Fatwas and Modernity
Almost two years ago the citizens of London were victims of a great atrocity. Those who perpetrated those crimes would like you to believe that they were inspired by the religion of Islam. Nothing could be further from the truth.
There is nothing in Islam that could ever justify these blatant acts of aggression. Islam calls on Muslims to be productive members of whatever society they find themselves in. Islam embodies a flexibility that allows Muslims to do so without any internal or external conflict. This is why we see a vast variety of cultural, artistic and civilisational phenomena all of which can be described as Islamic, ranging from the Taj Mahal in India to the winding streets of Fez to the poetry composed by English converts that represents not only the rigor of English verse, but also encompasses the beauty of Islamic piety.
This flexibility is not just present in the cultural output of Muslims; it is an integral part of the Islamic legal tradition as well. In fact, you could say it is one of the defining characteristics of Islamic law. Islamic law is both a methodology and the collection of positions adopted by Muslim jurists over the last 1,400 years. Those centuries were witness to no less than 90 schools of legal thought, and the 21st century finds us in the providential position to look back on this tradition in order to find that which will benefit us today. This is one of the first steps in the issuing of a fatwa (religious opinion/ruling).
Fatwas represent the bridge between the legal tradition and the contemporary world in which we live. They are the link between the past and the present, the absolute and the relative, the theoretical and the practical. For this reason it takes more than just knowledge of Islamic law to issue a fatwa. A Mufti who does not know the contemporary world in which he/she lives is like a person who has the ability to walk and might also have the ability to run. However, they move through a dark path without a light in their hand. It is possible that they will make it, but in most cases they will fall and perish. Muftis must also have an in-depth understanding of the problems that their communities are facing. When those who lack these qualifications issue fatwas the result is the extremism we see today, the kind witnessed on 7/7. We have to be clear about what is at stake here. When each and every person's unqualified opinion is considered a fatwa we lose a tool that is of the utmost importance for reigning in extremism and preserving the flexibility and balance of Islamic law.
This flexibility is present in the Islamic political sphere as well, but this is a point that is often missed. Many assume that an Islamic government must be a caliphate, and that the caliph must rule in a set and specific way. There is no basis for this vision within the Islamic tradition. The caliphate is one political solution that Muslims adopted during a certain historical period, but this does not mean that it is the only possible choice for Muslims when it comes to deciding how they should be governed.
The experience that Egypt went through can be taken as an example of this. The period of development begun by Muhammad Ali Pasha and continued by the Khedive Ismail was an attempt to build a modern state. This meant a reformulation of Islamic law. This process led Egypt to become a liberal state run by a system of democracy without any objections from Muslim scholars. Muslims are free to choose whichever system of government they deem most appropriate for them.
The principles of freedom and human dignity for which liberal democracy stands are themselves part of the foundation for the Islamic world view; it is the achievement of this freedom and dignity within a religious context that Islamic law strives for.
The world has witnessed tremendous change over the last two hundred years. This change came in the form of new technologies and political ideologies. There were also new developments in communications allowing us to be aware of what is happening in nearly every part of the world the instant that it occurs, whereas in the past it would take months if not years for even the most urgent news to spread. This wave of change has caused a complete alteration of nearly every aspect of our lives. It is this modern occurrence that presents the greatest difficulty to Muslim jurists and Muftis. In the past there was little alternation of the way things worked and progressed. Even when things changed it was slow and isolated to a handful of fields. The change of the past 200 years, however, has made it necessary to re-examine how everything works. Meaning that the way in which Islamic law is applied must take into account this change.
The flexibility and adaptability of Islamic law is perhaps its greatest asset. To provide people with practical and relevant guidance while at the same time staying true to its foundational principles, Islam allows the wisdom and moral strength of revelation to be applied in modern times. It is through adopting this attitude towards the shari'a that an authentic, contemporary, "moderate" and tolerant Islam can provide solutions to the problems confronting the Muslim world and the West today. Muslims must hold fast to this tradition in order to stand in the face of those who would use our religion for their own agendas.
Sheikh Ali Gomaa is the Grand Mufti of the Arab Republic of Egypt - the second highest religious position in the country. He oversees the premier institution in the Muslim world for religious legal direction, Dar al-Ifta al-Misriyyah. This essay is distributed by Common Ground News Service.
By Sheikh Ali Gomaa |
June 8, 2007; 9:54 AM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: God Loves Smart People |
Next: Who Influences the Candidates?
Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 4:17 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://dowisukî.shadowuk.0lx.net/skinny-blonde-small-tits/ > skinny blonde small tits
http://dowisukî.shadowuk.0lx.net/darkroom-gay-free/ > darkroom gay free
http://sojihyqî.cyanhosting.info/gay-man-singapore/ > gay man singapore
http://xezotevî.samhodgson.com/black-saggy-tits/ > black saggy tits
http://sojihyqî.cyanhosting.info/virgin-black-our-wings-are-burning/ > virgin black our wings are burning
http://cilowyrî.hollandhost.0lx.net/mature-joke/ > mature joke
http://xezotevî.samhodgson.com/world-famous-gays/ > world famous gays
http://fydimedij.xhost.ro/wife-taking-huge-black-cock/ > wife taking huge black cock
http://wugetetî.da-hosting.org/amateur-trimmed/ > amateur trimmed
http://wugetetî.da-hosting.org/asian-spikes/ > asian spikes
http://sojihyqî.cyanhosting.info/hardcore-jade-max/ > hardcore jade max
http://xucaxevî.wikipanda.org/casting-couch-free-naked-amateurs/ > casting couch free naked amateurs
http://wugetetî.da-hosting.org/thread-paintings-asian/ > thread paintings asian
http://fydimedij.xhost.ro/dc-chandler-gay/ > dc chandler gay
http://decokuhî.allmyfreehost.info/asian-tsunami-pictures-of-the-wave/ > asian tsunami pictures of the wave
http://dowisukî.shadowuk.0lx.net/the-asian-elephants-natural-habitata/ > the asian elephants natural habitata
http://sojihyqî.cyanhosting.info/accidental-lesbians/ > accidental lesbians
http://fydimedij.xhost.ro/foot-tickling-kids/ > foot tickling kids
http://sojihyqî.cyanhosting.info/calgay-gay-youth/ > calgay gay youth
http://decokuhî.allmyfreehost.info/erotic-games-gay/ > erotic games gay
Posted by: Anonymous | June 10, 2008 5:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.mixx.com/users/urdusexstoriesaz > urdu sex stories
Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 10:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://digimonnude.blogfreehere.com > digimon nude
http://oralantralfistula.blogfreehere.com > oral antral fistula
http://jetsonsnude.blogfreehere.com > jetsons nude
Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 1:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://digimonnude.blogfreehere.com > digimon nude
http://oralantralfistula.blogfreehere.com > oral antral fistula
http://jetsonsnude.blogfreehere.com > jetsons nude
Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 1:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://digimonnude.blogfreehere.com > digimon nude
http://oralantralfistula.blogfreehere.com > oral antral fistula
http://jetsonsnude.blogfreehere.com > jetsons nude
Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 1:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://digimonnude.blogfreehere.com > digimon nude
http://oralantralfistula.blogfreehere.com > oral antral fistula
http://jetsonsnude.blogfreehere.com > jetsons nude
Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 1:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://shakiranude.blogfreehere.com > shakira nude
http://enemasex.blogfreehere.com > enema sex
http://deepthroatingporn.blogfreehere.com > deep throating porn
Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 7:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://shakiranude.blogfreehere.com > shakira nude
http://enemasex.blogfreehere.com > enema sex
http://deepthroatingporn.blogfreehere.com > deep throating porn
Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 7:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The passing sound from at length week's earthquake in south-west China has risen to 40,075, officials arrange said.
Chinese aid workers are struggling to happen seek for millions who at sea their homes. exotic medical teams be suffering with started arriving in the area.
Tens of thousands more are stationary missing, and hopes are fading of locateing myriad people that time sprightly.
regardless, Chinese media say a bride was pulled from the rubble 195 hours - or eight days - after the disaster.
It was the deficient saving on Tuesday. Earlier, a man was pulled sprightly from the remains of a power herb after being buried for 179 hours, state media said. Rescuers fed him sweetened be inconsistent wholly a tube.
The saving try has now focused on providing edibles, seek and drinking incredible for the millions of people hurt by the 7.9 extent earthquake in Sichuan province.
Rescuers arrange launched a concluding try to search all hurt area.
On Monday Chinese president Wen Jiabao ordered troops to reach every set aside village and village in the earthquake district within 24 hours.
Posted by: spateerge | May 21, 2008 9:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.bizzyblogz.com/wholesalemx > wholesale motorcycle accessories
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 10:46 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.bloggen.be/ashleesimpo > ashlee simpson plastic surgery
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 9:35 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.bloggen.be/ashleesimpo > ashlee simpson plastic surgery
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 9:35 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://ogrishx.fora.pl > ogrish
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 8:31 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://candicemicx.fora.pl > candice michelle
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 7:00 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://candicemicx.fora.pl > candice michelle
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 6:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.bloggen.be/avadevineo > ava devine
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 6:12 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.bloggen.be/avadevineo > ava devine
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 6:12 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.bloggen.be/avadevineo > ava devine
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 6:12 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.bloggen.be/avadevineo > ava devine
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 6:11 AM
Report Offensive Comment
fun search test!
Posted by: Anonymous | December 20, 2007 12:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment
fun search test!
Posted by: Anonymous | December 16, 2007 4:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hi!не могу понÑть
http://a-cash.info/pharmacyonline/female-viagaraonline ">.female viagara
Posted by: Loanser | December 1, 2007 7:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jot or tittle
Posted by: KEAGAN | December 1, 2007 3:55 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Channel surfing
Posted by: SOPHIE | November 30, 2007 8:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Channel surfing
Posted by: SOPHIE | November 30, 2007 8:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Cold feet
Posted by: CHANCE | November 30, 2007 6:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment
San fairy Ann
Posted by: ADRIAN | November 30, 2007 4:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
San fairy Ann
Posted by: ADRIAN | November 30, 2007 4:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Blow your own trumpet
Posted by: SAMSON | November 30, 2007 4:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Jot or tittle
Posted by: SYDNEY | November 30, 2007 2:06 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Strain at the leash
Posted by: MITTENS | November 29, 2007 6:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Forbidden fruit
Posted by: TRIXIE | November 29, 2007 4:08 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Forbidden fruit
Posted by: TRIXIE | November 29, 2007 4:08 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Go-faster
Posted by: ABIGAIL | November 28, 2007 6:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Road rage
Posted by: PRINCE | November 28, 2007 3:54 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Caught red-handed
Posted by: GUINNESS | November 28, 2007 1:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Homonyms
Posted by: AUDREY | November 28, 2007 1:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The balance of power
Posted by: BENJAMIN | November 20, 2007 11:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 4:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 3:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 3:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 3:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 3:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 2:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 2:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 2:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 2:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 1:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 1:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 1:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 1:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 12:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 12:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 12:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 12:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 12:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 12:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 11:45 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 11:45 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 11:45 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 11:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 10:55 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 13, 2007 10:55 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 9:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 9:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 9:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 9:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 8:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 8:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 8:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 8:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 8:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 7:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 7:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 7:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 7:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 7:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 7:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 7:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 6:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 6:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 6:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 6:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 5:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 5:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 5:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 4:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 4:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 4:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 4:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 4:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 4:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 3:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 3:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 3:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 2:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 2:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 2:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 2:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 2:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 2:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 2:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 2:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 2:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 1:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 1:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 1:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 12:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 12:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 12:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 12:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:42 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:42 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 11:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:58 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:57 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:40 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:38 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:10 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:09 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:09 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 10:08 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 9:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 12, 2007 9:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 10, 2007 4:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 10, 2007 3:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 10, 2007 3:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 10, 2007 3:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 10, 2007 3:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 10, 2007 3:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 3:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 2:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 2:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 2:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 2:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 2:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 2:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 1:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 1:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 1:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 1:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 12:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 12:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 12:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 12:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 12:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 12:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 11:57 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 11:57 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 11:57 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 11:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 11:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 11:40 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 8, 2007 10:57 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 6:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 6:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 6:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 6:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 6:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 6:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 5:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 5:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 4:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 4:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 3:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 3:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 3:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 3:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 2:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 2:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 2:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 2:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 1:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 1:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 1:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 1:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 1:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 11:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 11:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 11:51 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 10:46 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 10:45 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 10:26 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 10:26 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 10:03 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 10:02 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 9:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 9:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 9:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 9:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 9:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 8:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 8:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 8:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 8:03 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:26 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:11 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 7:10 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 6:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 6:34 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 6:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 6:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 5:55 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 5:30 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 5:30 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 5:30 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 5:17 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 3:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 3:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 3:15 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 3:15 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 2:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 2:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 2:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 1:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 1:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 1:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:17 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 7, 2007 12:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 11:53 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 11:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 11:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 10:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 10:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 8:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 8:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 8:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 8:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 8:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:47 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:47 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 4:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 4:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 4:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 4:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 3:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 3:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 3:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:36 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:07 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:07 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:07 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:06 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:01 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:00 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 9:00 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 8:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 8:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 8:21 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 8:20 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 8:20 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:43 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:43 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:14 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:13 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:13 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:07 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:06 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:06 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 7:05 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 6:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 6:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 6:29 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 6:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 6:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:11 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:10 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:10 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 5:10 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 4:30 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 4:30 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 4:30 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 4:01 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 4:01 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 4:00 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 3:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 3:49 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 3:23 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 3:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 3:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 3:11 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 3:10 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:43 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 2:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:53 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:15 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 6, 2007 1:15 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 10:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 10:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 10:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 10:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 10:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 10:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 10:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 9:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 9:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 6:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 6:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 5:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 5:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 5:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 5:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 4:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 4:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 4:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 3:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 3:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 3:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 3:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 2:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 2:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 2:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 2:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 2:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 2:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 1:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 12:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 12:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 12:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 12:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 12:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 12:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 12:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 12:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:21 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:21 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:21 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 11:20 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 10:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 10:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 10:15 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 9:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 9:58 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 9:34 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 9:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 9:17 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 9:17 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 9:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:36 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:36 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:36 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:13 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:13 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 8:12 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 7:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 6:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 6:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 6:53 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 6:53 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 6:40 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | November 5, 2007 6:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment
http://rpz3zmr75a.com >Google
Posted by: wanxr | October 30, 2007 9:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://rpz3zmr75a.com >Google
Posted by: wanxr | October 30, 2007 9:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://rpz3zmr75a.com >Google
Posted by: wanxr | October 30, 2007 9:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://rpz3zmr75a.com >Google
Posted by: wanxr | October 30, 2007 9:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://rpz3zmr75a.com >Google
Posted by: wanxr | October 30, 2007 9:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
tester aposter
Posted by: test | October 14, 2007 6:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
tester aposter
Posted by: test | October 14, 2007 6:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
tester aposter
Posted by: test | October 14, 2007 6:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Привет.
Продаю перÑональный Ñертификат WebMoney за $99.
Можете проверить: WMID 322973398779 Redfern
Ð’ÑÑ‘ чиÑто, не одной жалоб. Сделан на утерÑнные документы. Ð’ÑÑ‘ законно.
ЕÑли нужно, то еÑть Ñертификаты ещё.
Стучацо в личную почту на Вебмани.
Ðто не Ñпам. Ðе пишите на мой WMID жалобы в арбитраж Вебмани.
Posted by: vursuaterne | October 8, 2007 1:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Привет.
Продаю перÑональный Ñертификат WebMoney за $99.
Можете проверить: WMID 322973398779 Redfern
Ð’ÑÑ‘ чиÑто, не одной жалоб. Сделан на утерÑнные документы. Ð’ÑÑ‘ законно.
ЕÑли нужно, то еÑть Ñертификаты ещё.
Стучацо в личную почту на Вебмани.
Ðто не Ñпам. Ðе пишите на мой WMID жалобы в арбитраж Вебмани.
Posted by: vursuaterne | October 7, 2007 6:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Привет.
Продаю перÑональный Ñертификат WebMoney за $99.
Можете проверить: WMID 322973398779 Redfern
Ð’ÑÑ‘ чиÑто, не одной жалоб. Сделан на утерÑнные документы. Ð’ÑÑ‘ законно.
ЕÑли нужно, то еÑть Ñертификаты ещё.
Стучацо в личную почту на Вебмани.
Ðто не Ñпам. Ðе пишите на мой WMID жалобы в арбитраж Вебмани.
Posted by: vursuaterne | October 5, 2007 3:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Привет.
Продаю перÑональный Ñертификат WebMoney за $99.
Можете проверить: WMID 322973398779 Redfern
Ð’ÑÑ‘ чиÑто, не одной жалоб. Сделан на утерÑнные документы. Ð’ÑÑ‘ законно.
ЕÑли нужно, то еÑть Ñертификаты ещё.
Стучацо в личную почту на Вебмани.
Ðто не Ñпам. Ðе пишите на мой WMID жалобы в арбитраж Вебмани.
Posted by: vursuaterne | October 5, 2007 12:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Привет.
Продаю перÑональный Ñертификат WebMoney за $99.
