₦airaland Forum

Empiree:
[s][/s]WHY DOES NIGERIA USES QURAN & BIBLE IN COURT?

RedPanda:
is it required by law?

RedPanda:
Lol...smh .... you still don't get secularism?....I'm not surprised though the concept doesn't exist in Islam. All the countries you are quoting esp US or the UK are Christian countries... The UK in particular is a christian country,Theresa may in her Christmas speech just 5 days ago emphasized the UK's christian heritage. Same as the Queen. The US has 'In God we trust'. The UK has 5% Muslim population, The US is even worse just about 1%. With Brexit and Donald trump you can be sure the Islamic growth in those countries will not grow exponentially at least in the next 10 years.

France is an example of a secular country. Having removed itself from the control of the Catholic church in the 1920s they are not about to let Islamist run over their country. Burqa is banned, Niqqab is banned, Hijab is restricted. That's the hallmark of a secular country. Keep your religion to yourself. Wear hijab in your house or to your mosque.

I will still repeat it, the best way to achieve this sharia dreamland is to agitate for your own country, the muslims can move to their country and create their sharia paradise for themselves.

Empiree:
Ask them. What matters here is Nigerian govt uses religious Books

RedPanda:
China doesn't even have that much patience, those things are banned there too. I think north korea is an atheist/agnostic state

tintingz:
You maybe right about UK being a Christian country but I will disagree with U.S the founding fathers of U.S were not practising Christians or dogmatic but they were deist, so when you hear "in God we trust" they are referring to a deistic god(anybody can chip in thier gods tho).

tintingz:
and also a Communist state, the reason their overfed leader is acting like a dictator.

RedPanda:
so you don't know. Let me educate you then. it is not required by any law. it is just customary and you don't have to use either bible or quran to take an oath whether during political ceremonies or other ceremonies

RedPanda:
Read this

http://www.newsweek.com/north-korea-communist-critics-warn-failure-understand-kim-jong-uns-beliefs-672399

Empiree:
And you dont get it either. It is used or not?. Thats the point. For the fact that it is used shows that Nigeria is not a SECULAR country as you people claimed compare to those countries you mentioned. They claim they are christians as you said of T. May. But do they use Bible?. If answer is no and they have no problem with hijab, who the hell is your law school or Bar to challenge the lady for using hijab in a country where Bible and Quran are used for official oat?

tintingz:
North Korea was widely known to be a Communist state, it was in the 90s they replaced Communism to Juche ideology, they now refer themselves as socialist state but we can't rule out north Korea is under a totalitarian dictatorship ruling system.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism_in_Korea

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea

RedPanda:
you are mixing apples and oranges here. Just calm down and follow simple logic.

Using bible or quran during swearing in ceremonies are optional. If you want, you can use. As most folks here are religious, they opt to swear either using the bible or quran. it's there personal decision. As your friend tithingz was implying, an atheist woudn't need to use any of that. It's a choice of the participants.

As for the UK, using hijab in court has to be a personal decision of their law bodies, they have the discretion just as we do. This thing is simple now. Just calm down and don't let emotions cloud your judgement.

As I have said before, it is for the NBA or the College of benchers to determine how the members of the organisation dress during official organisational duties. End of story. They can either decide to accept any kind of clothing or specify the appropriate dress code for their activities. It is a voluntary organisation, there is no compulsion in joining them. If you want to join them , you abide by their rules. it's that simple. Even if it is allowed in the UK that has got nothing to do with Nigeria. We are not UK. We are Nigeria and we are multi-religious here and we don't want a situation where one religion is given some kind of special treatment over the others. I.

RedPanda:
The US was definitely built on Judeo christian values. That's not in doubt at all.

http://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/did-america-have-christian-founding

Empiree:
Country's constitution supersedes whatever rules they have. Besides, you didnt quote their rule which bans hijab. You only put words in their mouth.

Now, is it their rule that extends to harassing and assaulting hijabi on the street too?. They have ulterior motives. Period. I am off this thread for now. This is no longer debateable. It is hate, bias, prejudice and intolerance.

tintingz:
You're using an article with assumptions and debated history as "definitely"?

The opinion of the article writer might be bias for his own interest, there are many other opinions that counter this article.

