babyosisi:


You people should make up your minds.
You say one thing and logical says another,which one is it?
Is the peaceful religion now confused?
You see why we (non muslims) have a problem with you people.

Not all non-muslims have a problem with muslims. You know not all christains agree on everything (e.g those that believe in purgatory and those that don't).
They probably understand things a little bit differently the same way christians understand somethings a little bit differently.

Naziru:

The context here is, in an Islamic state a Muslim denouncing Islam does not only commit apostasy but also treason. An treason even in secular laws is punishable by death (though not in all states, I admit).

@babyosisi, I think he said an Islamic state? You might want to ask for the pre-requisites of an Islamic State for which that applies, if I tend to agree that your intentions are sincere. The whole construct of a sentence should be addressed, anytime one is made to send a message.

As I said in my before post it applies to the past, where the situations are different and hence as clearly stated by My friend here, that such an act is treason, and hence punishable by that law. But as of today we do not have an ideal Islamic state, Islamic soldiers and even direct enemies across such an Islamic border, An Islamic Nation, so I guess what he says stands?

That is applicable today even in the government structure, where if an act as a citizen of a naton, is a threat to the national security of any specific country, you could face a penalty, which sometimes could be punishable by death. Nevertheless do not get me wrong yet again, as I clearly stated before, An ideal Islamic state with such an adverse tension, doe not exist today in this era, hence such application wouldn't be proper.

Naziru:

But isn't it intriguing, this stereotyping? Islam is judged by the (mal)practice of Muslims but neither is Christianity or Judaism. You don't hear of Christian terrorism in e.g the ETA movement in Spain or in the IRA of Ireland or Judaic terrorism as we see in west bank and Gaza.

Very true. Yet another very valid sentence that we tend to choose not to give feedback too, but when that applies to the so called Muslim subjects, and they tend to ignore such a visible point, you tend to think they are either weak or its their nature.

So are we really here to understand ourselves, and treat every point raised with fairness and justice or are we here to just bash the Muslim's with our hypocritical sentiments and hatred.

[table]

Logical:


@babyosisi, I think he said an Islamic state? You might want to ask for the pre-requisites of an Islamic State for which that applies, if I tend to agree that your intentions are sincere. The whole construct of a sentence should be addressed, anytime one is made to send a message.

As I said in my before post it applies to the past, where the situations are different and hence as clearly stated by My friend here, that such an act is treason, and hence punishable by that law. But as of today we do not have an ideal Islamic state, Islamic soldiers and even direct enemies across such an Islamic border, An Islamic Nation, so I guess what he says stands?

That is applicable today even in the government structure, where if an act as a citizen of a naton, is a threat to the national security of any specific country, you could face a penalty, which sometimes could be punishable by death. Nevertheless do not get me wrong yet again, as I clearly stated before, An ideal Islamic state with such an adverse tension, doe not exist today in this era, hence such application wouldn't be proper.

Very true. Yet another very valid sentence that we tend to choose not to give feedback too, but when that applies to the so called Muslim subjects, and they tend to ignore such a visible point, you tend to think they are either weak or its their nature.
So are we really here to understand ourselves, and treat every point raised with fairness and justice or are we here to just bash the Muslim's with our hypocritical sentiments and hatred.

[/table]


@Logical,

Permit me to disagree with the highlighted. You seem to be focusing only on Babyosisi's comments and disregarding all others. What of the rest of us that inquired and commented? Have you acknowlegded?

So an ideal Islamic State does not exist? I didn't see Nazir state that so if not for your explanations, I too would have misunderstood him. Afterall, I remember schooling in the North and the fear of being made to 'dress Muslim' hanging over our heads. So while reading his post, what came to my mind was Nigeria and if that that situation of treason will apply there.

You have to understand that for so long, Islam has been kept shrouded in secrecy/mystery and now that it has a face, albeit through the act of terrorists, the face is a negative face. So now that a lot more people are interested in the religion (whether with good intentions or not) if they don't get CLEAR answers, or when their questions are met with hostility, they are more likely to assume the worst based on the more visible, negative aspects of Islam.

This forum gives some of us the opportunity to clarify what we have been wondering for so long. Can you imagine having lived on and off in the North of Nigeria for so long and yet cannot get simple and clear answers about Islam? The same would go for you if you lived in a predominantly Christian area and you were not a christian and yet none of the christians you ask would give you a clear explanation of their religion.