Можете проверить: WMID 322973398779 Redfern
Ð’ÑÑ‘ чиÑто, не одной жалоб. Сделан на утерÑнные документы. Ð’ÑÑ‘ законно.
ЕÑли нужно, то еÑть Ñертификаты ещё.
Стучацо в личную почту на Вебмани.
Ðто не Ñпам. Ðе пишите на мой WMID жалобы в арбитраж Вебмани.
Posted by: vursuaterne | October 5, 2007 9:25 AM
Report Offensive Comment
tterte
Posted by: topsmileq | October 5, 2007 7:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
tterte
Posted by: topsmileq | October 5, 2007 7:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
tterte
Posted by: topsmileq | October 5, 2007 7:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Привет.
Продаю перÑональный Ñертификат WebMoney за $99.
Можете проверить: WMID 322973398779 Redfern
Ð’ÑÑ‘ чиÑто, не одной жалоб. Сделан на утерÑнные документы. Ð’ÑÑ‘ законно.
ЕÑли нужно, то еÑть Ñертификаты ещё.
Стучацо в личную почту на Вебмани.
Ðто не Ñпам. Ðе пишите на мой WMID жалобы в арбитраж Вебмани.
Posted by: vursuaterne | October 5, 2007 7:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment
tessssssssssssssssst
Posted by: test | October 1, 2007 7:40 AM
Report Offensive Comment
tessssssssssssssssst
Posted by: test | October 1, 2007 7:40 AM
Report Offensive Comment
tester aposter
Posted by: chicksbou | September 28, 2007 5:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
tester aposter
Posted by: chicksbou | September 28, 2007 5:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
aposter speed test2
Posted by: tester | September 27, 2007 9:13 AM
Report Offensive Comment
test of aposter
Posted by: tester | September 26, 2007 5:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
test of aposter
Posted by: tester | September 26, 2007 5:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
test of aposter
Posted by: tester | September 26, 2007 5:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
c854t
Posted by: ma236zda | September 15, 2007 3:34 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Alex wrote:
"Though the Coptic Christians liked it, almost every Copt that I talked to wanted to get out of Egypt and many talked of how many Christians in the north were being forcibly being converted into Islam and how when they flee south to Alexandria and try to get back into their birth-faith, the Muslim mullahs and the courts deny the right of a Muslim to change one's faith."
The fact that no one wants to address regarding copts all over the world and the orthozox christians in general is that some find in Islam the only way out from the oppression of the church. Most women leave that church and convert to Islam just to get a divorce from their husbands. Some of them want to go back to christianity after they fulfill their mission! This is where problems occur, as muslims do not see their religion as a bridge to fulfill personal agendas. Copts have never been true with themselves. They would rather blame others over looking at thier own issues. The anemosity between christians in the coptic community as well as different church denominations far exceeds the differences with muslims. The best way to get out of this is for the coptic church to loosen up their divorce policies and to open up their laws to match this time and age!
Posted by: somalitrade | September 8, 2007 1:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
m808k
Posted by: ro861ck | August 18, 2007 11:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
My wife and I were in Egypt on vacation around the time the so-called Mubarak referendum was going on with near complete boycott by the Muslim population! The Coptic Christians seem to have voted in large numbers since the referendum was to proscribe religious parties. On the face of it, it sounded good. Though the Coptic Christians liked it, almost every Copt that I talked to wanted to get out of Egypt and many talked of how many Christians in the north were being forcibly being converted into Islam and how when they flee south to Alexandria and try to get back into their birth-faith, the Muslim mullahs and the courts deny the right of a Muslim to change one's faith. So, all this rhetoric from Gomaa is not credible. Until and unless, Islamic countries guarantee freedom of religion, starting with Saudi Arabia. No theocracy (of any kind, Islam, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, Christian etc) ought to be given full membership in the UN. Religious proselytization of all kinds, Islamic, Christianity, Buddhist, Hindu etc must be considered a violation of the fundamental rights of a human being who must have the freedom to freely choose one's religion without being enticed or preached to by any organized group. Religion must be treated as a deeply personal affair and the state has no business in getting involved in it. Malaysia, Indonesia, the Gulf countries and many African countries which have majority Muslim populations are now imitating the behavior of the Catholic Church during its crusades and the western colonial powers which spread its brand of protestant and other forms of christianity in their colonies. All of them showed the way to the present-day Jehadis to use religion as an instrument of coercion to expand their hegemony and political power over those who are unwilling to become Muslims.
Posted by: Alex | July 24, 2007 6:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
dkyhwbzi tsgfe dguj xnzirguct nyemg lypm rcvdjuzs
Posted by: mutz nejxkymvp | July 11, 2007 1:36 AM
Report Offensive Comment
dkyhwbzi tsgfe dguj xnzirguct nyemg lypm rcvdjuzs
Posted by: mutz nejxkymvp | July 11, 2007 1:35 AM
Report Offensive Comment
a salaamu alaikum brother awan-
please ignore the ugly resonse of the cowardly anonymous.
i am impressed that in spite of all your continued and current suffering you still manage to bless us here.
intimidating you through threats to your family is despicable-
the practice of plea bargaining in america has long been recognized as unjust.
you have provided a sad example of how fear has motivated many americans to sit back and allow our citizens and neighbors to be abused and imprisoned.
i am deeply sorry for you and your family's persecution.
as america is supposed to be the vanguard of equality- it is apparent in the last 6 years that some hatreds and prejudices are not only sanctioned by the government- they are encouraged as being "patriotic".
i can only offer my sympathy, which isnt much- but its all im capable of giving.
peace
Posted by: victoria | June 21, 2007 11:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Moshin,
You pleaded guilty to money laundering on the advice of your lawyer. But you were not guilty? Sorry, that does not "wash". And whose money did you launder? Pakistani Muslim? Hmmmm???
Posted by: Anonymous | June 18, 2007 11:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
(((((((((((( Peace-Love-Rock-n-Roll-n-Wrap, Mitt ROMNEY, For Prez, 2008 Ya! )))))))))))))
Posted by: Anonymous | June 18, 2007 7:29 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Dear Sir / Madam
I am 46 years old, Canadian citizen and native of Pakistan (Muslim). I was an immigration consultant in Canada and as part of my business; I had an office in New York.
During 2001 immediately after the Sept 11, event the US govt arrested me on Oct 25, 2001 on anonymous call, as a material witness for the 9/11 world trade centre terrorist attack. A detail investigation by the FBI and USA Naval intelligence dept was conducted and I was cleared, but even then govt put me in front of Grand jury, and I was cleared and the case was dismissed by the Grand jury of the US Federal Court.
Approximately after 2 weeks , before I was released from custody the US Govt imposed a new charges of Fraud and money laundering , under the advice of my attorney , I pleaded guilty and I was sentenced to prison for five years (which was four years more, what I pleaded). In which I had already spent 3 years in Detention jail, during the case , I had about 14 months left to finishing my sentence ,(instead of appealing, I preferred to applied for Treaty Transfer to Canada, because if the case is in the appeal, defendant is not eligible for transfer back to his home country).
While at prison, I learned from the case manager Miss House, that my citizen was incorrect in the FBOP’s (Federal Bureau of Prison) computer system as Pakistani instead of Canadian.
Its important to note , that all of my Canadian identifications (passport , citizenship card , S.I.N , Health card , Driving license etc) were under FBI’s possession, with a great deal of concern, I wrote a letter to the Canadian Consulate in Buffalo, N.Y to notify such mistake and requested them to fix this problem. This is especially important for Treaty Transfer back to Canada.
The Canadian Consulate official sent a letter to the jail to correct my citizenship status, however FBOP ignored the request and the citizenship status in the FBOP computer still reflect Pakistani instead of Canadian (Note: - I would be required to obtain visa to visit Pakistan) .In contrast, the deportation letter received from US Immigration dept, Contained the correct citizenship status of Canada.
At the hindsight, I believe that the FBOP intentionally left the citizenship as Pakistani, so that they could retained me at their facility, while the govt is planning to file new charges against me 3rd time.
Approximately six weeks before my released date on Jan 30, 2006 I was notified by the FBOP that I was being transferred from Ellenwood, PA to MDC (Metropolitan Detention Centre) in Brooklyn N.Y, it was explained to me, that the purpose of this transfer was in preparation for deportation back to Canada, (after few days, I signed the immigration deportation papers, with my consular Miss Chen).
But immediately after my arriving to MDC Brooklyn, I discovered during a phone call with my family in Montreal, that RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) official had contacted my sister and brother-in-law regarding the whereabouts of my wife and my current situation, there was no explanation given by the RCMP official to the purpose of the call and he left his phone number and asked my wife to call him back immediately, my wife called the RCMP official and left messages in his voice mail. Then the official contacted my brother-in-law again and had asked him to tell my wife not to call again, because there is nothing good nor anything bad.
Meanwhile the AUSA (United States Attorney) office Investigator and FBI brought me to their office to be interrogated without an attorney present, even AUSA told in the court to the judge on March 16, 2006 that he arranged attorney for me before my arrival from Ellenwood PA to MDC Brooklyn, N.Y, on Transcript; page 11, Transcript line No: 14 to 23.
AUSA: - He (Khalid Awan) was writ in the cause of a grand jury investigation. He clearly had criminal exposure. So to protect his interest I made an application to the duty magistrate for counsel to be appointed.
THE COURT: - Initially he was brought here by a Court to testify before the grand jury?
AUSA: - That is correct, Your Honour.
THE COURT: - When he arrived here, you made arrangements for an attorney to be pointed to request him?
AUSA: - Yes, Your Honour.
This interrogation started with the AUSA office Investigator stating that my family will be arrested in Canada if I refused to answer their questions.
At this point I am certain that my family is in great danger for reasons that I am not aware of. I was scared that my family would be harassed by these people along with the Canadian RCMP official; I strongly believe that the RCMP is doing this intentionally in collaboration with FBI official to further harass me to admit charges that I never committed.
Without knowledge of the reasons why the Canadian RCMP agency was involved. I was surprised that RCMP official directly approached my family instead of me without proper explanation, and its also shocked for me, that how RCMP got the phone number of my family (because before my arrest, I don’t have any single record in any police dept, of any country).
I was intimated and pushed to the edge during this interrogation; I was determined to provide anything these USA officials wanted to make them happy even is the questions made no sense, because I want them to stop the harassment to my family.
On March 15, 2006 I completed the term of my imprisonment and was to be released from American Custody and deported back to Canada. Before that I was arrested again 3rd time, and charged with providing “material support to a foreign terrorist†and money laundering (to an organization and person, which are not designated by the USA govt and belongs to Sikh religion).
These charges emerged while I was still in prison and without the capability of providing any type of support. It was even difficult for me to get enough financial assistance to pay legal fees. I could not have provided any material support while I was in prison for five years and I could not launder any money because I did not have any.
AUSA filed three counts of indictment against me.
Conspiracy to provide material support.
Provide a material support to the foreign terrorist.
Money laundering to support terrorism.
(Please note, that in my previous case govt charged me for money laundering and fraud from Jan 1999 to 2002 and “its mentioned in the plea-agreement by the AUSA that no further money laundering charges will be brought against defendant from Jan 1999 to April 2002†even then govt indict me for money laundering from 1998 to Nov 2001 (Which is double Jeopardy and violation of 5th Amendment of U.S Constitution.)
In Oct 2006, during pre-trial hearing on the motions filed by my attorney the first two counts of my indictment were dismissed by the judge, stating that there is a lack of facts and figures.
After two weeks AUSA re-indicted me again. I believe this is a desperate act of the AUSA to cover up a huge embarrassment. Further this hastily drawn indictment was full of factual errors and creative legal theories.
Since I was first arrested by the American govt, I believe that I have been singled out, isolated and discriminated against primarily because of my race and religion, in addition to the fact that I don’t know any information that the American govt is trying to pressure out of me.
I do not understand the American laws and this is what led to my pleading guilty in the first case. I have difficulty understanding the new charges also.
I have been charged under, section 2339(a) of Title 18 of the United States code, which makes it illegal to provide material support to a foreign terrorist.
Please understand, I am not a terrorist, I do not know any terrorist and I have had no connections with or to any known or unknown terrorist. I have been incarcerated for last 5 years and I had no money to provide or launder.
The law enforcement have in America is pressuring me to provide information to them that I really do not have or know. I am a Canadian Citizen and nearly all of my family is in Canada, including my wife and kids. I don’t know any information to tell them to help their investigation.
Because of this, I am being treated unfairly and my rights under the American constitution are being violated. I am being held here in further detention against my will for crimes which I could have never committed, because I was in prison.
I believe that I am a victim of the discrimination that was outlined in the July 3, 2006 issue of Time magazine (Page 29, column 3). In this article section 2339(a) & (b) are discussed and criticized “as most suspects are charged under these two sections. However, the justice dept here in America admits that of the more than 218 guilty pleas that it has obtained, most are for minor investigation issues that are uncovered deeding the course of their terrorism investigation. This suggest, according to the article that the Attorney General’s office have is not concerned about the rights or fairness or the manner in which it achieves convictions for the people they arrest. Furthermore, criticizes have noted that one of the patterns to emerge from these domestic prosecutions is that suspect seen too incompetent to carry out the deeds they are accused of. The Deputy Attorney General acknowledges that the Dept of Justice’s goal is “preventions through prosecutions†and this is done with no regard for an individual’s rights.
I agree that these guilty of terrorism should be prosecuted. But as the above mentioned article suggest, innocent people should not be targeted because of their race or religion.
I am not a terrorist and I should not be targeted and treated unfairly and unjustly.
I need your assistance desperately in my case, as I believe that I am being treated unjustly here. I would like to send you my attorney’s contact information and provide you with legal documents related to my case, so that you may become more familiar with my situation.
Please also note, that I appeared in the court , for no guilty of my 2nd superseding indictment on Aug 02, 2006 and on Aug 03, 2006 FBOP officials placed me in the SHU (Segregation Housing Unit) out of these months, I placed in the SHU isolation from Aug 03, 2006 to March 6, 2007 for unknown “Pending Investigation†in these 215 days of my segregation and isolation, I don’t have a single phone call access to my family, no legal calls to my attorney and Canadian Council, my legal mail opened in my absence, no medical treatment for my injured shoulder (even I went for hunger strike for 3 and half day) I harassed by the various jail officials and lot of other problems too which already been submitted in the attention of the FBOP higher authorities, but no action taken on them, after writing the court, instead of receiving the response or any action on my complaints, jail officials removed /moved me from MDC federal facility to Nassau County Jail .
My suffering has gone on for far too long, and I need your help to bring my suffering to an end. I want to return home to my family, because my imprisonment was injustice and will remain a great injustice forever.
May God bless you and be with you in your efforts to champion the cause of human rights, and the suffering of innocent prisoners and restore hope, faith and love to peoples all over the world.
Sincerely,
KHALID AWAN
FBOP NO. 50959-054
Posted by: mohsin gondal | June 17, 2007 10:54 PM
Report Offensive Comment
a salaamu alaikum and thank you dr juma for bringing a sense of immediacy and the need for contemporaneous interpretation to this forum.
peace all
Posted by: victoria | June 16, 2007 2:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
If my religion depended on messages from mythical angels, I would have signficant doubts about said religion.
It turns out the angels of Mormonism ("angel" Moroni), Islam ("angel" Gabriel) and Christianity ("angels Gabriel and "no-name" dream talkers) serve as the "foundation"/conduits to God of said religions making faith in these faiths very troubling.
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 13, 2007 10:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
***Islam’s Adult breast feeding and Urine Fatwas***
CAIRO, June 11 — First came the breast-feeding fatwa: It declared that the Islamic restriction on unmarried men and women being together could be lifted at work if the woman breast-fed her male colleagues five times, to establish family ties. Then came the urine fatwa: It said that drinking the urine of the Prophet Muhammad was deemed a blessing.
For the past few weeks, the breast-feeding and urine fatwas have proved a source of national embarrassment in Egypt, not least because they were issued by representatives of the highest religious authorities in the land.
“We were very angered when we heard about the Danish cartoons concerning our prophet; however, these two fatwas are harming our Islamic religion and our prophet more than the cartoons,†Galal Amin, a professor of economics at the American University in Cairo, wrote in Al Masry Al Yom, a daily newspaper here.
For many Muslims, fatwas, or religious edicts, are the bridge between the principles of their faith and modern life. They are supposed to be issued by religious scholars who look to the Koran and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad for guidance. While the more sensational pronouncements grab attention, the bulk of the fatwas involve the routine of daily life. In Egypt alone, thousands are issued every month.
The controversy in Cairo has been more than just embarrassing. It comes at a time when religious and political leaders say that there is a crisis in Islam because too many fatwas are being issued, and that many of them rely on ideology more than learning.
The complaint has been the subject of recent conferences as government-appointed arbiters of Islamic standards say the fatwa free-for-all has led to the promotion of extremism and intolerance.
The conflict in Egypt served as a difficult reminder of a central challenge facing Islamic communities as they debate the true nature of the faith and how to accommodate modernity. The fatwa is the front line in the theological battle between often opposing world views. It is where interpretation meets daily life.