The author acknowledge,

# The founding fathers must be bad Christians

# The Constitution has no theocratical rule or influnced by God laws but more of Secularism.

# They are Christians but not dogmatic christians and they might be deist.

Like I said, many of the founding fathers were not practising good Christians, they can come out as Christians but not dogmatic, this is still a debate.

the largest group consisted of founders who retained Christian loyalties and practice but were influenced by Deism. They believed in little or none of the miracles and supernaturalism inherent in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Holmes finds a spectrum of such Deistic Christians among the founders, ranging from John Adams and George Washington on the conservative right to Benjamin Franklin and James Monroe on the skeptical left.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Faiths_of_the_Founding_Fathers

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States

I still hold to the opinion that U.S was not created under Christianity laws and not a Christian country!

RedPanda:
You are confusing the religious faith of the founders with the principles that formed the constitution. In any case, if the largest group of founders retained christian practices and loyalties and another group outrightly practicing christians....there is no way that combination of groups can produce a totally secular system.

tintingz:
The largest group were deistic-christians meaning they don't believe in supernaturalism and divine laws, if they were, America would have been under theocratical rulling system.

Here's from your article you provided,

One possibility is simply that the Founders identified themselves as Christians. Clearly, they did. In 1776, every European American, with the exception of about 2,500 Jews, identified himself or herself as a Christian. Moreover, approximately 98 percent of the colonists were Protestants, with the remaining 1.9 percent being Roman Catholics.

But this reality is not particularly interesting. These men and women might have been bad Christians, they may have been Christians significantly influenced by non-Christian ideas, or they may even have been Christians self-consciously attempting to create a secular political order.

Second, we might mean that the Founders were all sincere Christians. Yet sincerity is very difficult for the scholars, or anyone else, to judge. In most cases, the historical record gives us little with which to work. And even if we can determine, say, that a particular Founder was a member, regular attendee, and even officer in a church, it does not necessarily mean he was a sincere Christian. Perhaps he did these things simply because society expected it of him.

Third, we might mean that the Founders were orthodox Christians. In some cases—for example, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, John Jay, Roger Sherman, and John Witherspoon—there is abundant evidence that these Founders embraced and articulated orthodox Christian ideas. But the lack of records often makes it difficult to speak with confidence on this issue.
http://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/did-america-have-christian-founding

Too much might might might, too much assumptions and you expect me to take this article as fact or serious? My opinion still stands, America is not a Christian country!

RedPanda:
http://www.pewresearch.org/2007/12/03/religion-and-secularism-the-american-experience/

tintingz:
This is a debate link na.

McClay acknowledge,

# The separation of the state and church in America.

# De-christianization and Secularism in America.

RedPanda:
Let me put it this way. Although Secularism is enshrined in the bill of rights, you can't have a population of almost 80% Christians without some influence on its foundations and constitution. That's what i'm getting at. It's not a very strict form of secularism like you find in France. The secularism basically developed from not being wanting to be like the European nations especially Great Britain.You have the national prayer day, you have christian prayers said in schools, Crosses and Christian motto in public buildings, 'In God we trust' as a motto and on the currency, even the national anthem and the dominance and influence of the Christian Right in government.

tintingz:
The second link you provided said, the founders never established a single religion form in the state.

Both the link you provided and Wikipedia said the founders were (may be) influenced by non-christianity ideology or deistic ideology.

The laws are purely secular, even if some are influenced by Christianity, it's a deistic one and non dogmatic.

"In God we trust", so you think someone like Thomas Jefferson took this as the trinitarian Christian God? Or every other opposition founders that dont believe in supernaturalism?

In God we trust is a deism ceremonial motto.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceremonial_deism

Read this,

Phrases such as "Nature's God", which Jefferson used in the Declaration of Independence, are typical of Deism, although they were also used at the time by non-Deist thinkers, such as Francis Hutcheson. In addition, it was part of Roman thinking about natural law, and Jefferson was influenced by reading Cicero on this topic.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Thomas_Jefferson

All these are still a debate, you're free to choose your opinion but saying U.S is definitely a Christian country is fallacious!