We rely on people like you to find the balance between both extremists; however it would also be a good thing if you acknowledge that there are others, apart from Babyosisi who have views on this thread.

_{Babyosisi, no offence intended}.

Cheers

@nilla I understand your sentiments and did not wish to speak for you but in a life and death situation,there is no time for understanding things a different way.Does apostacy warrant death or does it not?

@logical the poster said nothing about "ideal" Islamic state,that is your interpretation.
I spent a while with you in a conversation it took you ages to answer my simple question of the punishment for apostacy.
You said Mohammed and his followers killed apostates or advocated their deaths at the time for a reason which is no longer applicable today and I chose to believe you and then when naziru appeared and gave a response I was familiar with and I challenged it based on your response,you returned to tell us it only happens in a non existent Islamic state.

Anyone reading this whole conversation will be as confused.There is no ideal world,we are yet to have one.
My observation is on the happenings of today.

Are there any Muslim/sharia governments today(not in the ideal world) that sanction death for apostacy?

Enugu and many others have questions unanswered and it is important that you help with forthcoming,straight unqualified and uncomplicated answers.
This veil of secrecy like enugu said should be removed and you are not helping matters.
someone posted a cartoon about how Muslims answer questions and it did make sense,you are yet to prove him wrong.

@babyosisi

This is the second time you are repeating the same way of addressing issues. So you are choosing to use a generalization rule to accept facts to suit you when you need it to suit your original sentiments?

Would it be fair if I start using that approach to accept your points?

This I am saying, Considering the fact, that you are saying that it is not OK to use an IDEAL understanding for things that are so crucial when the roots are under questionable scrutiny?

I don't remember talking about Ideal world? I was talking about the law as it presents itself? So why are you using something that does not fit with what I originally said? Confusion only arises when I say something and you plug that thing into another unequated existence, to distract that person from what I actually said.

How many times do you want me to answer the same question?

If I choose my method of answering a question by saying yes and giving a reason to support it, due to nature of the question being contextual, you tend to say that I am not answering your question, because it does not agree with what you originally believed in?

The basis of this argument was to clarify things, not to agree to what you already believe, please do note that, in your next reply to the topic.

When you talk about secrecy, please post exactly which of the answers I am secretly answering? From what I remembered precisely, you hate supporting answers, when you yourself your belief is heavily backed with contextual applications and not just a word for it.

Ideal LAW, you cant judge an offender without evidence and circumstantial situations that support that crime, this is totally what it is about, it does not have to do anything with the WORLD.

@ logical you have again gone around the issue choosing rather to chastise me with much verbosity than answer a simple question.

Are you saying that since there is no ideal Islamic state today,no Islamic state has in it's laws the punishment of death for apostacy(conversion from Islam to another religion)
Lets forget the sentiments,its not helping us move along here.

Yes, there is no Ideal Islamic State.

To form an Islamic State there must be a total rehaul in the political, judicial, and social environment, so for example Saudi Arabia uses a Monarchy system, which is totally not accepted by Islamic law, you can check that for yourself.

So today there is no Islamic government that sanctions killing for apostacy?

On Islamic Terrorism:
In AD 624, The Prophet Muhammed announced the Jihad or holy war.
“ I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite off their finger-tips off them, slay them wherever you find them…”

As British Charge 11 Suspects in Airliner Plot, let me remind all the Islamic terrorists and their fellow Muslims that,
God has not called us to be suicide bombers
God has called us to be peacemakers.
God has not called us to be messengers of death.
God has called us to be messengers of life.

http://scarlettearsoflondon..com

God has not called us to be messengers of falsehood.
God has called us to be messengers of truth.
God has not called us to be messengers of hatred.
God has called us to be messengers of love.

On the beauty of the Hijab and Burga:

She came in silken veils
Like aurora in her sails.
And the siren fled at the scent of her chador
The hood of her candor
My beloved Princess Sunniya
She is the loveliest damsel in all Arabia.

On Adultery:

Is only the woman that is always caught in adultery?
What of the man?
Or did she commit the adultery by herself?
The hypocrisy and injustice must stop.