“It is a very critical issue for us,†said Abdullah Megawer, the former head of the Fatwa Committee at Al Azhar University, the centuries-old seat of Sunni Muslim learning in Egypt. “You are explaining God’s message in ways that really affect people’s lives.â€
Technically, the fatwa is non binding and recipients are free to look elsewhere for a better ruling. In a faith with no central doctrinal authority, there has been an explosion of places offering fatwas, from Web sites that respond to written queries, to satellite television shows that take phone calls, to radical and terrorist organizations that set up their own fatwa committees.
“There is chaos now,†Mr. Megawer said. “The problem created is confusion in thought, confusion about what is right and what is wrong, religiously.â€
Governments have tried to guide and control the process, but as they struggled with their own legitimacy, they have often undermined the perceived legitimacy of those they appoint as religious leaders. In Egypt, there are two official institutions responsible for religious interpretation: the House of Fatwa, or Dar Al-Ifta, which formally falls under the Ministry of Justice, and Al Azhar University. All court sentences of death must be approved by Dar Al-Ifta, for example.
“These people in fact are defined as agencies of the government,†said Muhammad Serag, a professor of Islamic Studies at the American University in Cairo. “They are not trusted anymore.â€
While that view is disputed by officials from both institutions, everyone acknowledges that those who issue fatwas serve as mediators between faith and modernity and as arbiters of morality. They are supposed to consider not only religious teachings, but the circumstances of the time.
The position is without parallel in the West, and it combines the role of social worker, therapist, lawyer and religious adviser.
In fact, the relationship between the Koran and a fatwa is a matter of dispute. Some Muslim scholars view the Koran’s words and ideas as fixed, with little room for maneuvering. Others see their job as reconciling modern life with the text by gently bending the text to fit new circumstances.
A second issue is the basis for interpretation. The sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, known collectively as the Hadith, also serve as the basis for many fatwas. But those sayings, of which there are thousands, have been passed down orally and may or may not be genuine. Some seek to limit fatwas to the written Koran, as a result.
A sign hangs on the back wall of a small room that serves as a fatwa center for Egyptians looking for guidance: “Brother Citizens, the Azhar Fatwa Committee welcomes the masses of citizens and announces that fatwas are free of charge and of fees.â€
Tucked just inside the entrance of the historic Al Azhar Mosque in downtown, the center is open six days a week from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. It is a worn room with a soaring ceiling, tattered black couches patched up with packing tape and rickety metal kitchen chairs. Five sheiks sit on the couches and receive people.
Sheik Abdel Aziz el-Naggar has been offering fatwas for 17 years as an employee of Al Azhar. Like other sheiks, he rotates each month to committees that operate in each of Egypt’s regional governates. Over the years, he said, a vast majority of the visitors have asked for help with their marriages.
“The greatest ill in society I observe is the lack of trust and knowledge between husband and wife,†he said. “A man will think masculinity is being a dictator.â€
At 11:30 one recent morning, a young woman entered and sat in the chair opposite him. She held her son, about 4, on her knee as she explained that her husband had married another woman (four wives are allowed in Islam) and that the new wife was only 18. “He said he would spend five nights with her and one with me,†the woman complained. “Can I ask for a divorce?â€
Under Islam, the sheik advised, all wives must be treated equally. So if she could not work the matter out “peacefully, then yes, she could ask for a divorce.â€
That was her fatwa.
A couple approached. The man’s clothes were tattered, and his wife looked distressed. Their 9-year-old son’s clothing was clean, his hair gelled, his smile bright. The man explained that they had adopted the child when he was 9 months old, and that they had just heard that under Islam their son had to be put out of the house, because the mother had not given birth to him or breast-fed him.
He would reach puberty as an outsider, and could not, technically, be around the woman he knew as his mother. The imam at their local mosque said it was haram — forbidden under Islam — to live with the boy.
The sheik said yes, that was right, that the boy could not live with them. The father leaned in, disturbed, and said, “And that’s it.â€
The sheik seemed stuck and referred them to another sheik for another opinion.
That was their fatwa.
A man wanted to know if he could keep money he had found. Another wanted to know if he needed to testify at a trial if called. A third wanted to know if it was O.K. to buy a car on an installment plan. A mother did not like her son’s wife and wanted to know if she could do anything about the marriage.
Each consultation took a few minutes. Such questions have been asked for generations.
Should ancient statues be destroyed or preserved? Should women be allowed to drive, to work, to travel without the permission of men? Can boys and girls attend school together? Is it permissible to buy insurance, to wear a sports jersey with a cross design, to shake hands with a non-Muslim, to take pictures, to view family photographs?
All of this has been addressed in fatwas.
“We are the conscience of the nation,†said Abdel Moety Bayoumi, a member of the Al Azhar Research Committee, a state-sanctioned body that issues religious opinions and is often behind decisions over which books should be stripped from store shelves and banned.
In Egypt, and other Muslim countries, where laws must abide by the Koran, fatwas by government-appointed officials can have the weight of law. “We have to be clear what is at stake here,†said Egypt’s grand mufti, Sheik Ali Gomaa, in a recent speech in London. “When each and every person’s unqualified opinion is considered a fatwa, we have lost a tool that is of the utmost importance to rein in extremism and preserve the flexibility and balance of Islamic law.â€
In his own role and practice, the grand mufti embodies many of the issues that have arisen around the fatwa practice. He has issued rulings that have been deemed by some as so progressive that they were offensive, and others that were so literal as to be considered offensive.
Sheik Ali issued the now-notorious urine fatwa in a book called “Religion and Life.†It was published six years ago and told the story of a woman who drank the prophet’s urine. He had his own book taken off the shelves, and said the controversial statement was not a fatwa but his opinion, which was offered in response to a question.
“The reality is that the mufti is now ‘burned’ and lost religious recognition and the trust of the Muslims and his fatwas will not gain anything but carelessness from all the Muslims; as some will hate it as they hate drinking urine,†wrote Hamdy Rizk in an opposition newspaper.
But he was also criticized — and praised — earlier this year after he had issued a fatwa saying that it was permissible for women to have reconstructive hymen surgery before marriage to conceal that they were no longer virgins. He said that since it was impossible to tell whether a man was a virgin, women should have the same option.
But he took his opinion a step further, when he said that if a married woman had sex with another man, regretted her action and asked God for forgiveness, she should not tell her husband. The goal, he reportedly said, was to preserve the family.
The breast-feeding fatwa came in mid-May. A religious scholar, who headed a department that studies the Prophet Muhammad’s teachings at the Foundation of Religion College of Al Azhar University, wrote that there had been instances in the time of the prophet when adult women breast-fed adult men in order to avoid the need for women to wear a veil in front of them.
“Breast-feeding an adult puts an end to the problem of the private meeting, and does not ban marriage,†wrote the scholar, Izat Atiyah. “A woman at work can take off the veil or reveal her hair in front of someone whom she breast-fed.â€
The ruling was mocked on satellite television shows around the region, and was quickly condemned at home. Mr. Atiyah was suspended from his job, mocked in newspapers and within days issued a retraction, saying it was a “bad interpretation of a particular case.â€
Mona el-Naggar contributed reporting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/12/world/middleeast/12fatwa.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all
Posted by: Mauricio | June 12, 2007 12:35 AM
Report Offensive Comment
***Islam’s Adult breast feeding and Urine Fatwas***
CAIRO, June 11 — First came the breast-feeding fatwa: It declared that the Islamic restriction on unmarried men and women being together could be lifted at work if the woman breast-fed her male colleagues five times, to establish family ties. Then came the urine fatwa: It said that drinking the urine of the Prophet Muhammad was deemed a blessing.
For the past few weeks, the breast-feeding and urine fatwas have proved a source of national embarrassment in Egypt, not least because they were issued by representatives of the highest religious authorities in the land.
“We were very angered when we heard about the Danish cartoons concerning our prophet; however, these two fatwas are harming our Islamic religion and our prophet more than the cartoons,†Galal Amin, a professor of economics at the American University in Cairo, wrote in Al Masry Al Yom, a daily newspaper here.
For many Muslims, fatwas, or religious edicts, are the bridge between the principles of their faith and modern life. They are supposed to be issued by religious scholars who look to the Koran and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad for guidance. While the more sensational pronouncements grab attention, the bulk of the fatwas involve the routine of daily life. In Egypt alone, thousands are issued every month.
The controversy in Cairo has been more than just embarrassing. It comes at a time when religious and political leaders say that there is a crisis in Islam because too many fatwas are being issued, and that many of them rely on ideology more than learning.
The complaint has been the subject of recent conferences as government-appointed arbiters of Islamic standards say the fatwa free-for-all has led to the promotion of extremism and intolerance.
The conflict in Egypt served as a difficult reminder of a central challenge facing Islamic communities as they debate the true nature of the faith and how to accommodate modernity. The fatwa is the front line in the theological battle between often opposing world views. It is where interpretation meets daily life.
“It is a very critical issue for us,†said Abdullah Megawer, the former head of the Fatwa Committee at Al Azhar University, the centuries-old seat of Sunni Muslim learning in Egypt. “You are explaining God’s message in ways that really affect people’s lives.â€
Technically, the fatwa is non binding and recipients are free to look elsewhere for a better ruling. In a faith with no central doctrinal authority, there has been an explosion of places offering fatwas, from Web sites that respond to written queries, to satellite television shows that take phone calls, to radical and terrorist organizations that set up their own fatwa committees.
“There is chaos now,†Mr. Megawer said. “The problem created is confusion in thought, confusion about what is right and what is wrong, religiously.â€
Governments have tried to guide and control the process, but as they struggled with their own legitimacy, they have often undermined the perceived legitimacy of those they appoint as religious leaders. In Egypt, there are two official institutions responsible for religious interpretation: the House of Fatwa, or Dar Al-Ifta, which formally falls under the Ministry of Justice, and Al Azhar University. All court sentences of death must be approved by Dar Al-Ifta, for example.
“These people in fact are defined as agencies of the government,†said Muhammad Serag, a professor of Islamic Studies at the American University in Cairo. “They are not trusted anymore.â€
While that view is disputed by officials from both institutions, everyone acknowledges that those who issue fatwas serve as mediators between faith and modernity and as arbiters of morality. They are supposed to consider not only religious teachings, but the circumstances of the time.
The position is without parallel in the West, and it combines the role of social worker, therapist, lawyer and religious adviser.
In fact, the relationship between the Koran and a fatwa is a matter of dispute. Some Muslim scholars view the Koran’s words and ideas as fixed, with little room for maneuvering. Others see their job as reconciling modern life with the text by gently bending the text to fit new circumstances.
A second issue is the basis for interpretation. The sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, known collectively as the Hadith, also serve as the basis for many fatwas. But those sayings, of which there are thousands, have been passed down orally and may or may not be genuine. Some seek to limit fatwas to the written Koran, as a result.
A sign hangs on the back wall of a small room that serves as a fatwa center for Egyptians looking for guidance: “Brother Citizens, the Azhar Fatwa Committee welcomes the masses of citizens and announces that fatwas are free of charge and of fees.â€
Tucked just inside the entrance of the historic Al Azhar Mosque in downtown, the center is open six days a week from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. It is a worn room with a soaring ceiling, tattered black couches patched up with packing tape and rickety metal kitchen chairs. Five sheiks sit on the couches and receive people.
Sheik Abdel Aziz el-Naggar has been offering fatwas for 17 years as an employee of Al Azhar. Like other sheiks, he rotates each month to committees that operate in each of Egypt’s regional governates. Over the years, he said, a vast majority of the visitors have asked for help with their marriages.
“The greatest ill in society I observe is the lack of trust and knowledge between husband and wife,†he said. “A man will think masculinity is being a dictator.â€
At 11:30 one recent morning, a young woman entered and sat in the chair opposite him. She held her son, about 4, on her knee as she explained that her husband had married another woman (four wives are allowed in Islam) and that the new wife was only 18. “He said he would spend five nights with her and one with me,†the woman complained. “Can I ask for a divorce?â€
Under Islam, the sheik advised, all wives must be treated equally. So if she could not work the matter out “peacefully, then yes, she could ask for a divorce.â€
That was her fatwa.
A couple approached. The man’s clothes were tattered, and his wife looked distressed. Their 9-year-old son’s clothing was clean, his hair gelled, his smile bright. The man explained that they had adopted the child when he was 9 months old, and that they had just heard that under Islam their son had to be put out of the house, because the mother had not given birth to him or breast-fed him.
He would reach puberty as an outsider, and could not, technically, be around the woman he knew as his mother. The imam at their local mosque said it was haram — forbidden under Islam — to live with the boy.
The sheik said yes, that was right, that the boy could not live with them. The father leaned in, disturbed, and said, “And that’s it.â€
The sheik seemed stuck and referred them to another sheik for another opinion.
That was their fatwa.
A man wanted to know if he could keep money he had found. Another wanted to know if he needed to testify at a trial if called. A third wanted to know if it was O.K. to buy a car on an installment plan. A mother did not like her son’s wife and wanted to know if she could do anything about the marriage.
Each consultation took a few minutes. Such questions have been asked for generations.
Should ancient statues be destroyed or preserved? Should women be allowed to drive, to work, to travel without the permission of men? Can boys and girls attend school together? Is it permissible to buy insurance, to wear a sports jersey with a cross design, to shake hands with a non-Muslim, to take pictures, to view family photographs?
All of this has been addressed in fatwas.
“We are the conscience of the nation,†said Abdel Moety Bayoumi, a member of the Al Azhar Research Committee, a state-sanctioned body that issues religious opinions and is often behind decisions over which books should be stripped from store shelves and banned.
In Egypt, and other Muslim countries, where laws must abide by the Koran, fatwas by government-appointed officials can have the weight of law. “We have to be clear what is at stake here,†said Egypt’s grand mufti, Sheik Ali Gomaa, in a recent speech in London. “When each and every person’s unqualified opinion is considered a fatwa, we have lost a tool that is of the utmost importance to rein in extremism and preserve the flexibility and balance of Islamic law.â€
In his own role and practice, the grand mufti embodies many of the issues that have arisen around the fatwa practice. He has issued rulings that have been deemed by some as so progressive that they were offensive, and others that were so literal as to be considered offensive.
Sheik Ali issued the now-notorious urine fatwa in a book called “Religion and Life.†It was published six years ago and told the story of a woman who drank the prophet’s urine. He had his own book taken off the shelves, and said the controversial statement was not a fatwa but his opinion, which was offered in response to a question.
“The reality is that the mufti is now ‘burned’ and lost religious recognition and the trust of the Muslims and his fatwas will not gain anything but carelessness from all the Muslims; as some will hate it as they hate drinking urine,†wrote Hamdy Rizk in an opposition newspaper.
But he was also criticized — and praised — earlier this year after he had issued a fatwa saying that it was permissible for women to have reconstructive hymen surgery before marriage to conceal that they were no longer virgins. He said that since it was impossible to tell whether a man was a virgin, women should have the same option.
But he took his opinion a step further, when he said that if a married woman had sex with another man, regretted her action and asked God for forgiveness, she should not tell her husband. The goal, he reportedly said, was to preserve the family.
The breast-feeding fatwa came in mid-May. A religious scholar, who headed a department that studies the Prophet Muhammad’s teachings at the Foundation of Religion College of Al Azhar University, wrote that there had been instances in the time of the prophet when adult women breast-fed adult men in order to avoid the need for women to wear a veil in front of them.
“Breast-feeding an adult puts an end to the problem of the private meeting, and does not ban marriage,†wrote the scholar, Izat Atiyah. “A woman at work can take off the veil or reveal her hair in front of someone whom she breast-fed.â€
The ruling was mocked on satellite television shows around the region, and was quickly condemned at home. Mr. Atiyah was suspended from his job, mocked in newspapers and within days issued a retraction, saying it was a “bad interpretation of a particular case.â€
Mona el-Naggar contributed reporting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/12/world/middleeast/12fatwa.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all
Posted by: Mauricio | June 12, 2007 12:31 AM
Report Offensive Comment
***Islam’s Adult breast feeding and Urine Fatwas***
CAIRO, June 11 — First came the breast-feeding fatwa: It declared that the Islamic restriction on unmarried men and women being together could be lifted at work if the woman breast-fed her male colleagues five times, to establish family ties. Then came the urine fatwa: It said that drinking the urine of the Prophet Muhammad was deemed a blessing.
For the past few weeks, the breast-feeding and urine fatwas have proved a source of national embarrassment in Egypt, not least because they were issued by representatives of the highest religious authorities in the land.
“We were very angered when we heard about the Danish cartoons concerning our prophet; however, these two fatwas are harming our Islamic religion and our prophet more than the cartoons,†Galal Amin, a professor of economics at the American University in Cairo, wrote in Al Masry Al Yom, a daily newspaper here.
For many Muslims, fatwas, or religious edicts, are the bridge between the principles of their faith and modern life. They are supposed to be issued by religious scholars who look to the Koran and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad for guidance. While the more sensational pronouncements grab attention, the bulk of the fatwas involve the routine of daily life. In Egypt alone, thousands are issued every month.
The controversy in Cairo has been more than just embarrassing. It comes at a time when religious and political leaders say that there is a crisis in Islam because too many fatwas are being issued, and that many of them rely on ideology more than learning.
The complaint has been the subject of recent conferences as government-appointed arbiters of Islamic standards say the fatwa free-for-all has led to the promotion of extremism and intolerance.