RedPanda:
I disagree with the deism as having more of an influence than classical mainstream Christianity. At best, we can say they both had some influence on the founders and both were utilised in birthing the new nation. You can't have a population of 80% comprised of believers and then deism is what is holding the fabric of national consciousness together it doesn't make any sense.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-Deism-and-Christianity-1272214

This guy correctly dissects what is known as ceremonial deism
https://www.alternet.org/belief/4-ways-christianity-sneaks-our-secular-government-and-why-it-matters

tintingz:
Albaqir, does a Muslim woman have right to judge men or have power over men according to Islamic rules?

Empiree: Hijab is subject of discussion here not niqab. Niqab is optional.

Empiree:
^^^

I still don't get why Hijab matter is a big deal?

I have put up picture descriptions to illustrate hijabi lawyers in the West.

Why is this an issue?. Are you more democratic than them?

All of you bypassed hijabi inaugurations pictures i put up there.

I ask again, is nigerian Bar more secular than them?

You have problems in that country you called Nigeria. Everything you try to copy from your slave masters. But then, you wanna act like you know more than slave masters. Why is every skywards negative in Nigeria?.

Is it not only at Bar hijabians have been abused. They have been abused at govt offices and schools. Muslim children wear hijab to school in America. You dare not yank off hijab from her. You going to jail for hate crime. Hijab is identity for women and western govt perfectly understood that except for islamophobia movement.

RedPanda:
It's a big deal because you cannot impose your way of life or inject religion into a profession. Your constitutional right to practice your religion freely is within the confines of that religion, it is not an absolute right act anyhow. In any case, the constitution doesn't enshrine hijab in workplaces.

I dunno about slave masters, but I know the hijab is banned expressly in workplaces in the European Union.
http://www.dw.com/en/ecj-headscarf-ruling-and-its-consequences/a-37937433

The US has anti-masking laws that deal with burka and niqab. Hijab is banned in some circumstances.

Hijab is only a problem because Muslims decide to make it a problem. The country isn't an Islamic country, so they should agitate for a country of their own.

It is offensive for Muslims to insist on injecting religion into organisations. Next thing will be the military and then other professions that require religious/political neutrality.

Empiree:
^^^

I still don't get why Hijab matter is a big deal?

I have put up picture descriptions to illustrate hijabi lawyers in the West.

Why is this an issue?. Are you more democratic than them?

All of you bypassed hijabi inaugurations pictures i put up there.

I ask again, is nigerian Bar more secular than them?

You have problems in that country you called Nigeria. Everything you try to copy from your slave masters. But then, you wanna act like you know more than slave masters. Why is every skywards negative in Nigeria?.

Is it not only at Bar hijabians have been abused. They have been abused at govt offices and schools. Muslim children wear hijab to school in America. You dare not yank off hijab from her. You going to jail for hate crime. Hijab is identity for women and western govt perfectly understood that except for islamophobia movement.

Empiree:
[s][/s]I AM SORRY I HAVE TO CANCEL YOU OUT BCUS YOU DON'T SEEM TO MAKE SENSE. I understand your problem already. Your goal is written on the wall.


Your dilemma is like this:


A bearded popstar (non-muslim) attends convocation, you all hail him and want to take pictures with him, and you have no problem with him. Matter of fact, many of you will go further to say "i like men with beard". In the same convocation, a bearded muslim man is among the gathering, the next thing you people say is " he is a terrorist. This is not islamic country. This is secular gathering". But in reality, beard is beard. Anyone with 10 cent worths of brain knows this is prejudice, hate, bias and intolerance. Therefore, I am afraid that nigeria is heading to a lizard hole of no return with attitude of you christians and non muslims.



Once again, you bypassed evidences raised about those pictures. Those are taken in Western world at non-religious professions. Are you more democratic than them?. Are you more secular than them?. That's the question you are yet to answer, buddy.

usermane:
The issue is not on abuse of hijab wearers, we all condemn yanking off and shoving away any person's attire. The subject here is wearing hijab to a place it wouldn't be approved. In US, there were legal procedures that had to be established before hijab could be freely permitted at secular institutions to grant the right of women to wear head covers.

RedPanda:
You are becoming redundant with this your thinking it wont get you anywhere. You also know nothing about the western world you quote.