@ logical what say you then to this story


April 24, 2005
Iranian Christian Faces Death for Apostasy
Hamid Pourmand update from Religion Journal "Iranian Christian Faces Death Penalty for Apostasy," with thanks to Nobody:

An Iranian church leader, who is already in prison, faces the death penalty if he is found guilty by a shari'ah court.
Hamid Pourmand, 47, is scheduled to go before a shari'ah court in Bandar-i-Bushehr next week on charges of apostasy from Islam and seeking to spread the Christian gospel among Muslims. The former charge is punishable by death.

Pourmand, who was a Colonel in the Iranian army, was also a lay leader of the Assemblies of God church in Bandar-i-Bushehr, a southern port city in Iran. He was arrested along with 85 other church leaders at the annual meeting of the AOG church in Iran on Sept. 9, 2004 in Keraj. According to Middle East Concern and Compass Direct, he was the only one not to be released shortly after being arrested.

On Feb. 16 he was charged before a military court with deceiving the Iranian armed forces about his conversion nearly 25 years ago. Non-Muslims are not allowed to become officers in the army, but Pourmand provided evidence to the court that his superiors knew about his faith. This evidence was rejected as false and Pourmand was sentenced to three years in prison with the loss of all benefits. This meant losing his 20-year army pension and home and now his wife and two children have been evicted and have no source of income.

He is currently in a group cell at Evin maximum security Prison in Tehran. He is the first Iranian convert to be charged with apostasy since 1993. CSW is working with other NGOs to raise his case with the UK Foreign Office, the UN and the EU.

"Hamid Pourmand has already been stripped of his freedom and his job, and his family has been made destitute," said Stuart Windsor, national director of Christian Solidarity Worldwide. "He now faces a death sentence if the shari'ah court finds him guilty. CSW calls on the international community to do all it can to put pressure on the Iranian authorities to safeguard his life."


Let's hope the Mullahs hear strong words from Secretary Rice about this.

what say you on this one.

Afghan Christian averts death for apostasy as Italy grants asylum
Christian Century, April 18, 2006
After a week of intense lobbying by Western governments for his release, Abdul Rahman, an Afghan who faced the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity, arrived in Italy, where he received political asylum.

Religious conservatives who have supported President Bush and the U.S. military presence and the push for democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq had expressed dismay over signs that religious freedoms are untenable in those overwhelmingly Muslim countries.

Despite the opinions of some U.S.-based Muslim scholars that Islam does not require a death sentence for Muslims who become Christians, the force of popular sentiment in Afghanistan made it unlikely that Rahman, 41, would have been safe after his release by a court late last month.

The Rahman saga, like the earlier mass protests around the world over published Danish cartoons that unflatteringly depicted the prophet Muhammad, has stirred Western debate on the Bush administration's efforts to encourage democratic government where autocratic rule and hard-line religious law have deep roots.

Advertisement

1 John 2:22-23 "Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who acknowledges the Son has the Father also." This is someone who denies Christ as the only anointed one and refuses the interrelationship of the persons who are deity.

1 John 4:2-3 "By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; and this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world." Several times this term is used in the plural, and can be applied to almost anyone who is opposed to Christ. Those who deny that Jesus came in the flesh are anti-Christ or of the spirit of antichrist. This is one of the ways to discern a false teacher from a true one.
http://www.letusreason.org/Proph4.htm

Islam is the religion of the AntiChrist.

Only those still in darkness do not know the truth.
Jesus Christ is the only supreme truth.
Anything contrary to the truth of Jesus Christ is a lie and of the devil.

By their fruits you shall know them.

please everyone read on apostacy yourselves and death sentences today.

Logical tells us there are no death sentences for leaving Islam but our environment tells us otherwise.
Iran,Pakistan,Saudi,Afghanistan,Mauritania and several Muslim countries have death sentences today as the punishment for converting from Islam to Christianity.

read this please and make up your own minds,don't base it solely on what someone says.
What is our reality?

http://peace.heebz.com/apostacy.html

@babyosisi
Are you new to this thread? I guess not? Then why the before post? Hmm Several but not All, as you agree too, which would for once say you are not using a generalisation concept.

If a christian believer choose to be different like the Jehova witnesses for example, would you attest that the laws governing their belief system even though they are christians is popular amongst all christian belief? I guess not.