The conflict in Egypt served as a difficult reminder of a central challenge facing Islamic communities as they debate the true nature of the faith and how to accommodate modernity. The fatwa is the front line in the theological battle between often opposing world views. It is where interpretation meets daily life.
“It is a very critical issue for us,†said Abdullah Megawer, the former head of the Fatwa Committee at Al Azhar University, the centuries-old seat of Sunni Muslim learning in Egypt. “You are explaining God’s message in ways that really affect people’s lives.â€
Technically, the fatwa is non binding and recipients are free to look elsewhere for a better ruling. In a faith with no central doctrinal authority, there has been an explosion of places offering fatwas, from Web sites that respond to written queries, to satellite television shows that take phone calls, to radical and terrorist organizations that set up their own fatwa committees.
“There is chaos now,†Mr. Megawer said. “The problem created is confusion in thought, confusion about what is right and what is wrong, religiously.â€
Governments have tried to guide and control the process, but as they struggled with their own legitimacy, they have often undermined the perceived legitimacy of those they appoint as religious leaders. In Egypt, there are two official institutions responsible for religious interpretation: the House of Fatwa, or Dar Al-Ifta, which formally falls under the Ministry of Justice, and Al Azhar University. All court sentences of death must be approved by Dar Al-Ifta, for example.
“These people in fact are defined as agencies of the government,†said Muhammad Serag, a professor of Islamic Studies at the American University in Cairo. “They are not trusted anymore.â€
While that view is disputed by officials from both institutions, everyone acknowledges that those who issue fatwas serve as mediators between faith and modernity and as arbiters of morality. They are supposed to consider not only religious teachings, but the circumstances of the time.
The position is without parallel in the West, and it combines the role of social worker, therapist, lawyer and religious adviser.
In fact, the relationship between the Koran and a fatwa is a matter of dispute. Some Muslim scholars view the Koran’s words and ideas as fixed, with little room for maneuvering. Others see their job as reconciling modern life with the text by gently bending the text to fit new circumstances.
A second issue is the basis for interpretation. The sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, known collectively as the Hadith, also serve as the basis for many fatwas. But those sayings, of which there are thousands, have been passed down orally and may or may not be genuine. Some seek to limit fatwas to the written Koran, as a result.
A sign hangs on the back wall of a small room that serves as a fatwa center for Egyptians looking for guidance: “Brother Citizens, the Azhar Fatwa Committee welcomes the masses of citizens and announces that fatwas are free of charge and of fees.â€
Tucked just inside the entrance of the historic Al Azhar Mosque in downtown, the center is open six days a week from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. It is a worn room with a soaring ceiling, tattered black couches patched up with packing tape and rickety metal kitchen chairs. Five sheiks sit on the couches and receive people.
Sheik Abdel Aziz el-Naggar has been offering fatwas for 17 years as an employee of Al Azhar. Like other sheiks, he rotates each month to committees that operate in each of Egypt’s regional governates. Over the years, he said, a vast majority of the visitors have asked for help with their marriages.
“The greatest ill in society I observe is the lack of trust and knowledge between husband and wife,†he said. “A man will think masculinity is being a dictator.â€
At 11:30 one recent morning, a young woman entered and sat in the chair opposite him. She held her son, about 4, on her knee as she explained that her husband had married another woman (four wives are allowed in Islam) and that the new wife was only 18. “He said he would spend five nights with her and one with me,†the woman complained. “Can I ask for a divorce?â€
Under Islam, the sheik advised, all wives must be treated equally. So if she could not work the matter out “peacefully, then yes, she could ask for a divorce.â€
That was her fatwa.
A couple approached. The man’s clothes were tattered, and his wife looked distressed. Their 9-year-old son’s clothing was clean, his hair gelled, his smile bright. The man explained that they had adopted the child when he was 9 months old, and that they had just heard that under Islam their son had to be put out of the house, because the mother had not given birth to him or breast-fed him.
He would reach puberty as an outsider, and could not, technically, be around the woman he knew as his mother. The imam at their local mosque said it was haram — forbidden under Islam — to live with the boy.
The sheik said yes, that was right, that the boy could not live with them. The father leaned in, disturbed, and said, “And that’s it.â€
The sheik seemed stuck and referred them to another sheik for another opinion.
That was their fatwa.
A man wanted to know if he could keep money he had found. Another wanted to know if he needed to testify at a trial if called. A third wanted to know if it was O.K. to buy a car on an installment plan. A mother did not like her son’s wife and wanted to know if she could do anything about the marriage.
Each consultation took a few minutes. Such questions have been asked for generations.
Should ancient statues be destroyed or preserved? Should women be allowed to drive, to work, to travel without the permission of men? Can boys and girls attend school together? Is it permissible to buy insurance, to wear a sports jersey with a cross design, to shake hands with a non-Muslim, to take pictures, to view family photographs?
All of this has been addressed in fatwas.
“We are the conscience of the nation,†said Abdel Moety Bayoumi, a member of the Al Azhar Research Committee, a state-sanctioned body that issues religious opinions and is often behind decisions over which books should be stripped from store shelves and banned.
In Egypt, and other Muslim countries, where laws must abide by the Koran, fatwas by government-appointed officials can have the weight of law. “We have to be clear what is at stake here,†said Egypt’s grand mufti, Sheik Ali Gomaa, in a recent speech in London. “When each and every person’s unqualified opinion is considered a fatwa, we have lost a tool that is of the utmost importance to rein in extremism and preserve the flexibility and balance of Islamic law.â€
In his own role and practice, the grand mufti embodies many of the issues that have arisen around the fatwa practice. He has issued rulings that have been deemed by some as so progressive that they were offensive, and others that were so literal as to be considered offensive.
Sheik Ali issued the now-notorious urine fatwa in a book called “Religion and Life.†It was published six years ago and told the story of a woman who drank the prophet’s urine. He had his own book taken off the shelves, and said the controversial statement was not a fatwa but his opinion, which was offered in response to a question.
“The reality is that the mufti is now ‘burned’ and lost religious recognition and the trust of the Muslims and his fatwas will not gain anything but carelessness from all the Muslims; as some will hate it as they hate drinking urine,†wrote Hamdy Rizk in an opposition newspaper.
But he was also criticized — and praised — earlier this year after he had issued a fatwa saying that it was permissible for women to have reconstructive hymen surgery before marriage to conceal that they were no longer virgins. He said that since it was impossible to tell whether a man was a virgin, women should have the same option.
But he took his opinion a step further, when he said that if a married woman had sex with another man, regretted her action and asked God for forgiveness, she should not tell her husband. The goal, he reportedly said, was to preserve the family.
The breast-feeding fatwa came in mid-May. A religious scholar, who headed a department that studies the Prophet Muhammad’s teachings at the Foundation of Religion College of Al Azhar University, wrote that there had been instances in the time of the prophet when adult women breast-fed adult men in order to avoid the need for women to wear a veil in front of them.
“Breast-feeding an adult puts an end to the problem of the private meeting, and does not ban marriage,†wrote the scholar, Izat Atiyah. “A woman at work can take off the veil or reveal her hair in front of someone whom she breast-fed.â€
The ruling was mocked on satellite television shows around the region, and was quickly condemned at home. Mr. Atiyah was suspended from his job, mocked in newspapers and within days issued a retraction, saying it was a “bad interpretation of a particular case.â€
Mona el-Naggar contributed reporting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/12/world/middleeast/12fatwa.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all
Posted by: Mauricio | June 12, 2007 12:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
***Islam’s Adult breast feeding and Urine Fatwas***
CAIRO, June 11 — First came the breast-feeding fatwa: It declared that the Islamic restriction on unmarried men and women being together could be lifted at work if the woman breast-fed her male colleagues five times, to establish family ties. Then came the urine fatwa: It said that drinking the urine of the Prophet Muhammad was deemed a blessing.
For the past few weeks, the breast-feeding and urine fatwas have proved a source of national embarrassment in Egypt, not least because they were issued by representatives of the highest religious authorities in the land.
“We were very angered when we heard about the Danish cartoons concerning our prophet; however, these two fatwas are harming our Islamic religion and our prophet more than the cartoons,†Galal Amin, a professor of economics at the American University in Cairo, wrote in Al Masry Al Yom, a daily newspaper here.
For many Muslims, fatwas, or religious edicts, are the bridge between the principles of their faith and modern life. They are supposed to be issued by religious scholars who look to the Koran and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad for guidance. While the more sensational pronouncements grab attention, the bulk of the fatwas involve the routine of daily life. In Egypt alone, thousands are issued every month.
The controversy in Cairo has been more than just embarrassing. It comes at a time when religious and political leaders say that there is a crisis in Islam because too many fatwas are being issued, and that many of them rely on ideology more than learning.
The complaint has been the subject of recent conferences as government-appointed arbiters of Islamic standards say the fatwa free-for-all has led to the promotion of extremism and intolerance.
The conflict in Egypt served as a difficult reminder of a central challenge facing Islamic communities as they debate the true nature of the faith and how to accommodate modernity. The fatwa is the front line in the theological battle between often opposing world views. It is where interpretation meets daily life.
“It is a very critical issue for us,†said Abdullah Megawer, the former head of the Fatwa Committee at Al Azhar University, the centuries-old seat of Sunni Muslim learning in Egypt. “You are explaining God’s message in ways that really affect people’s lives.â€
Technically, the fatwa is non binding and recipients are free to look elsewhere for a better ruling. In a faith with no central doctrinal authority, there has been an explosion of places offering fatwas, from Web sites that respond to written queries, to satellite television shows that take phone calls, to radical and terrorist organizations that set up their own fatwa committees.
“There is chaos now,†Mr. Megawer said. “The problem created is confusion in thought, confusion about what is right and what is wrong, religiously.â€
Governments have tried to guide and control the process, but as they struggled with their own legitimacy, they have often undermined the perceived legitimacy of those they appoint as religious leaders. In Egypt, there are two official institutions responsible for religious interpretation: the House of Fatwa, or Dar Al-Ifta, which formally falls under the Ministry of Justice, and Al Azhar University. All court sentences of death must be approved by Dar Al-Ifta, for example.
“These people in fact are defined as agencies of the government,†said Muhammad Serag, a professor of Islamic Studies at the American University in Cairo. “They are not trusted anymore.â€
While that view is disputed by officials from both institutions, everyone acknowledges that those who issue fatwas serve as mediators between faith and modernity and as arbiters of morality. They are supposed to consider not only religious teachings, but the circumstances of the time.
The position is without parallel in the West, and it combines the role of social worker, therapist, lawyer and religious adviser.
In fact, the relationship between the Koran and a fatwa is a matter of dispute. Some Muslim scholars view the Koran’s words and ideas as fixed, with little room for maneuvering. Others see their job as reconciling modern life with the text by gently bending the text to fit new circumstances.
A second issue is the basis for interpretation. The sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, known collectively as the Hadith, also serve as the basis for many fatwas. But those sayings, of which there are thousands, have been passed down orally and may or may not be genuine. Some seek to limit fatwas to the written Koran, as a result.
A sign hangs on the back wall of a small room that serves as a fatwa center for Egyptians looking for guidance: “Brother Citizens, the Azhar Fatwa Committee welcomes the masses of citizens and announces that fatwas are free of charge and of fees.â€
Tucked just inside the entrance of the historic Al Azhar Mosque in downtown, the center is open six days a week from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. It is a worn room with a soaring ceiling, tattered black couches patched up with packing tape and rickety metal kitchen chairs. Five sheiks sit on the couches and receive people.
Sheik Abdel Aziz el-Naggar has been offering fatwas for 17 years as an employee of Al Azhar. Like other sheiks, he rotates each month to committees that operate in each of Egypt’s regional governates. Over the years, he said, a vast majority of the visitors have asked for help with their marriages.
“The greatest ill in society I observe is the lack of trust and knowledge between husband and wife,†he said. “A man will think masculinity is being a dictator.â€
At 11:30 one recent morning, a young woman entered and sat in the chair opposite him. She held her son, about 4, on her knee as she explained that her husband had married another woman (four wives are allowed in Islam) and that the new wife was only 18. “He said he would spend five nights with her and one with me,†the woman complained. “Can I ask for a divorce?â€
Under Islam, the sheik advised, all wives must be treated equally. So if she could not work the matter out “peacefully, then yes, she could ask for a divorce.â€
That was her fatwa.
A couple approached. The man’s clothes were tattered, and his wife looked distressed. Their 9-year-old son’s clothing was clean, his hair gelled, his smile bright. The man explained that they had adopted the child when he was 9 months old, and that they had just heard that under Islam their son had to be put out of the house, because the mother had not given birth to him or breast-fed him.
He would reach puberty as an outsider, and could not, technically, be around the woman he knew as his mother. The imam at their local mosque said it was haram — forbidden under Islam — to live with the boy.
The sheik said yes, that was right, that the boy could not live with them. The father leaned in, disturbed, and said, “And that’s it.â€
The sheik seemed stuck and referred them to another sheik for another opinion.
That was their fatwa.
A man wanted to know if he could keep money he had found. Another wanted to know if he needed to testify at a trial if called. A third wanted to know if it was O.K. to buy a car on an installment plan. A mother did not like her son’s wife and wanted to know if she could do anything about the marriage.
Each consultation took a few minutes. Such questions have been asked for generations.
Should ancient statues be destroyed or preserved? Should women be allowed to drive, to work, to travel without the permission of men? Can boys and girls attend school together? Is it permissible to buy insurance, to wear a sports jersey with a cross design, to shake hands with a non-Muslim, to take pictures, to view family photographs?
All of this has been addressed in fatwas.
“We are the conscience of the nation,†said Abdel Moety Bayoumi, a member of the Al Azhar Research Committee, a state-sanctioned body that issues religious opinions and is often behind decisions over which books should be stripped from store shelves and banned.
In Egypt, and other Muslim countries, where laws must abide by the Koran, fatwas by government-appointed officials can have the weight of law. “We have to be clear what is at stake here,†said Egypt’s grand mufti, Sheik Ali Gomaa, in a recent speech in London. “When each and every person’s unqualified opinion is considered a fatwa, we have lost a tool that is of the utmost importance to rein in extremism and preserve the flexibility and balance of Islamic law.â€
In his own role and practice, the grand mufti embodies many of the issues that have arisen around the fatwa practice. He has issued rulings that have been deemed by some as so progressive that they were offensive, and others that were so literal as to be considered offensive.
Sheik Ali issued the now-notorious urine fatwa in a book called “Religion and Life.†It was published six years ago and told the story of a woman who drank the prophet’s urine. He had his own book taken off the shelves, and said the controversial statement was not a fatwa but his opinion, which was offered in response to a question.
“The reality is that the mufti is now ‘burned’ and lost religious recognition and the trust of the Muslims and his fatwas will not gain anything but carelessness from all the Muslims; as some will hate it as they hate drinking urine,†wrote Hamdy Rizk in an opposition newspaper.
But he was also criticized — and praised — earlier this year after he had issued a fatwa saying that it was permissible for women to have reconstructive hymen surgery before marriage to conceal that they were no longer virgins. He said that since it was impossible to tell whether a man was a virgin, women should have the same option.
But he took his opinion a step further, when he said that if a married woman had sex with another man, regretted her action and asked God for forgiveness, she should not tell her husband. The goal, he reportedly said, was to preserve the family.
The breast-feeding fatwa came in mid-May. A religious scholar, who headed a department that studies the Prophet Muhammad’s teachings at the Foundation of Religion College of Al Azhar University, wrote that there had been instances in the time of the prophet when adult women breast-fed adult men in order to avoid the need for women to wear a veil in front of them.
“Breast-feeding an adult puts an end to the problem of the private meeting, and does not ban marriage,†wrote the scholar, Izat Atiyah. “A woman at work can take off the veil or reveal her hair in front of someone whom she breast-fed.â€
The ruling was mocked on satellite television shows around the region, and was quickly condemned at home. Mr. Atiyah was suspended from his job, mocked in newspapers and within days issued a retraction, saying it was a “bad interpretation of a particular case.â€
Mona el-Naggar contributed reporting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/12/world/middleeast/12fatwa.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all
Posted by: Mauricio | June 12, 2007 12:26 AM
Report Offensive Comment
God is a lot nicer than most people think that He is and one of these days we will all find out. By the way God is not a He or a She but I have to use some kind of pronoun. God Incarnate happened to be a He though. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.
Posted by: Thomas Baum | June 11, 2007 7:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Anon,
Considering the low number of practicing global Jews, the Talmud is a non-entity on the religious front.
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 11, 2007 10:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment
hello again anonymous.
your words (here and elsewhere) are complete and utter lies and fabrication. They reflect your desperation.
Come out into the LIGHT and verify those words or crawl back into whatever pit you came from.
Posted by: michael | June 11, 2007 9:08 AM
Report Offensive Comment
To concerned s0-called Christian.
I don't see you critiqueing the TALMUD.
But, of course you know nothing about it do you.
IF you did, you would quickly understand its evils and its nefarious schemes.
You try to appear educated, but you are no more then a baby in the dark.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 11, 2007 9:01 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Song of I am woman
Oh yes I am wise
But it's wisdom born of pain
Yes,I've paid the price
But look how much I gained
If I have to,I can do anything
I am strong(strong)
I am invincible(invincible)
I am woman
But,I am not sure if any slave or subjugated woman can perceive or not.
Women are deficient at wise,woman is your tilth,two women equals one man,man can scourge woman.
This is the difference between Civilization and Cult.This is the difference between Citibank and Sukutbank.
Citibank,market value 5000 billion dollars(five fold of indonesia GDP)
Sukutbank,market value 1 or 2 billion dollars.
They sit on Petronas Tower,but they can not see the world
This is the matter.
Posted by: halozcel | June 11, 2007 6:38 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Mary,
Please read at (11 tooners) -its about a year old but should answer your question:
http://mahmood.tv/2006/05/14/ghada-jamsheer-is-on-time/
So sorry, Gaby.
Posted by: jan | June 10, 2007 11:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Interesting! Note: there is "NO such thing(s) as Satan nor Angel Good or Bad. Therefore , ABRAHAMIC & VEDIC Superstupidstitious Religions is NO-MORE, That Is, without the "Espialidotious craparino I Say.
Ya Ya .
Posted by: JOZEVS et al | June 10, 2007 11:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank, yes I actually do love everyone equally, yeseven Satan. I even set him up with his own place. Dont worry, someday you will have plenty of time to get to know him better.
Posted by: God | June 10, 2007 10:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Mary,
Please, do not believe everything you see or read on the internet!
Especially do not ask those who post that CRAP whether it is true!
It is just meant to create more division!
Posted by: Gaby | June 10, 2007 10:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jan, The woman on the youtube link you posted said Islamic laws allow a man to sexually gratify himself with a 2 year old child. She was angry. Is this true?
Posted by: mary | June 10, 2007 10:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Anonymous:
Maybe someone needs to teach Jihadist/Julia the words to the old Helen Reddy's song "I am woman"?"
Anon, I am sure she knows the song. She is a very educated woman AND she is strong!
Posted by: Gaby | June 10, 2007 10:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Maybe someone needs to teach Jihadist/Julia the words to the old Helen Reddy's song "I am woman"?
Posted by: Anonymous | June 10, 2007 9:54 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank,
I love everyone equally. Remember?
P.S.: I love you but you have grown up to be kind of an A-hole.
Posted by: God | June 10, 2007 9:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jihadist, my Friend!
Why even respond to the nincompoops of the world!
Frank, Concerned, etc. are northing but a hate gang, a.k.a. Neo-Nazis.
I hope you are doing well. Saw on one of the other blogs that you have caught some kind of bug. Flu?
There are many of us who sincerely like you, just ignore the idiots who will not take you seriously.
In Friendship,
Blessed BE!
Posted by: Gaby | June 10, 2007 9:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank,
Despite the accuracy of your views on Islam, you are not a Christian.
"Waste of skin..." indeed, how Christ-like!
Posted by: Warren | June 10, 2007 9:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jihadist:
When will you break your silence and stop bleating back to us words you are expected and required to speak. Will you never find your own voice?
"Surely you are not saying to the wider Muslim world that the life of a murdered promiment journalist is more important than the countless hundred thousands of burqa and hijab clad women not as well known as the said journalists who got killed as victims of the so-called "liberators" by so-called "friendly fires", as well as from the cross-fires of internal strifes and conflicts."
Yes, I am. How can you compare a woman assassinated by her coreligionists for daring to speak and hope for a better life for women of her country to women with no voice and no hope killed in wartime? Shame on you (a Muslim woman ejoying the benefits of the western world.)
There will always be courageous Muslim women willing to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bynld68XNB0
I am sorry for you.
Best wishes.
Posted by: jan | June 10, 2007 8:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jihadist aka Julia,
There you go again. It always somebody else. Never the peaceful Muslims. Maybe Muslims should show us goodness by being good.
And what about the Malaysian atheist/politician? Name, obituary, jail cell address??
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 10, 2007 8:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jan
And what can you really do for Afghan women, Palestinian women and Iraqi women after that awareness raising on their state as you propounded here?
Surely you are not saying to the wider Muslim world that the life of a murdered promiment journalist is more important than the countless hundred thousands of burqa and hijab clad women not as well known as the said journalists who got killed as victims of the so-called "liberators" by so-called "friendly fires", as well as from the cross-fires of internal strifes and conflicts.
Muslims in the wider Muslim world will ignore the concerns expressed here on murdered and or/killed journalists as hypocricy. Remember the "accidental" deaths of "accidental" bombings of Al Jazeera station in Baghdad? Nary a voice raised re "brave" journalists telling the truth there and getting killed.
US journalists also endured "hardships" in their coverage. Even Helen Thomas, UPI correspondent in the White House, was once "banished" to the "back" by the Bush Jr White House.
By the way, better to send your concerns and condolences directly to the Aghan government. They are responsible for not managing the mess in Aghanistan leading to the murder of the journalist among others. You don't hear too much about countless Afghan women getting killed by the tribal warlords's armed conflicts and who are associated with the Karzai goverment do you? Or how the Karzai government is managing or not managing the internal situation in Afghanistan? It's a social, political and security mess. Her death is reminder of it.
Best regards
Posted by: Jihadist | June 10, 2007 7:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Speaking of Islam's tyrannical control over its people:
If every Palestinian desires their child be a suicide bomber, why is a FATWA needed to keep them in line?
"Fatwa forbids Palestinians from emigrating"
"We hereby declare that emigration from the blessed lands is not permitted according to religious law," the fatwa said. "The people living in these areas must remain in their homes and must not leave them to conquerors.
A religious decree released by the Palestinian Authority's mufti forbids all Palestinian citizens from emigrating from the powder-keg region."
Posted by: Anonymous | June 10, 2007 6:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Interesting: Muslims discussing sharia law -please take note of the differing opinions..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIvozo77rFs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJp1sBxyv2o&mode=related&search=
Posted by: jan | June 10, 2007 5:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank:
Women are standing up and will stand up at great risk. The soul loves freedom. In truth, this is a contest between those who love individual freedoms and those who seek to control. Nothing new. Many have given their lives for freedom and many more will:
"Zakia Zaki, 40, one of the most prominent afghan radio journalists (Radio Solh : Radio Peace) and mother of six children, was cowardly assassinated on June 6, 2007 as she lay sleeping with her young child. This short video is a portrait of her made by the video team of NGO Aina (ainaworld.org), that supports freedom of press and media. Please spread this video so that more people become aware of her courageous struggle and the hardships endured by Afghan journalists
Posted by: jan | June 10, 2007 4:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment
IT (God) is the spirit who created all things animate and inanimate. IT is part of us and always will be, here and in eternity. Man-made religions (all of them) ingnore this basic fact. All that is required of us are good deeds to maintain the Earth and Universe to the best of our ability.
Religions demand that we listen to prophets who are nothing but human. Humans can not possibly understand what IT is, therefore, religions make no sense.
Humans are only required to do two things while alive. 1) Harm none! 2) Be good to yourselves, your fellow humans, and all living and non-living things.
When we die, we don't really die, we shed our earthly form and rejoin with IT. Simple truth!
Posted by: Gaby | June 10, 2007 4:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The verses of surah 4:89-91 refers to hypocites who used to acknowledge the truthfulness of Quran in decietful manner.
The doctor of hate and manipulation skillfully removed 4;89 if they turn back to(ENMITY)get hold of them and kill them which is considered a norm for a TRAITOR to a nation 1400 years ago and today also.
The doctor of hate and manipulation deceitfully removed from 4;90 "be patient to them" after"fight with you or against your people"
and last line the word "agression" before "against them".
The so called master of verses of Quran claims to have read Quran thoroughly, also should know that prophet Abraham peace be on him is mentioned 19 times,Ismael peace be on him 10 times(Arabs are the decsendants of Ismael hence the relationship of Abraham as a Patriach to Arabs and Prophet Mohammad peace be upon him),Isaac peace be on him 4 times,Jacob peace be upon him 13 times, Moses peace be on him 21 times,Mary peace be on her 10 times and Jesus peace be on him 14 times in Quran.
Muslim literally means person who submits to the will of GOD Almighty (ALLAH in arabic because its the only language which does not have plural to the word GOD) so all prophets who had convenant with GOD before Islam were muslims.
The hate monger deliberately ignores the above facts, should his claim of reading Quran for last 40 years be accepted.
The holy Quran has set the rules of engagement of war in defense(do not cut trees,burn crops or hurt elderly,women and children) as repeated many times in Quran never as aggressor.
The hatemonger qoutes verses of Quran when followers of Unity of God(muslims) being spread by Prophet Mohammad were under constant threats. Pagan Arabs being supported by Arab Christians and Jews were constantly planning to eliminate the few in number muslims who had migrated to Madinah.
Unfortunately. the hate monger concentrates only on the verses in deceitful way to serve his agenda and of anti-Islam forces.
Quran talks about kindness to parents regardless of the parent's faith,rights of woman,children,neighbors,poor,the oppressed,inheritance,rules of lending,following the laws of land even if you live in non-Islamic country and many other daily life issues.
What you seek is what you gain from Quran based on your intentions as human beings.
There is saying in the east"Caravans continue to pass by the barking dogs or detractors." so will the message of Islam(1.2billion and growing)
The message of Quran will continue to the ones seeking bond with God Almighty as promised by God Almighty inspite of decietful efforts of the past, the present and the future decietful hatemongers.
Posted by: Iftakhar Malik | June 10, 2007 4:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"yes i hate that part of islam that says a child of 9 can give consent for sex with an adult, and i hate anyone that practices that. kohemini [sp] also said as a matter of islamic lay you can have sex with a female of any age."
To better understand Frank's words (which i agree with) -Please watch:
"Islamic Laws & The 7 year old Muslim bride"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxnC8vKehY0
Posted by: jan | June 10, 2007 3:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank:
I merely (and quite correctly) pointed out that it is difficult to take your arguments seriously when you are unwilling or unable to write properly. You diminish yourself and your rather shrill and exasperatingly detailed attempts to communicate you various points of view on Islam
Otherwise I generally agree that Islam is a religion that promotes violence.
However so does Christianity and Judism if you choose to view the Bible in certain ways. In fact people throughout the world, all throught the past 2,000 years have made the Bible say basically what they want to. If one cherry picks verses correctly and chooses willful ignorance of other parts of the Bible then yes, the Bible can support all kinds of ideals both peaceful and malicious.
That is why I have very little use for hardcore theology and religious blinders to help me get through the day. The world would be a much more peaceful place if we did not seperate ourselves into groups of God's "chosen" people with mindless rules and (largely) baseless theology and concentrated on working together positively.
I am pretty sure that is what God wanted from us if anything at all.
Frank, yes you make your views known, but you come off as such a sad, hate-filled crank that few if any of us who read and/or participate in this forum will take you seriously.
You are your own worst enemy and your hatred will eat you alive.
Cheerio.
Posted by: D. Dave | June 10, 2007 1:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
It boils down to the founder of Islam and his book of death.
But the founders of other religions also need to be kept in mind.
Again a synopsis:
1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was probably a mythical character. If he was real, he was at best a combination of at least three men. 1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have put Abraham on the myth pile along with much of OT.
2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth. Analyses of his life by many contemporary NT scholars via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of his sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian sects.
3. Mohammed, an illiterate, hallucinating Arab, also had embellishing/hallucinating scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the Koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.
4. Luther, Calvin, Smith et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie talking thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).
5. Hinduism - (from a Hindu website) "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centred and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’"
The caste/laborer system and cow worship are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."
6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"
Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life.
http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/BUDDHISM/SIDD.HTM
Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations/embellishments and myths surrounding the founders of said rules of life.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus for an analysis of Jesus' life to include his illiteracy.
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 10, 2007 12:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Boston has a new mosque:
The new Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center in Roxbury where the call to prayer will be heard five times a day.
For all Americans to hear the first call to prayer:
Posted by: jon | June 10, 2007 9:49 AM
Report Offensive Comment
"I watched the video, recommended above by anon. In it you say Allah permits wife-beating. Hearing that turned my blood cold. For years I've heard that Arabic speakers will say reasonable things in English, while at the same time saying hateful things in Arabic."
Could be so, ...of course, 'Arabic speakers' who trouble to learn to speak English might also be motivated by having more reasonable things to say than xenophobia.
Plenty of people here in America think the Bible mandates, if not just justifies both wife and child beating: look at who it is in America who *sells the tools and texts for this, not to mention lobbying against laws that make this a crime in our 'evil secular' society.*
Yep. Fundamentalist Christians.
They put a nice face on for those who don't speak 'their language,' too.
This doesn't mean that Muslims speaking against this utter-war-for who-gets-to-abuse-everyone-in-the-world is necessarily not to be listened to.
Let's a) hear it.
And b) hear from people saying they hear it.
Wow. Wild idea. Let's hear the same from American Christians. Repudiate Dominionism, queer-bashing, racism, and all the usual social ills... *every time you speak.* Why not?
Easy, right?
Go for it.
Posted by: Paganplace | June 10, 2007 4:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank,
It is kind of hard to take you seriously when you cannot even punctuate correctly.
You are a guy who spends A LOT of time trolling on these boards....that does not make you a Dr.
That being said, yes, Islam does have some 'splaining to do.
I am so glad that I gave up on organized religion years ago.
PS: Frank, Jesus himself would probably tone it down a bit and use correct grammar. Give it a shot, big guy.
Posted by: D. Dave | June 10, 2007 3:09 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I watched the video, recommended above by anon. In it you say Allah permits wife-beating. Hearing that turned my blood cold. For years I've heard that Arabic speakers will say reasonable things in English, while at the same time saying hateful things in Arabic. That video seemed to lift the mask off of your reasoned words above, about not abusing fatwas.
The scripture that I follow says pure religion is taking care of the powerless. Islam seems to advocate beating, and taking advantage of, the powerless. The mind-set you give Allah in that video is why people fear the standard Islamic interpretation of God.
When fatwas, one's which advocate violence and hate are issued, based on a view that Allah is happily vicious despite being called merciful, I never hear any uproar about them. I hear cries calling for blood and death, and pleas to help with the murdering of others.
Fatwas and Sharia law seem about abusing the powerless, and massaging the ego of the powerful. I hope to hear something different, but rarely do.
Posted by: jam | June 10, 2007 2:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Frnak Collins, PhD. says, "why danny boy use what ever you want".
Thank you, Doctor, for your blessing.
I will use the shift key, proper grammar (to the best of my non-PhD. ability), common decency, and the proper spelling of MY OWN NAME.
It is so nice to have your permission to use whatever I want.
I'm ever grateful, Doctor.
Posted by: Danny B. | June 10, 2007 12:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment
So...
Is it Dr. Frank Collins, PhD.
OR
Dr. Frnak Collins, PhD.?
The correct choice should drop down when you type the initial "f" in the name field of the post form. I don't even get paid like a PhD. and have THAT figured out.
It's easy as cut-n-paste!
Posted by: Danny B. | June 10, 2007 12:09 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Finally,almost paid like a Phd is showing his true colors by displaying his expertise in laguage of Vulgarity not only Hatemongering just like that so-called intellect who left live Television show to join Sirius radio.
As far as responding to his attacks on Islam,his rhetoric of putting verses of Quran out of context and blaming personal actions on Isalm do not deserve resoponse to his malafide and decietful personality.
Posted by: Iftakhar Malik | June 9, 2007 10:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Claro que si....
Posted by: Viejita del oeste | June 9, 2007 8:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Viejita del oeste,
I could not agree more! !La fe mueve montanas, de verdad?
Posted by: Danny B. | June 9, 2007 8:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Frank Collins, PhD. posted:
"islamic works for me - i dont care if it works for you. but if you want to pretend i wrote something after islamic try this [believer in the monkey piss drinking piece of garbage that like to get porked in the butt by his fagfather] how does that work for you?"
Such turns of phrase you have, Doctor! "Porked in the butt", no less. The poetic license you take with English grammar really makes it "pop" too!
It is no wonder you are paid so handsomely to teach. You have such profound things to share, and in such a clever manner.
Posted by: Danny B. | June 9, 2007 7:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Yep. Not surprised at the abusive spammers once again ruining a potentially-thoughtful and educational discussion.
Personally, I appreciate the chance to find out more about how these fatwas get handed down and all, and, apparently where they go wrong.
As for you, Frank, after that latest outburst. You're so indignant that people don't seem to *like* you, and, filth like that comes out of your mouth.
Those would probably be considered 'fighting words' in any state or nation that still recognizes the concept, and here you are saying someone *else* is violent.
You shame the name of your own Jesus guy, who I don't think I have to be Christian to tell you he would rebuke your behavior in the strongest possible terms.
Certainly, I'll ask you kindly to refrain from calling yourself American.
But, for Christians... this is what you get when you take certain agendas for piety.
Posted by: Paganplace | June 9, 2007 6:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Danny B
Keep at it, brother. We need to signify what it really means to be a follower of Jesus.
Bruce
Try reading Jozevz' comments out loud. They are poetry or theater, but there is usually a real point to what he says.
As to your point about different emphasis in different religions showing rule by a different G-d, I would say what we have is a failure to communicate. The holy books, although based on G-d's truth, are transmitted through the language, dreams and hang-ups of those who write them down. I can make a speech in front of 100 people (I hope I never have to) and you might get 100 different reports on what I said was essential, based on what priorities each hearer came in with.