I repeat, since you choose to turn a blind eye on what I already said. Stories can exist, fables can, human cospirators propagandist and cospirators can form whatever they like. All shariah laws can be reviewed, modified to accomodate any reality based on what we call fatwah. Whoever chooses not too, is guilty not the whole entity of that belief system, since it accomodates for changes based on circumstancial evidence.

I am sure you would agree, if it were to support christianity or whatever you believe in, but I still would give you the benefit of the doubt to consider applying that same ideology to Islamic doctrines.

In Nigeria for example wouldnt equate the Yoruba Muslims as the Hausa Muslims? Yes I suppose not, but rather that is exactly what you are doing, beign bias and generalising a crime commited by the Hausas to qualify for the entire Nigerian Muslims.

The simple derivation of filtering all those unfair approaches is by using a intellectual approaches, Why is it not ALL? What are those using the different approaches applying? Does the religion approve of those application?

If the religion does approve such application, then the religion is ok?

Logical:

@babyosisi
In Nigeria for example wouldnt equate the Yoruba Muslims as the Hausa Muslims? Yes I suppose not, but rather that is exactly what you are doing, beign bias and generalising a crime commited by the Hausas to qualify for the entire Nigerian Muslims.

@logical
i happen to serve some where in osun state during my nysc and i learnt a lot about the yoruba folks
an average yoruba man luvs his family and his brothers so much more than taking up arms to killthem becos of religion or wat ever
w ehad a tough time seperating the muslims from the the xtians cos they were very good neighbours and friend living in peace
well u say the northerners kill southerners we wont argue that but how come they do so on the pretext of religion?
while i was in lagos then i use to wonder how come the hausa dont go to the same mosque as the yorubas maybe they do but in small nimbers? probably the hausa themselves dont see the yoruba muslims as real muslims most probably because they r peacefull and wont fight u over a dead muhammad and averagely cos the yoruba muslims belive in God and see islam as a method of worshipping him? while the northern guys have arab blood flowing in their vein.
terrorismand sectarian killings are now popular antics bein used by the most members of the muslim world(except yoruba muslims and some few others) i come to ask u how many people have u guys converted in such way? none!
u beeter go back and do ur research and stop making ur self look ignorant. the islam shout peace and we now now the peace is by intimidation
go talk to some jiadist in iraq that belive killing fellow iraqis is their mission sent to them by God .

i come to ask u how many people have u guys converted in such way? none!
u beeter go back and do your research and stop making your self look ignorant. the islam shout peace and we now now the peace is by intimidation
go talk to some jiadist in iraq that believe killing fellow iraqis is their mission sent to them by God .

who told u that he is here to convert anybody, you get your head together and stop accusing someone else, you go talk to priest and bishops to stop raping young boys in their care, how about that for ignorant comments

People should stop asking individuals about why certain people do things! very easy to generalize and act holy yourselves

while i was in lagos then i use to wonder how come the hausa don't go to the same mosque as the yorubas maybe they do but in small nimbers? probably the hausa themselves don't see the yoruba muslims as real muslims most probably because they r peacefull and wont fight u over a dead muhammad and averagely because the yoruba muslims believe in God and see islam as a method of worshipping him?

while in london ( he he Dem dash me visa o) i noticed Nigerian xtains don't usually go to the same churches as the white people maybe in small numbers? probably the Nigerians themselves don't see the white xtains as real xtains most probably because they are hypocrates who think other peoples religion or way of worship is not up to scratch and enjoy hooking up with babes (i visit the youth section ) after service

loverbwouy what are you saying exactly? since u know so much of Islam why are you not answering the questions.

@logical your Jehovah witness analogy does not compare for we are talking about a life and death situation here.
bellotti and several other Muslims on this forum have openly declared Saudi Arabia their ideal and dream muslim state and he is a Nigerian,I have reason to be concerned because Saudi kills converts.

so can I deduce from your answer that the following are true.

1.The Koran and or hadiths says in several areas to kill infidels and apostates.

2.In true sharia apostates are punishable by death in an "ideal" Islamic state

3.There is today no ideal Islamic state.

4.Countries like Iran,Pakistan and Saudi,Mauritania and Afghanistan that have death penalty for apostates in their sharia code are wrong for doing so.