Posted by: Viejita del oeste | June 9, 2007 5:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Defamation Of Character" ?
Posted by: Anonymous | June 9, 2007 4:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank,
THE ISLAMIC what? That's an adjective.
"or whatever comment you used"
Since you cannot find the shift key, I'll assume you do not know that one can scroll up to read previous posts to aid in referring to them. One can.
I apologize for confusing you with Dr. Frank Collins, PhD., if that is what I did there. Sorry about that.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 9, 2007 3:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment
JOZEVZ
Can you possibly translate your previous "I'll say this only once" into PLAIN ENGLISH, maybe ?
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 9, 2007 1:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Frank,
"what do you mean by succer punched by christians at home? were is the holy war that requires christians to murder non chrisitans going on in america?
you have to be islamic - you comment about people commenting about islam but not knowing about it, and the christian comment is a dead give away.
why dont you islamic ever answer questions about your vile religion?"
I think you are addressing my comment...but none of this makes ANY sense.
Huh?
You're really much better at random non-contextual hate talk and condescending name butchery, Doctor.
Posted by: Danny B. | June 9, 2007 1:47 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Please feel free to educate yourself:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/09/AR2007060900213.html
Posted by: jon | June 9, 2007 12:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
One need only read this thread to see the futility of this Muslim leader's comments. Juma is a government appointed official. He is specifically selected to serve Mubarak's political agenda for al Azhar and the Muslim legal institutions of Egypt.
America is deftly ignorant of Islam. And as indicated here, for many Americans, ignorance is no barrier to forming opinions, passing judgement, and levelling condemnations of Muslims and Islam. Yet Juma is hardly an agent of TRUE knowledge BECAUSE he is a government appointedcompromised by a government of oppression, corruption, deceit.
Egypt is a poor country that can't feed itself, can't manufacture or produce significant products for itself, and has been emasculated by much smaller and more potent nations like Israel. Yet Mubarak and his ilk have failed to develop a significant level of self sufficiency in agriculture or manufacturing. He has instead relied on trade with Europe and corruption of Egypt's economy to funnel wealth to America and Europe.
Posted by: Usama | June 9, 2007 12:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I'm Going fishing & G-d Hunting. So good selling. Ya.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 9, 2007 11:10 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Anonymous,
It is the initial of my last name.
Posted by: Danny B. | June 9, 2007 10:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Anonymous posted: "One post avers that "Islam has remained a non-tolerant, backward religion and is on a collision course with everything modern or civilized." That's a pretty good description of American Christian dominionists and their feckless President Bush."
What really frightens me lately is that a sizeable group of Christians in this country is not REMAINING backward, but is willfully choosing to TURN backward. Even worse, taking pride in fostering ignorance!
The inability to reconcile faith with scientific advancement, and the push to combine church and state astound me.
I am a Christian, but I was reading some Intelligent Design lessons so I would better understand what that means, and I was really taken aback.
It is a huge step backward and unfortunate for any child robbed, not only of a legitimate lesson in science, but any lessons in critical thinking as well.
I, for one, cannot fall for the trickery of keeping my eye on "backward" Islam abroad while I am sucker-punched with an equally backward brand of Christianity at home.
Posted by: Danny B. | June 9, 2007 10:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment
"I can go on and on about Hadith requiring a woman to breast feed a stranger in order for him to see her face"
Mauricio is right. This is on youtube:
"Islam Sucks...but not in the way you think..."
Posted by: jan | June 9, 2007 10:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Danny B.:
"BOY?! BOY?!"
Okay then, was DOES the B stand for?
Posted by: Anonymous | June 9, 2007 10:05 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Frank Collins, PhD. posted: "what are you talking about boy?"
BOY?! BOY?!
Do you write your posts from the front of a bus, or a white-only lunch counter?
...or is that a SCHOLARLY example you are setting?
Posted by: Danny B. | June 9, 2007 9:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Viejita Del Obste -- My apologies. For whatever reason, the posting to the 'On Faith' section appears to go soooo much more slowly, that I probably hit the mouse a number of times out of frustration.
BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THOSE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN I IN THIS FIELD, NAMELY,
The God of the Old Testament, Yahweh, is readily identifiable by a virtual paranoia [if I may use that term] towards SEX, indeed so much so, that I am surprised that it took thousands of years before folks in the West decided that 'the Stork' brings babies into the world, as a solution to kids EVEN THINKING about the IMPOSSIBLE, namely, their parents had SEX -- how horrible -- they wouldn't really do something like THAT, would they ???
Whereas, a non-Muslim Westerner gets the impression that SEX in Islam is not only allowed, it is a REWARD in 'Heaven' and on Earth, with not only as many women as one can find [or support], but also with young boys [under the age of 13.]
If that is so, any form of analysis is likely to reach the same conclusion, namely Yahweh and Allah cannot EVEN POSSIBLY be one and the same deity, even if both are 'the one God' and therefore the same one God, because their expressed views on such a fundamental matter APPEAR to be so diametrically opposed to each others teachings.
ANY HELPFUL OBSERVATIONS HERE ?????
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 9, 2007 3:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Viejita Del Obste -- My apologies. For whatever reason, the posting to the 'On Faith' section appears to go soooo much more slowly, that I probably hit the mouse a number of times out of frustration.
BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THOSE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN I IN THIS FIELD, NAMELY,
The God of the Old Testament, Yahweh, is readily identifiable by a virtual paranoia [if I may use that term] towards SEX, indeed so much so, that I am surprised that it took thousands of years before folks in the West decided that 'the Stork' brings babies into the world, as a solution to kids EVEN THINKING about the IMPOSSIBLE, namely, their parents had SEX -- how horrible -- they wouldn't really do something like THAT, would they ???
Whereas, a non-Muslim Westerner gets the impression that SEX in Islam is not only allowed, it is a REWARD in 'Heaven' and on Earth, with not only as many women as one can find [or support], but also with young boys [under the age of 13.]
If that is so, any form of analysis is likely to reach the same conclusion, namely Yahweh and Allah cannot EVEN POSSIBLY be one and the same deity, even if both are 'the one God' and therefore the same one God, because their expressed views on such a fundamental matter APPEAR to be so diametrically opposed to each others teachings.
ANY HELPFUL OBSERVATIONS HERE ?????
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 9, 2007 3:21 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Viejita Del Obste -- My apologies. For whatever reason, the posting to the 'On Faith' section appears to go soooo much more slowly, that I probably hit the mouse a number of times out of frustration.
BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THOSE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN I IN THIS FIELD, NAMELY,
The God of the Old Testament, Yahweh, is readily identifiable by a virtual paranoia [if I may use that term] towards SEX, indeed so much so, that I am surprised that it took thousands of years before folks in the West decided that 'the Stork' brings babies into the world, as a solution to kids EVEN THINKING about the IMPOSSIBLE, namely, their parents had SEX -- how horrible -- they wouldn't really do something like THAT, would they ???
Whereas, a non-Muslim Westerner gets the impression that SEX in Islam is not only allowed, it is a REWARD in 'Heaven' and on Earth, with not only as many women as one can find [or support], but also with young boys [under the age of 13.]
If that is so, any form of analysis is likely to reach the same conclusion, namely Yahweh and Allah cannot EVEN POSSIBLY be one and the same deity, even if both are 'the one God' and therefore the same one God, because their expressed views on such a fundamental matter APPEAR to be so diametrically opposed to each others teachings.
ANY HELPFUL OBSERVATIONS HERE ?????
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 9, 2007 3:21 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Bruce, you need to be more patient; your post appears 10 times.
Frank, we all know how you feel about Muslims. Give it a rest. I can't even remember what the original post was about....
Posted by: Viejita del oeste | June 9, 2007 2:25 AM
Report Offensive Comment
ACTUALLY THE 72 VIRGINS THAT MEET ONE WHO SACRIFICES HIS LIFE FOR '''ISLAM'''' ARE NOT WHAT ONE MIGHT EXPECT THEM TO BE:
1. They have 72 figures and 72 toes.
2. Put your wallet down and at least 36 fingers will likely grab it and that presumes that only 1 virgin notices it.
3. When you ask them why they did what they did, you will hear 72 excuses and/or explanations for each point that you raise.
4. It is actually the female virgins that have a permanent erection -- what a DRAG !!!
5. Allegedly, no Astrogel is available for use with these 72 virgins, because Astronauts who recommend Astrogel, have never even seen as much as a single virgin in their space journeys.
SO, I HOPE THAT A LITTLE HUMOR IS OCCASIONALLY ALLOWED IN ISLAM !!!
Posted by: Anonymous | June 9, 2007 2:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh Ali Gomaa's commentary above is encouraging, but perhaps the REAL ISSUE is what we, in the Western Democracies especially, would call resolution of CONFLICTS OF LAW and of DIVERGING LEGAL OPINIONS of especially the states and the Federal judicial circuits.
Perhaps even more significant in theory, but far less so in practice, would be resolution of conflicts between 'international law' and the US Constitution itself. Historically, ALLEGEDLY no such conflicts have ever been found, because BOTH are SUPPOSE TO BE the SUPREME law of the land.
The United States has a very rich judicial history of Constitutional jurisprudence of well over 250 years of interpretation.
'International law,' however is a MUCH MORE AMBIGUOUS term which was traditionally interpreted to mean the Customary Commercial [Rules] of mostly CHRISTIAN Europe. Not considered in that 'traditional meaning' were the laws of the Koran, Buddhist, or Hindu legal traditions, and ESPECIALLY not considered were laws in and between socialist or communist societies generally and IF the Code of Hammurabbi was ever considered, its alleged application was limited to the 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and no cast or social limitations were placed thereon as in fact actually existed under the Code of Hammurabbi of slave, freemen and nobels. The often quoted saying, above stated applied ONLY between the nobels themselves and otherwise damages in silver were awarded.
When one today speeks of 'international law,' one is usually referring to TREATY law, which is SELDOM in any way international in scope, with the possible exception of treaties of FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION [FCN.]
And while one could claim that when the West attacks Islamic law, it is therefore a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the issuance of Fatwahs by [excuse the expression] by every religious Tom, Dick and Harry claiming ANY right WHATSOEVER to do so in Islam is of EXTREME CONCERN due to the nature and extent of the INSTABILITY being created thereby.
Further, the well recoginzed +++++EXCEPTION+++++ [and EXPRESS APPROVAL] that appears in the KORAN itself to TRUTH TELLING to those outside of ISLAM only makes the above an even more extreme issue and creates DOUBTS that NO LEGAL SYSTEM can meaningfully and adequately address.
THEREFORE, ISLAM MUST GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND STOP BLAMEING, THE CRUSADERS, THE JEWS AND OUTSIDERS GENERALLY FOR ALL OF ITS PROBLEMS.
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 9, 2007 2:11 AM
Report Offensive Comment
an anonymous says "Powerful forces, Christian and Muslim, armed with their archaic dogmas cooked up by shepherds in the deserts thousands of years ago, ache for a clash of civilizations"
When an illiterate shepherd in the desert thousands of years ago manages to contrive one of the best told stories in human history, cooks up an 'archaic' dogma that somehow has survived the test of time and still appeals to a sixth of today's global population, even goes further to predict with shocking accuracy some aspects of current world affairs, and then uses this exact argument of himself being an illiterate shepherd having been blessed with such extraordinary abilities as proof of his Prophethood... then there are 2 possibilities: a) that he was the most genius liar who still managed to come up with a robust ideology that still thrives thousands of years later , and for that he deserves my fullest respect or b) that he actually was the kindest, purest human chosen to reveal the final divine message to humanity by the same Creator Who revealed similar messages to other human beings in the same league of purity, including Jesus, Moses and hundreds of other prophets peace be upon them...
with that bigger picture in mind, a)Islam in essence is more tolerant to other faiths (especially Judaism and Christianity) because it endorses their Prophets and their original messages and rejects to great degree many but not all of their current altered doctrines, whereas peoples of other faiths (at least many on this forum) reject both the message of Islam and discredit its Prophet b)In the current state of affairs the so-called Islamic states with their weak influence over global affairs (a case in example, inability of any muslim state to enforce a single UN resolution on Israel) due to their backwardness in virtually every avenue including science, economy, military prowess etc. has pushed forward extremism and violence within the frustrated populations as short cuts for political gains, in a fashion similar to the conduct of patriotic Jews in the early days of Israel, the IRA in Ireland, Basque separatists in Spain, and Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka... the road to ending Al Qaeda and averting another 9/11 is again in the hands of the influential west. It is up to the west to act even-handedly and help resolve the conflicts in Israel, Iraq and Kashmir.. Conflicts which were created or are being supported by the west, as these are the burning issues which fuel desperate youth to rebel and heed calls for global jihad.. For the sake of everone's sanity be honest, stop the double-standards and use a more balanced approach -the realists approach- and the road to avert the clash of civilization will never be clearer.
Peace to all
(this contribution is from a Saudi, who went to the local school where 'Wahhabism' is preached, and grew up in the same district where Osama Bin-Ladin used to collect charities for the American-backed Jihadis in Afghanistan back in the 80s.)
Posted by: Saeed Al Ghamdi | June 9, 2007 2:07 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Hello Sister(s) Brother(s) et al, MAURICIO;
Allah , a/k/a our "Eclat" not a Man nor a women G-d. WE NEver Die, so Never Forget.
In SHALLAH, Wahad Emma. Wahad, Abba, Wahad ALLAH! Hom Do La!
Wa Salaam Wa a lakem. WE Liove You always!
Praise Eclat + "i" = ALLAH!
Posted by: Yakub Yozevz et al | June 9, 2007 12:26 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Hey everyone, I am going to start issuing some Fatwas. Watch this space!
Posted by: Chucky | June 9, 2007 12:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
To Jan,
You are right about the fatwas allowing women to surgically have their virginity restored, I have personnally caused two of them by the age of 19, this was 30 years ago.
I should have also mentioned the following ALLOWED Muslim practices: Slavery, TEMPORARY PLEASURE MARRIAGE, Marriage to a girl as young as 9 YEARS OLD as the Prophet did it with Aicha, Sodomy, BIGOTRY and HATRETS for other religions and most of all JIHAD.
Posted by: Mauricio | June 8, 2007 11:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
When you sing the songs of hate to the selected audience's desire and agenda,you will be certainly celebrated ,paid by the audience to the level equal to Phd and will de certainly gleefully called DOCTOR( doctor of manipulation by quoting QURANIC verses out of context to deserve the master's reward).
The term "boy" is used in a pegoritive term when the man wants to prove his manhood with disregard to an intellectual's effective rebuttals.
Islam the only faith which brings the created closer to its Creator spiritually when followed in it's entirety, Quran's message of spirituality to all humanity including kindness to the ignorants of their arrogance of their Creator.
Islam cannot be blamed to the personal,political and territorial goals of conquest and bloodletting just as all the old religions.
If meditation provides dose of solemn peace then also try meditation while thinking of the Creator to get eternal peace which is the ultimate message of Quran including humbleness, socail, economic,political and lastly self defense.
Ironically,there are always few masquerading their whims to oppose for the sake of opposition for self preservation to be want to be counted.
Posted by: IFTAKHAR MALIK | June 8, 2007 11:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
One post avers that "Islam has remained a non-tolerant, backward religion and is on a collision course with everything modern or civilized." That's a pretty good description of American Christian dominionists and their feckless President Bush. The tide of obscurantism is lapping at Washington D.C. as scientists are censored and marginalized, ancient myths about creation and procreation become mainstream again, "faithyness" is the mode, and the ill-educated American masses sink deeper into ignorance and heedlessness. Would it be that civilization's texts could be somehow preserved by Muslim scholars as in medieval Baghdad and Andalusia when Europe was in a Dark Age. Alas, that is not to be for the lights of reason and scholarship are dimming in the Arab lands as well. Powerful forces, Christian and Muslim, armed with their archaic dogmas cooked up by shepherds in the deserts thousands of years ago, ache for a clash of civilizations that is not only senseless and unnecessary but fairly easily avoided by literate men of good will and probity if only there were any in positions of power and decision.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 8, 2007 11:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Please read "The Spy of the Heart".
Posted by: Sarmad Paul | June 8, 2007 10:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Please read "he Spy of the Heart".
Posted by: Sarmad Paul | June 8, 2007 10:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment
What a blessing that an authority like Sheikh Ali Gomaa has the wisdom and courage to speak truth to power. Hopefully the tide is turning in the global mainstream Muslim point of view from the unqualified individuals of which Sheikh Ali speaks, who therefore issue unqualified fatwas which cause unspeakable violence and suffering. My fervent hope is that more Muslim scholars all over the world ceaselessly speak out against those who would interpret the Koran to commit senseless and self-defeating atrocities against both non-Muslims and even their fellow Muslims.
Posted by: John | June 8, 2007 10:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dear Mauricio,
Thank you, Thank you, Thank you..
Your honesty on this board is refreshing. I was hearing things on the net about the truly WEIRD fatwas -even one were its ok for women to surgically have their virginity restored and deceive her husband...Twisted -for what has been taken cannot be returned.
Posted by: jan | June 8, 2007 10:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Yeah, atrocities. It takes one to know one!!
Posted by: nina hagen | June 8, 2007 9:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Reza and Salim:
"After all, Christianity did not achieve its dominance in the near east through entirely peaceful means"
"i would like to point the fact that having a halo behind a lot of the saints heads is only a technique that artists had to use to create a balance with the sword in the hand...."
Moderate Muslims are most often silent. When they speak I clearly hear: the end justifies the means.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 8, 2007 9:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
***FRAUD***FRAUD***FRAUD***FRAUD***FRAUD***FRAUD**
This "person" is the MUFTI of Egypt, which means he interpret the Sharia (Muslim Laws) and sign the death penalties by hanging issued by courts.
He claims modernity however he's an imposture since he supported Hamas and Hezballh suicidal operations.
He was publicly reprimanded in the last weeks by all the Arab media and his colleagues from other Muslim nations for a book that he have wrote, where he cited a Hadith that drinking the Prophet Muhammad URIN, was a cure from illnesses and a blessing !
(Hadith is stories transmitted by people who lived during the Prophet life or LONG TIME AFTER)
There was an UPROAR from religion scholars, medical doctors, historians and scientists.
While it lasted for few weeks, he continued to defend his FATWA / Hadith in the media before he was chastised by his AZHAR colleagues in their monthly meeting, and he was finally obliged to withdrew the book from the market.
His book included other BOGUS Hadith , many of these Hadith are complete FRAUD religiously, historically and scientifically.
Having been born a Muslim to one of this person Professors, I know enough about the DARK AND HIDDEN SECRETS of ISLAM, this is why I am no longer a Muslim.
I can go on and on about Hadith requiring a woman to breast feed a stranger in order for him to see her face or that a woman can be pregnant for up to FOUR (4) YEARS.
Islam is FULL of BIZAR and DANGEROUS examples, one of them are the SEVENTY TWO (72) VIRGINS AND BOYS AWAITING Muslims in Paradise, where the VIRGINS, REMAIN VIRGINS IN SPIT of SEXUAL INTERCOURSES and where the Man keep a PERMANANT ERECTION.
These examples are the TIP OF THE ICEBERG........
Posted by: Mauricio | June 8, 2007 9:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
DEAR FRANK COLLIN,
The word needs peace and everybody living in peace, dont mind religion, and the most important is the love blowing in every world.
A great mission is changed the world, where the people can living with falling in love.
A BIG LOVE POR EVERYBODY
Posted by: donizeti rodrigues inácio | June 8, 2007 9:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The word needs peace and everybody living in peace, dont mind religion, and the most important is the love blowing in every world.
A great mission is changed the world, where the people can living with falling in love.
A BIG LOVE POR EVERYBODY
Posted by: donizeti rodrigues inácio | June 8, 2007 9:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The word needs peace and everybody living in peace, dont mind religion, and the most important is the love blowing in every world.
A great mission is changed the world, where the people can living with falling in love.
A BIG LOVE POR EVERYBODY
Posted by: donizeti rodrigues inácio | June 8, 2007 9:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
gosh, good to see so many people are interested in islam, in a good or bad way, it doesn't really matter cause thats how islam is supposed to spread whith words and not swords.
just would like to point out to the believers in the jewish-co-holliwood version of islam, please widen your horizons and try to read the right information. its all there for yous in public libraries and on the net!
and for the people who are saying that islam was introduced by force, i would like to point the fact that having a halo behind a lot of the saints heads is only a technique that artists had to use to create a balance with the sword in the hand....
Posted by: salim | June 8, 2007 9:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Reza,
I thought it was obvious but apparently not. The koran needs to have all the elements of militarism removed/deleted/cleaned out. Ditto for all the anti-female elements. To do that you must put Allah, the "prophet" and messenger in the reality of history.
And I find it amazing that you did not mention your required belief in angels. Hmmm, but I guess if you kill/mythicize the messenger, the messages become mute and thereby are nothing more than the scribble of Arabic scribes repeating the messages of the ancients (e.g. Hittites, Babylonians, Egyptians, Macedonians, Buddhists et al).
Allah, God, Zeus, Mother Nature, et al (peace be upon them)
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 8, 2007 8:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
In today's world one easily sees a huge gap between Islam and all the other ideologies. And it's often said that while all ideologies have evolved and adapted to the changing times, Islam has remained a non-tolerant, backward religion and is on a collision course with everything modern or civilized. However, the fact that Islam in general has had the power to preserve itself from the changes of modern times, not all of which were necessarily good for humanity, makes me feel there is something divine, authentic, and Godly about this religion.
Peace to all.
Posted by: CAG | June 8, 2007 8:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Reza,
I am not a Muslim, but you make a very cogent and logical argument. Thank you sir.
Posted by: Mike | June 8, 2007 8:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Danny B.: Thanks and let’s be committed to dialogue.
Hi Concerned Christian,
I really do not understand the point of your post. I assume that you refer to the Qur’an as the Book that needs cleansing. Is your use of the term cleansing, similar to ethnic cleansing? I digress.
I question your premises and assumptions. What does it mean to cleanse? Do you mean to make pure or remove dirt or filth? Once again, this is based on your own view of what is pure and what is impure. You must have criteria to determine whether something is “clean†or “unclean†(have you ever read Leviticus???).
So, what are your criteria? That the book should reflect the Bible or Christian belief? Do you seek to make Islam “clean†or is that just a euphemism to make Islam “Christian�
#1: What “should†this be added?
#2: That statement is not in conflict with evolution nor the Big Bang.
#3: I get the picture now. You mean to cleanse the Qur’an based on disbelief in the spiritual side of our existence. I don’t share that belief. We are discussing the beliefs of the religion right? Would believe in Allah and not in what He said???
#4: Would believe in Allah and not in what He said???
#5: Would believe in Allah and not in what He said???
“Mohammed spent thirty days fasting in a hot cave ..."fast, hunger-driven" hallucinations into horrible reality for unbelievers.â€
Muhammad (sas) was not hungry. His wife Khadijiah (ra) or one of her servants would bring him food nightly. He would fast in his regular manner which is during the day only. Second, caves are cool, not hot, that’s why some animals spend the day there.
Posted by: reza | June 8, 2007 6:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
This comment is in refrence to every one of you who either praised Shiekh's article or condemned it- Before you can color yourself as Jewish, Christian or Muslim you need to learn some about the base of understanding a true relegion. The very base is understanding yourselve as a humanbeing (wants, desires, streghnth and weekness)then you need to learn about your sorounding (earth, mountains, sky, rocks..)to compare yourself to these powerful objects in the society and then you need to look deep in yoursleves to find out the reason for your existance. After you come to a conclusion then I want you to look into the horrible and tragic history of mankind and those inhuman crimes that we as human beings have committed(no relegious afiliation). What mad those despised leaders to kill thousands of innocents in the name of their regimes? What was that stregnth that supported them in killing thousands of innocents by diffrent meanse? We can't even think of killing a parrote yet in the other part of the world people kill humans. We do not want to stray away from topic but what I want to pinpoint towards is that in a state of chaos every one becomes an animal. Our trained soldiers commit crimes of killing civilians but once they are back in US they fall into the rules of the country. You hardly see any one walk around and beat people in the states and that is because of the laws and rules of the state Not every one necessarly like these laws and (Drug dealers, Gang members, Drunks, Adicts, or any one who can not maintain himself/herself)still get in trouble, sure the government punish them too. Fetwa is just like the jurisdication of a country where laws are passed at the municiple levle and send to higher courts for review. Fetwa from an educated and informed Muftie is more likely to get genrally accepted and followed while the other one contradicts himself.
So there is nothing wrong by following a relgious fetwa (I am refering to all the relegions) for their fetwas are the reason of the law and regulation in a society. There is nothing wrong to be relegious but following a wrong theology is a crime. Thank you for reading and visit my URL
Posted by: Ali | June 8, 2007 6:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
frank collins got it right. you won't find christians told to kill unbelievers in the new testament and any that do are wrong.frank the scholar tells collins to shut up and not comment. well,i guess we will have to defend ourselves.
Posted by: gary | June 8, 2007 6:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment
frank collins got it right. you won't find christians told to kill unbelievers in the new testament and any that do are wrong.frank the scholar tells collins to shut up and not comment. well,i guess we will have to defend ourselves.
Posted by: gary | June 8, 2007 6:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank Collins is at it again with his allegedly historical catalogue of Islamic violence. OK, Frank, what about Christian violence:
Saint Augustine’s cognite intrare (“lead them inâ€â€”i.e. “force them to convertâ€). In fact the Qur’an says the exact opposite: There is no compulsion in religion (2:256 ). Augustine’s frightening idea that all must be compelled to “conform†to the “true Christian faith†has unleashed centuries of unparalleled bloodshed. Indeed, Christians have suffered more under the rule of Christian civilization than under pre- Christian Roman rule or any other rule in history.
Millions were tortured and slaughtered in the name of Christianity during the periods of the Arian, Donatist and Albigensian heresies
The Crusades:
The European armies were saying, as they slaughtered both Christian and Muslim Arabs: “Kill them all, God will know his own.â€
Europe's Reformation and Counter Reformation Era: Two thirds of the Christian population of Europe was slaughtered by Christians
The African slave trade:
Claimed the lives of 40 million
The Colonial Conquests:
Estimates for the number of Native Americans slaughtered by the Europeans in North, Central and South America run as high as 20 million within three generations.
The 20th century's Western Civilization took warfare to new extremes. A conservative estimate puts the total number of brutal deaths in the 20th century at more than 250 million. Of these, Muslims are responsible for less than 10 million deaths. Christians, or those coming from Christian backgrounds account for more than 200 million of these! The greatest death totals come from World War I (about 20 million, at least 90 % of which were inflicted by “Christiansâ€) and World War II (90 million, at least 50% of which were inflicted by “Christians,†the majority of the rest occurring in the Far East). Given this grim history, it appears that we Europeans must all come to grips with the fact that Islamic civilization has actually been incomparably less brutal than Christian civilization. Did the Holocaust of over 6 million Jews occur out of the background of a Muslim Civilization?
In the 20th century alone, Western and/or Christian powers have been responsible for at least twenty times more deaths than have Muslim powers. In this most brutal of centuries, we created incomparably more civilian casualties than have Muslims in the whole of Islamic history.
In the 20th century:
Rawanda, 1994:
Witness the slaughter of 900,000 Rwandans in 1994 in a population that was over 90% Christian
1992-1995 Bosnia:
The genocide of over 300,000 Muslims and systematic rape of over 100,000 Muslim women by Christian Serbs
And best of all, Frank, the Holocaust of the Jews. This was a quintessentially Christian event, stemming directly from Christian hatred of Jews. A hatred of 2000 years. Tell me, Frank, do you thank your God for the Holocaust? Do you thank sweet Jesus for Auschwitz? You should, 'cause he sure did it.
"Kill them all and let God sort them out!" Only a true Christian could say this.
Posted by: Garak | June 8, 2007 6:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Reza,
You forgot to cleanse your Book of Death.
Again the starting points to ease your rebuttal,(maybe Gabriel can help out)
"The 77 Branches of Faith is a collection compiled by Imam Bayhaqi. In it, he explains the essential virtues that reflect true faith (iman) through related Qur’anic verses and Prophetic sayings." i.e. a nice summary of the Koran and Islamic beliefs.
"30 qualities are connected to the heart"
(five at a time)
"1. Belief in Allah"
No problem but "aka as God, Yahweh, Zeus, Jehovah, Mother Nature, etc." should be added.
"2. To believe that everything other than Allah was non-existent. Thereafter, Allah Most High created these things and subsequently they came into existence."
No problem but evolution and the Big Bang cannot be ignored and the "akas" for Allah should be included.
"3. To believe in the existence of angels."
A major item to delete. Angels/devils are the mythical creations of ancient civilizations, e.g. Hittites, to explain/define natural events, contacts with their gods, big birds, sudden winds, protectors during the dark nights, etc. No "pretty/ugly talking wingie thingies" ever visited or talked to Mohammed, Jesus, Mary or Joseph or Joe Smith. Today we would classify angels as fairies and "tinker bells". Modern devils are classified as the demons of the demented.
"4. To believe that all the heavenly books that were sent to the different prophets are true. However, apart from the Quran, all other books are not valid anymore."
Another major item to delete. There are no books written in Heaven just as there are no angels to write/publish/distribute them. The Koran, OT, NT etc. are simply books written by humans for humans.
Prophets were invented by ancient scribes typically to keep the uneducated masses in line. Today we call them fortune tellers.
Prophecies are also invalidated by the natural/God/Allah gifts of Free Will and Future.
"5. To believe that all the prophets are true. However, we are commanded to follow the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) alone."
Mohammed spent thirty days fasting in a hot cave before his first contact with Allah aka God etc. via a "pretty wingie talking thingie". Common sense demands a deletion of #5. #5 is also the major source of Islamic violence i.e. turning Mohammed's "fast, hunger-driven" hallucinations into horrible reality for unbelievers.
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 8, 2007 6:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Well put Reza.
Posted by: Danny B. | June 8, 2007 6:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
WPC,
Welcome, and you make some valid points.
You pointed out: "Frank Collins, who calls Islam a source of war and hate while ignoring the equally heinous things done by people who called themselves Christian, remains impervious to any facts in these discussions.
DOCTOR Collins will argue that Jesus never told anyone to kill, blah, blah, blah...and the the Koran specifically requires it...then trot out his sound bites.
Then you pointed out: "By the way, people who are followers of Islam are called Muslims, not Islamics."
I noticed this too, but would never presume to correct such an illustrious scholar as the "Doctor" who is paid LIKE a PhD.!
Then again, he also doesn't seem to think that "I" is a proper noun, so who knows?
Stick around...he only gets more amazing!
Posted by: Danny B. | June 8, 2007 5:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hi all,
One by one.
“Mohammed was an illiterate Arab. How did this work then? It is obvious he could not proofread the book of Death to verify his hallucinogenic messages from "mythical Gabriel". So are we to rely on the "scribblings" of scribes who obviously plagiarized from the all the ancient religions and then added their own agenda to justify the looting and pillaging of the lands of the non-believers?â€
This argument is not at all logical. If the scribes or any of the early muslims wanted to have an agenda to justify looting and pillaging, then why, in the face of persecution in Makkah, didn’t they just acquiesce to their persecutors demands? If they “obviously plagiarized†ALL of the ancient religions, then why didn’t they plagiarize the most important part or the most important religion of that area, i.e. many gods and polytheism? Why oppose the most powerful, when you can just write whatever you want, as you have claimed? It doesn’t make sense at all.
“and what is the difference between a moderate or progressive islamic and your general run of the mill islamic?â€
Islamic is a modifier for an inanimate object, not for people. Your ignorance is brilliant.
“so tell us in what context do you put the war like history of islam, considering that they started the war before anyone ever knew about them. or why there are no longer any jews in mecca?â€
This line of discussion will not get us anywhere. After all, Christianity did not achieve its dominance in the near east through entirely peaceful means. Indeed, in the speech urging on the crusades (as recorded by Robert the Monk), Pope Urban says,
“Let the deeds of your ancestors move you and incite your minds to manly achievements; the glory and greatness of king Charles the Great, and of his son Louis, and of your other kings, who have destroyed the kingdoms of the pagans, and have extended in these lands the territory of the holy church. Let the holy sepulchre of the Lord our Saviour, which is possessed by unclean nations, especially incite you, and the holy places which are now treated with ignominy and irreverently polluted with their filthiness. Oh, most valiant soldiers and descendants of invincible ancestors, be not degenerate, but recall the valor of your progenitors.â€
R Paul, what an excellent comment!
“Re Fatwas... my Syrian, Muslim mother tells me *fatwas* of any kind have no basis in Islamic law, are made by men who want to control other people on false authority, and are indefensible because no mufti can achieve the understanding of the world population's widely varied, realities-on-the-ground required to interpret Islamic law "for all". Such a scholar would have to grow up in every village on earth, in every country on the planet, and walk in every man's and every woman's shoes to have the insight as to how Islamic law should be applied via a "fatwa". Since it is impossible to know enough to be correct in judgement for all, it is illegal to issue a fatwa of any kind today.â€
I don’t know if your mother is an expert on Islamic law, but fatwas definitely have a basis within Islamic Law. You are correct that a fatwa is temporally and geographically bound and it is even known that Imam Abu Hanifah came to a different conclusion on a similar issue when he was in Egypt than he was in Iraq. The fact that these bounds exist does not mean that fatwas are illegal. It simply means that the fatwa is only applicable in a certain time and place. It is decentralized.
“I and many other non-Muslims would welcome a host of fatwas from you and other prominently-followed Islamic clerics and scholars that would condemn suicide bombers, violent attacks on non-militarized civilian targets, and the innate evil of both the honor-killings of women and the practice of female circumcision.â€
These fatwas exist. You just don’t hear about them for whatever reason. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4775588
“I am curious to know the reason why, in your "Guest Voices" article "Fatwas and Modernism" you did not mention your own recent fatwa that (as I understand it) states that since Islam prohibits statues, none should be allowed in modern Egypt. In part, I need you to help me understand how this fatwa in particular embodies your stance that Islam is flexible.â€
This is an excellent question. Well, what would you consider flexible or inflexible? It is just like what is moderate depends on what are the extremes. I suppose that you would consider that keeping 10% or 50% of the statues would consititute flexibility. I cannot speak for the Sheikh, but it is my understanding that 2-dimensional representations may be acceptable. I would consider this flexible in that accommodates the desire to portray something or something, but also accommodates the restriction on statues. I understand that this is not necessarily what the Sheikh meant (because I’ve studied Islamic jurisprudence), but it is illustrative of the concept. Flexibility would mean a willingness to compromise or an ability to adapt to changing circumstances. In my example, the compromise is that you may represent but not in three dimensions.