5.True Muslims frown at the killing of apostates.

Then my next question would be,is it the dream of Muslims to establish an ideal Islamic state or not.

Any Muslims please respond,the silence is speaking louder than the words

I am sorry to say but I am really getting sick of your loop of questions and use of fallacious approaches to distract people. I am sure nobody wants to answer you, because when then go through the last two pages of this thread they would understand exactly my worries in regards to how you want to drive at achieving your motives.

Its as simple as it is, if you want to really have a honest conversation, open your mind, read through all I have said, and say something useful thats on track.

I am sure your response would be, "This is exactly what I expect, This is what they are", that I surely don't doubt. As I said I am sick of trying to clarify things with you. Any honest person reading through this thread would understand exactly what I said, Thank goodness I used English and most of us went to school.

Sincerity is a pre-requisite to a healthy intellectual discussion, and I do encourage you use that as a tool not only in this forum, but everywhere you go.

For a start, It would interest people reading this thread, to know what your intentions are, and what you plan to achieve. Honestly I would like to know.

Anyone reading the posts would see how evasive and cunning you have been.o
I literally had to drag answers out of you like pulling teeth.
My questions have been simple,even an illiterate can understand them.

You said there is no ideal sharia state today and I wanted you to agree that since there was none,any government killing apostates in the name of Sharia must be wrong based on your explanation and I also wanted to know if it is the dream of Muslims to have an ideal shariah state but suddenly you are sick of answering because you know as you claim,an ideal sharia state would be the will of Allah but would kill apostates also.

The cartoon earlier tells the typical muslim answer to questions.
The others dissappeared because they know theit truthful answers will not be politically correct,the same reason you are throwing a tantrum.

God help us!!!

babyosisi:

Anyone reading the posts would see how evasive and cunning you have been.o
I literally had to drag answers out of you like pulling teeth.
My questions have been simple,even an illiterate can understand them.

You said there is no ideal sharia state today and I wanted you to agree that since there was none,any government killing apostates in the name of Sharia must be wrong based on your explanation and I also wanted to know if it is the dream of Muslims to have an ideal shariah state but suddenly you are sick of answering because you know as you claim,an ideal sharia state would be the will of Allah but would kill apostates also.

The cartoon earlier tells the typical muslim answer to questions.
The others dissappeared because they know theit truthful answers will not be politically correct,the same reason you are throwing a tantrum.

God help us!!!

This is exactly what you said now and I am inclined to agree that you never read what I have written before or you choose to cast a blind eye to it. Let me re-paste them again, since you insist I havent answered them.

1. I wanted you to agree that since there was none,any government killing apostates in the name of Sharia must be wrong based on your explanation.

logical link=topic=20477.#msg581040#msg581040:
You would be charged with murder, if you kill someone where Islamic law is practiced. I encourage that you take it upon you to read before you form opinion on anything. Islamic Law plus the application of fatwa, just the same way you read the old testament and embrace new modified laws based on context, that should help.

2.as you claim, an ideal sharia state would be the will of Allah but would kill apostates also.

logical link=topic=20477.#msg581047#msg581047:

The will of Allah? Allah Enjoins us to be sincere and apply shariah based on circumstances, wisdom, sincerity and context. Anything not applied in relation is not his will, hence I suppose that applies.

Futhermore,

logical link=topic=20477.320.html#msg581062:

A good example is the law of cutting hands when you steal. It is only applicable according to the shariah in the enviroment that there is 0% poverty, a place where everybody has shelter and food to eat. So tell me that ideal community is available today.

A refrence was during the prophets time when he halted the law due to ferminine.

3.The cartoon earlier tells the typical muslim answer to questions.

Well just as predicted, the typical muslims have just fullfilled your typical stereotypical nature.

So in an ideal Islamic state which is the dream of Muslims,apostacy could be punishable by death once applied based on wisdom,sincerity,circumstances and within context so any Islamic countries today who are kiilling apostates are wrong since there is no ideal Islamic state even if they claim to be doing it based on wisdom,circumstances,sincerity and context.?

This is a simple yes and no question.

Apostacy meaning converting from Islam.

The Truth About Shariah.

I have always tried to go through shariah in an understandeable short essay, but due to the nature of forums, I doubted many would read it, nevertheless its worth a try today. I would try to summarize as best as I can, I just hope people would understand better and not derive meanings other than what they are really are.

The general public have several preconceived notions about Islamic Law. One such notion is that Islamic judges are bound by ancient and outdated rules of fixed punishments for all crimes. Here I would explore that idea and look at other myths in an attempt to present Islamic Law from a non-biased view of Shar'iah Law.

Although it is the responsibility of the mass media to bring to the world's attention violations of human rights and acts of terror, many believe that media stereotyping of all Muslims is a major problem.

Which I tend to assume that honest readers would agree to too.

Islamic Law is controlled, ruled and regulated by the Islamic religion. There are civil laws in Muslim nations for Muslim and non-Muslim people. Shar'iah is only applicable to Muslims.

Now the Islamic Law at Glance.

Historically the Islamic Judge (Qazi) was a legal secretary appointed by the provincial governors. Each Islamic nation may differ slightly in how the judges are selected.

One common myth associated with Islamic Law is that judges must always impose a fixed and predetermined punishment for each crime.
Judges under Islamic Law are bound to administer several punishments for a few very serious crimes found in the Qur’an, but they possess much greater freedom in punishment for less serious (non-Hadd) crimes. Common law is filled with precedents, rules, and limitations which inhibit creative justice. Judges under Islamic Law are free to create new options and ideas to solve new problems associated with crime.

Elements of Shar'iah Law

Shariah Law controls, rules and regulates all public and private behaviour. It has regulations for personal hygiene, diet, sexual conduct, and elements of child rearing.

Shar'iah Law has several sources from which to draw its guiding principles. It does not rely upon one source for its broad knowledge base. The first and primary element of Shar'iah Law is the Qur’an.The second element of Shar'iah Law is known as the Sunna or otherwise known as the Hadith.

The Sunna contain stories and anecdotes, called Hadith, to illustrate a concept. The Qur’an may not have all the information about behaviour and human interaction in detail; the Sunna gives more detailed information than the Qur’an, but nevertheless an unbroken chain of narration is needed to authenticate it, before implementation.

The third element of Shar'iah Law is known as the Ijma. The Muslim religion uses the term Ulama as a label for its religious scholars. These Ulama's are consulted on many matters both personal and political. When the Ulama's reach a consensus on an issue, it is interpreted as Ijma. The concepts and ideas found in the Ijma are not found explicitly in the Qur’an or the teachings of the Prophet (Sunna). Islamic judges are able to examine the Ijma for many possible solutions which can be applied in a modern technical society. They are free by the Islamic law, to create new and innovative methods to solve crime and social problems based upon the concepts found in the Ijma.These judges have great discretion in applying the concepts to a specific problem.


The Qiyas are a fourth element of Shar'iah Law. The Qiyas are not explicitly found in the Qur’an, Sunna, or given in the Ijma. The Qiyas are new cases or case law which may have already been decided by a higher judge. The Shar'iah judge can use the legal precedent to decide new case law and its application to a specific problem. The judge can use a broad legal construct to resolve a very specific issue. For example, a computer crime or theft of computer time is not found in the Qur’an or Sunna. The act of theft as a generic term is prohibited so the judge must rely on logic and reason to create new case law or Qiyas.

The fifth element of Shar'iah Law is very broad and "all encompassing." This secondary body of knowledge may be ideas contained in the other written works. The New Testament is an example of this area of information, and legal discourses based upon Civil Law or Common Law may be another example. All information can be examined for logic and reason to see if it applies to the current case. It also may be a local custom or norm that judge may find helpful in applying to the issue before him. The judge may also weigh the impact of his decision upon how it will effect a person's standing in the community.

Crimes under Islamic Law can be broken down into three major categories. Each will be discussed in greater detail with some common law analogies. The three major crime categories in Islamic Law are:

1. Hadd [plural Hudud] Crimes (most serious).
2. Tazir Crimes (least serious).
3. Qesas Crimes (revenge crimes restitution).

Hadd crimes are crimes against God's law and Tazir crimes are crimes against society. There are some safeguards for Hadd crimes that many in the media fail to mention. Some in the media only mention that if you steal, your hand is cut off.

The Islamic judge must look at a higher level of proof and reasons why the person committed the crime. A judge can only impose the Hadd punishment when a person confesses to the crime or there are enough witnesses to the crime. The usual number of witnesses is two, but in the case of adultery four witnesses are required.

The media often leaves the public with the impression that all are punished with flimsy evidence or limited proof. Islamic law has a very high level of proof for the most serious crimes and punishments. When there is doubt about the guilt of a Hadd crime, the judge must treat the crime as a lesser Tazir crime. If there is no confession to a crime or not enough witnesses to the crime, Islamic law requires the Hadd crime to be punished as a Tazir crime.

Tazir Crimes
Modern Islamic Society has changed greatly from the time of the Prophet. Contemporary Shar'iah Law is now in written form and is statutory in nature. Islamic concepts of justice argue that a person should know what the crime is and its possible punishment.

For example, Egypt has a parliamentary process which has a formal penal code written and based upon the principles of Islamic Law, but Saudi Arabia allows the judge to set the Tazir crimes and punishments. Modern Islamic Law recognizes many differences between these two nations.

It also allows for much greater flexibility in how it punishes an offender. The major myth of many people is that judges in Islamic nations have fixed punishments for all crimes. In reality the judges have much greater flexibility than judges under common law.

Tazir punishments vary according to the circumstances. They change from time to time and from place to place. They vary according to the gravity of the crime and the extent of the criminal disposition of the criminal himself.

Historically Tazir crimes were not written down or codified. This gave each ruler great flexibility in what punishments the judge was able to dispense. The judge under Islamic Law is not bound by precedents, rules, or prior decisions as in common law. Judges are totally free to choose from any number of punishments that they think will help an individual offender. The only guiding principle for judges under Shar'iah Law is that they must answer to Allah and to the greater community of Muslims. Some of the more common punishments for Tazir crimes are counselling, fines, public or private censure, family and clan pressure and support, seizure of property, confinement in the home or place of detention, and flogging.

Contemporary treatment of Islamic Law and "Radical Muslims" is filled with stereotypical characterizations. Some in the Western media have used the "New York City bombings" as a way to increase hate and prejudice. They have taken the views of a few radicals and projected them onto all Muslims. This action has done a great disservice to the Muslim world.

Some people, also have concluded that Islamic judges lack discretion in their sentences of defendants in the Shar'iah Court System. There are Hadd crimes that do have fixed punishments set forth in the Qur’an, and not all the Hadd crimes are bound by mandatory punishment.

True we are bound to agree that, Islamic Law is very different from English Common Law or the European Civil Law traditions. Nevertheless, we should note that Muslims are held accountable to the Shar'iah Law in an Islamic state, and are judged based on current applicable situations and contexual applications, but non-Muslims are not bound by the same standard (apostasy from Allah). Muslims and non-Muslims are both required to live by laws enacted by the various forms of government such as tax laws, traffic laws, white collar crimes of business, and theft.

The topic says Muslims,are we bad?

I am  of the strong opinion that there are  bad and good muslims because they humans.
I am also of the strong opinion that Islam as a religion seeks to dominate,is intolerant,preaches hate and is violent.
It is the job of Muslims to correct that picture and I am not the only one with those views.

If the teachings from the Koran and hadiths to hunt down and snap the neck of infidels have been abrogated,why is it so difficult to say so boldly just like I made it clear that wars fought in the old testament were for a purpose then and are neither recommended nor encouraged  by the coming of our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ,the prince of peace.
It is your duty to show and tell the world what you believe in and let us know which verses in the Koran that are no longer applicable if any.

If you guys don't speak up,we are left to listen to what the Iranian president,Osama the idiot,al zawahiri,mujahudeens and the rest of the bad guys are doing in the name of Allah.

Remember that their bombs will not sort out Muslims from non Muslims.

babyosisi:

So in an ideal Islamic state which is the dream of Muslims,apostacy could be punishable by death once applied based on wisdom,sincerity,circumstances and within context so any Islamic countries today who are kiilling apostates are wrong since there is no ideal Islamic state even if they claim to be doing it based on wisdom,circumstances,sincerity and context.?

This is a simple yes and no question.

Apostacy meaning converting from Islam.

@logical ,and the answer is

Its not my duty to stop another person's crime, rather I choose to correct stereotypical deduction. I am not a religious police, and this is not a law enforcing thread and the world is full of different crimes being perpetuated with different motives. Whatever someone else chooses to propagand, what we should investigate is, whether the source of the propaganda validates the cause before a deduction is made. If it is not, then it should be condemned, and I do know that out of the many billions of muslims out there arround the world, more than 90% condemn terror, and that is more than enough.

I already answered your question before, so I choose not to answer it again. If you need to read it again, please visit
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-20477.288.html#msg580981
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-20477.288.html#msg581021

I have seen your yes and no answers and I get the picture,typical ain't it?
You still dodge the answer because in the earlier areas you quoted we had neither talked of Islamic nations already killing apostates nor had you established the fact that only ideal Islamic nations could do so.

You ought to reason like a grown man and see that the questions you answered previously were different though related you can avoid it if you choose to but saying you have answered it previously would be a lie because I had not asked it previously,if I'm lying paste the exact question here even though it would be much easier for you to answer the question than prove stubborn.

The interesting thing I found about all this accusations is, most of the people that claim Muslims support terrorism fail to actually research that fact by googling or doing what they do best in attesting to the crimes perpetuated by a so called Islamic group or organisation.

Here is a helpful google result for starters.
http://www.google.com.my/search?q=muslims+condemn+terror+attack

yeah muslims condemn terror attacks perpetuated by muslims. Those who claim to totally follow the tenets of islam are the radicals causing all the trouble while those who have seen modernity and have not been enslaved and brainwashed by the koran and radical imams are the ones distancing themselves from the attack.

Logical:

The interesting thing I found about all this accusations is, most of the people that claim Muslims support terrorism fail to actually research that fact by googling or doing what they do best in attesting to the crimes perpetuated by a so called Islamic group or organisation.Here is a helpful google result for starters.
http://www.google.com.my/search?q=muslims+condemn+terror+attack

Don't let Al queda and hezbollah hear you refer to them as so called after all they claim to be fighting the course of allah.

donmayor:

yeah muslims condemn terror attacks perpetuated by muslims. Those who claim to totally follow the tenets of islam are the radicals causing all the trouble while those who have seen modernity and have not been enslaved and brainwashed by the koran and radical imams are the ones distancing themselves from the attack.

and the reformed moderates will not admit this though we know better.

To cap it all capturing Journalists and forcing them to convert to Islam at GUNPOINT that is preposterous man

[table]

Logical:

I am sorry to say but I am really getting sick of your loop of questions and use of fallacious approaches to distract people. I am sure nobody wants to answer you, because when then go through the last two pages of this thread they would understand exactly my worries in regards to how you want to drive at achieving your motives.

Its as simple as it is, if you want to really have a honest conversation, open your mind, read through all I have said, and say something useful thats on track.

I am sure your response would be, "This is exactly what I expect, This is what they are", that I surely don't doubt. As I said I am sick of trying to clarify things with you. Any honest person reading through this thread would understand exactly what I said, Thank goodness I used English and most of us went to school.Sincerity is a pre-requisite to a healthy intellectual discussion, and I do encourage you use that as a tool not only in this forum, but everywhere you go.

For a start, It would interest people reading this thread, to know what your intentions are, and what you plan to achieve. Honestly I would like to know.

[/table]

Any honest person reading through this thread would understand exactly what I said, Thank goodness I used English and most of us went to school.Sincerity is a pre-requisite to a healthy intellectual discussion, and I do encourage you use that as a tool not only in this forum, but everywhere you go.

@Logical,

I would describe myself myself as an honest person[/color] and I also went to school[color=#990000][color=#000099][/color] but you have consistently refused to face other 'Landers like me and make things clear to us;rather, you have chosen to concentrate on Babyosisi and leave us out to continue to flounder.

I am neither of the opinion that MUslims are bad or good. People are both good and/or bad; that is stating the obvious but SIMPLE questions posted by the likes of me,have been buried under pages of facts that still leave us in a quandary. so Logical, should I expect to get to be addressed directly or do I have to go through your replies to Babyosisi before I can get my questions answered I would appreciate it if you do not like Neoteny, begin to ask me what my questions were and if I could rephrase them. Thanks

Cheers