Posted by: Reza | June 8, 2007 5:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank Collins, who calls Islam a source of war and hate while ignoring the equally heinous things done by people who called themselves Christian, remains impervious to any facts in these discussions. By the way, people who are followers of Islam are called Muslims, not Islamics. It is always a mistake to judge any belief on the basis of the evil things done by a few in its name. Rather, we should call every believer in that faith to the highest virtues of his tradition. Islam has those virtues in as much abundance as the other great religions. It's highest expression within Islam is Sufism and its best demonstration in social and political context was al-Andalus (Muslim Spain).
The honored Mufti, nevertheless, seems a bit mistaken when he refers to Egypt as a liberal democracy. I would ask him about the requirement that citizens of Egypt must put a religion on their identity cards - but they can select only from Islam, Christianity and Judaism. If they refuse to put one of these religions, they are denied the ID card, which is absolutely essential for enjoying the rights of citizenship, social services, and education. The recent Supreme Administrative Court decision that Baha'is are not to be permitted to enter Baha'i, other, or leave it blank, is an example, urged on by Islamist fanatics who called for the death of the Baha'is during the court proceeding without being removed, and by clerics of Al-Azhar University.
People who write venemously here about Islam are deeply mistaken. But you, likewise, need to consider how it is possible for an Islamic cleric to be mistaken about what the proper attitude of Islam should be toward people who do not fit into an outdated definition of who has freedom of worship. If it is to deny them their rights to practice their faith and also deny them the rights of citizenship, then Egypt is not a liberal democracy and Islamic law has failed the most important Qur'anic tests: "Let there be no compulsion in religion" and "To you your religion, to me my religion."
Posted by: wpc09 | June 8, 2007 5:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank Collins, who calls Islam a source of war and hate while ignoring the equally heinous things done by people who called themselves Christian, remains impervious to any facts in these discussions. By the way, people who are followers of Islam are called Muslims, not Islamics. It is always a mistake to judge any belief on the basis of the evil things done by a few in its name. Rather, we should call every believer in that faith to the highest virtues of his tradition. Islam has those virtues in as much abundance as the other great religions. It's highest expression within Islam is Sufism and its best demonstration in social and political context was al-Andalus (Muslim Spain).
The honored Mufti, nevertheless, seems a bit mistaken when he refers to Egypt as a liberal democracy. I would ask him about the requirement that citizens of Egypt must put a religion on their identity cards - but they can select only from Islam, Christianity and Judaism. If they refuse to put one of these religions, they are denied the ID card, which is absolutely essential for enjoying the rights of citizenship, social services, and education. The recent Supreme Administrative Court decision that Baha'is are not to be permitted to enter Baha'i, other, or leave it blank, is an example, urged on by Islamist fanatics who called for the death of the Baha'is during the court proceeding without being removed, and by clerics of Al-Azhar University.
People who write venemously here about Islam are deeply mistaken. But you, likewise, need to consider how it is possible for an Islamic cleric to be mistaken about what the proper attitude of Islam should be toward people who do not fit into an outdated definition of who has freedom of worship. If it is to deny them their rights to practice their faith and also deny them the rights of citizenship, then Egypt is not a liberal democracy and Islamic law has failed the most important Qur'anic tests: "Let there be no compulsion in religion" and "To you your religion, to me my religion."
Posted by: wpc09 | June 8, 2007 5:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank Collins, who calls Islam a source of war and hate while ignoring the equally heinous things done by people who called themselves Christian, remains impervious to any facts in these discussions. By the way, people who are followers of Islam are called Muslims, not Islamics. It is always a mistake to judge any belief on the basis of the evil things done by a few in its name. Rather, we should call every believer in that faith to the highest virtues of his tradition. Islam has those virtues in as much abundance as the other great religions. It's highest expression within Islam is Sufism and its best demonstration in social and political context was al-Andalus (Muslim Spain).
The honored Mufti, nevertheless, seems a bit mistaken when he refers to Egypt as a liberal democracy. I would ask him about the requirement that citizens of Egypt must put a religion on their identity cards - but they can select only from Islam, Christianity and Judaism. If they refuse to put one of these religions, they are denied the ID card, which is absolutely essential for enjoying the rights of citizenship, social services, and education. The recent Supreme Administrative Court decision that Baha'is are not to be permitted to enter Baha'i, other, or leave it blank, is an example, urged on by Islamist fanatics who called for the death of the Baha'is during the court proceeding without being removed, and by clerics of Al-Azhar University.
People who write venemously here about Islam are deeply mistaken. But you, likewise, need to consider how it is possible for an Islamic cleric to be mistaken about what the proper attitude of Islam should be toward people who do not fit into an outdated definition of who has freedom of worship. If it is to deny them their rights to practice their faith and also deny them the rights of citizenship, then Egypt is not a liberal democracy and Islamic law has failed the most important Qur'anic tests: "Let there be no compulsion in religion" and "To you your religion, to me my religion."
Posted by: wpc09 | June 8, 2007 5:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank Collins, who calls Islam a source of war and hate while ignoring the equally heinous things done by people who called themselves Christian, remains impervious to any facts in these discussions. By the way, people who are followers of Islam are called Muslims, not Islamics. It is always a mistake to judge any belief on the basis of the evil things done by a few in its name. Rather, we should call every believer in that faith to the highest virtues of his tradition. Islam has those virtues in as much abundance as the other great religions. It's highest expression within Islam is Sufism and its best demonstration in social and political context was al-Andalus (Muslim Spain).
The honored Mufti, nevertheless, seems a bit mistaken when he refers to Egypt as a liberal democracy. I would ask him about the requirement that citizens of Egypt must put a religion on their identity cards - but they can select only from Islam, Christianity and Judaism. If they refuse to put one of these religions, they are denied the ID card, which is absolutely essential for enjoying the rights of citizenship, social services, and education. The recent Supreme Administrative Court decision that Baha'is are not to be permitted to enter Baha'i, other, or leave it blank, is an example, urged on by Islamist fanatics who called for the death of the Baha'is during the court proceeding without being removed, and by clerics of Al-Azhar University.
People who write venemously here about Islam are deeply mistaken. But you, likewise, need to consider how it is possible for an Islamic cleric to be mistaken about what the proper attitude of Islam should be toward people who do not fit into an outdated definition of who has freedom of worship. If it is to deny them their rights to practice their faith and also deny them the rights of citizenship, then Egypt is not a liberal democracy and Islamic law has failed the most important Qur'anic tests: "Let there be no compulsion in religion" and "To you your religion, to me my religion."
Posted by: WPC | June 8, 2007 5:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Frank Collins, who calls Islam a source of war and hate while ignoring the equally heinous things done by people who called themselves Christian, remains impervious to any facts in these discussions. By the way, people who are followers of Islam are called Muslims, not Islamics. It is always a mistake to judge any belief on the basis of the evil things done by a few in its name. Rather, we should call every believer in that faith to the highest virtues of his tradition. Islam has those virtues in as much abundance as the other great religions. It's highest expression within Islam is Sufism and its best demonstration in social and political context was al-Andalus (Muslim Spain).
The honored Mufti, nevertheless, seems a bit mistaken when he refers to Egypt as a liberal democracy. I would ask him about the requirement that citizens of Egypt must put a religion on their identity cards - but they can select only from Islam, Christianity and Judaism. If they refuse to put one of these religions, they are denied the ID card, which is absolutely essential for enjoying the rights of citizenship, social services, and education. The recent Supreme Administrative Court decision that Baha'is are not to be permitted to enter Baha'i, other, or leave it blank, is an example, urged on by Islamist fanatics who called for the death of the Baha'is during the court proceeding without being removed, and by clerics of Al-Azhar University.
People who write venemously here about Islam are deeply mistaken. But you, likewise, need to consider how it is possible for an Islamic cleric to be mistaken about what the proper attitude of Islam should be toward people who do not fit into an outdated definition of who has freedom of worship. If it is to deny them their rights to practice their faith and also deny them the rights of citizenship, then Egypt is not a liberal democracy and Islamic law has failed the most important Qur'anic tests: "Let there be no compulsion in religion" and "To you your religion, to me my religion."
Posted by: WPC | June 8, 2007 5:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted by: Anonymous | June 8, 2007 5:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
AH-HA-HA! Frank, you slay me! Every once in a while it actually pays (in entertainment value) to read your ignorant slop!
You (HAAAA!!!) said: "when i teach, which is not often, i get paid at the phd salary level and everyone calls me doctor. but even if i drove camels - i can read and in this case i read the koran and i quoted a few verses - there are lots more."
Being paid (they should get their money back) at the PhD. salary level and being CALLED "doctor" is not he same as ACTUALLY having a PhD.!
So, being able to read is basically the same? Don't tell my parents...they will want a lot of money back from the Univerity for my education.
You posted: "so when are you islamic defenders going to answer a question? i keep asking real easy one and no one will answer them. why is that?"
Maybe it's because it doesn't require a PhD. to recognize an idiot!
Oh Frank, I'm sure the only degree you have is that degree of ridiculousness!
Posted by: Danny B. | June 8, 2007 5:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
No matter how much we argue and analyse, when it comes to religions,all religions, we reach nowhere. Why don't we just forget all about such ancient fairy tales and judge others on the merits of what they do,not on their inherited faith.
Surprising though, Lots of criticism and attacks made on Islam in particular, while I have not read one criticism or attack on other religions from any moslem.It clearly shows moslem's full respect to others, while others unfortunately show very cruel belligerence towards 1.2 billion moslems in our world.
Posted by: SAM | June 8, 2007 4:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Does the Sheikh know that Taj Mahal was built by several Hindu and muslim builders under Shah Janahan, a mughal (muslim) ruler, who after the completion of the monument immediately chopped of the hands of all the builders so that the Taj can never be copied again! This is Islam for you.
Posted by: M | June 8, 2007 4:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I commend Sheikh Ali's wisdom and courage in expressing his viewpoint. I'm sure there are a lot of loonies in the middle east who would love to see him killed for his opiniions. It is true that fundamentalists of any religion will insist that their literal interpretation of their scripture is the only interpretation possible. And they will use these interpretations to justify whatever behavior they want. The current crop of islamo-fanatics are no closer to true Islam than the Ku Klux Klan was to true Christianity.
Posted by: John | June 8, 2007 4:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment
All religious faiths have a fault in that they were created by humans who are imperfect by definition. Know one knows what Mohammad or Jesus or any other prophet said as no one was there recording/writing it at that moment. For all we know they were ficticious or absolute crazy people that happened to have sheep-like flocks of humans follow them. Therefore all of these conversations/comments are a waste of time and effort over such a silly thing as religion. How can anyone be a scholar of something that is not real? Sorry Sheikh and to keep it fair the same goes for all of the Christian and or Jewish scholars.
Posted by: Gary Gill | June 8, 2007 4:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Brian:
"Gomaa stuck to his position despite criticism, claiming that everything which emanated from the Prophet is pure and sacred."
What were Mo's companion's eating?
Posted by: jon | June 8, 2007 4:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
It might also help if those charged with commentary on comparative religions, or who choose to comment as a matter of course, might make themselves aware of ESPECIALLY Zacariah Sitchen's multiple publications [even now available in paperback] that are collectively entitled THE EARTH CHRONICALS.
The Biblical Book of Genesis itself referrers to a period of pre-history, mostly in the antediluvian period [before the Great Flood] and of how the ELOHIM [vernacular term -- angels] came to Earth and created all of the major civilizations over EXTENDED periods of time and of what they bequeathed to humanity in that process -- which INITIALLY ENDS with the advent of the Great Flood.
Among other interesting things noted, the story of Adam & Eve, Cain & Abel, are set forth in MUCH GREATER detail than found in the Book of Genesis. So, where did it come from? The surviving Sumerian record[s], which are generally the basis for the Book of Genesis anyway.
Cain kills Abel and is 'expelled' from the Garden of Eden, but where does he go and ESPECIALLY how does he get there. Hint -- he is taken to the region of Lake Titicaca, where a new civilization is begun -- but even better, he is returned but only for a brief visit to the Garden of Eden, to witness the death of his father, Adam -- after which, its back to Tiahuanaku. But how did he travel -- if I told you, you probably wouldn't believe me anyway, so start with The Lost Book of Enki by Sitchin -- Enki is also called Yehweh/Allah.
Happy reading !!!
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 8, 2007 4:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I'd be more impressed if he wrote this article in arabic and passed it along the Muslim communities. Even Arafat spoke of peace in English, and then told his followers to kill Americans and Israelies in Arabic.
Posted by: Wild Bill | June 8, 2007 4:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Ok.
This is the same dude that wrote a book a few years ago stating that Mohammed's companions used to drink his URINE considering it a blessed act.
End of discussion. Shut down the posts.
Posted by: brian | June 8, 2007 4:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I grew up in a muslim country (my first 27 years)and was raised muslim although I was not very faithful. I am no expert in Islam but in my almost 30 years of living in a muslim country I have never heard of Fatwa. The first fatwa I heard of was the one issued against the British author-- Rushdie. What I was taught in Islam is that what I do is between me and my creator and that no one can tell me what to do or not to do. IMO, this fatwa thing in nothing more than men trying to impose on people what they cannot win using argumentation.
Posted by: No name | June 8, 2007 3:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Nice try to put pretty makeup on the face of a rabid dog. I am actually trying to be generous and kind so respect my restraint. The fact the Islam is so tolerant of it extreemist brethren, condones lying in some instances, and has yet to collectively condemn terrorism is all the evidence civilized humans require to recognize Islam as incompatable with civilization. Normally I would request all those sworn to mohammad to gather at mecca so we could vaporize you all with just one nuke but I realize that muslims really don't have much of a choice and are ultimately victims of Islam. So I recommend that you strive for separation of religion and state everywhere, issue the biggest fatwa you can to condemn fundamentalism and specifically call on all Muslims to exterminate Osama and terrorism. Then we can talk about how wonderful moderate Islam is.
Posted by: Rich Rosenthal | June 8, 2007 3:47 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh Ali Gomaa's commentary above is encouraging, but perhaps the REAL ISSUE is what we, in the Western Democracies especially, would call resolution of CONFLICTS OF LAW and of DIVERGING LEGAL OPINIONS of especially the states and the Federal judicial circuits.
Perhaps even more significant in theory, but far less so in practice, would be resolution of conflicts between 'international law' and the US Constitution itself. Historically, ALLEGEDLY no such conflicts have ever been found, because BOTH are SUPPOSE TO BE the SUPREME law of the land.
The United States has a very rich judicial history of Constitutional jurisprudence of well over 250 years of interpretation.
'International law,' however is a MUCH MORE AMBIGUOUS term which was traditionally interpreted to mean the Customary Commercial [Rules] of mostly CHRISTIAN Europe. Not considered in that 'traditional meaning' were the laws of the Koran, Buddhist, or Hindu legal traditions, and ESPECIALLY not considered were laws in and between socialist or communist societies generally and IF the Code of Hammurabbi was ever considered, its alleged application was limited to the 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and no cast or social limitations were placed thereon as in fact actually existed under the Code of Hammurabbi of slave, freemen and nobels. The often quoted saying, above stated applied ONLY between the nobels themselves and otherwise damages in silver were awarded.
When one today speeks of 'international law,' one is usually referring to TREATY law, which is SELDOM in any way international in scope, with the possible exception of treaties of FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION [FCN.]
And while one could claim that when the West attacks Islamic law, it is therefore a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the issuance of Fatwahs by [excuse the expression] by every religious Tom, Dick and Harry claiming ANY right WHATSOEVER to do so in Islam is of EXTREME CONCERN due to the nature and extent of the INSTABILITY being created thereby.
Further, the well recoginzed +++++EXCEPTION+++++ [and EXPRESS APPROVAL] that appears in the KORAN itself to TRUTH TELLING to those outside of ISLAM only makes the above an even more extreme issue and creates DOUBTS that NO LEGAL SYSTEM can meaningfully and adequately address.
THEREFORE, ISLAM MUST GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND STOP BLAMEING, THE CRUSADERS, THE JEWS AND OUTSIDERS GENERALLY FOR ALL OF ITS PROBLEMS.
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 8, 2007 3:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh Ali Gomaa's commentary above is encouraging, but perhaps the REAL ISSUE is what we, in the Western Democracies especially, would call resolution of CONFLICTS OF LAW and of DIVERGING LEGAL OPINIONS of especially the states and the Federal judicial circuits.
Perhaps even more significant in theory, but far less so in practice, would be resolution of conflicts between 'international law' and the US Constitution itself. Historically, ALLEGEDLY no such conflicts have ever been found, because BOTH are SUPPOSE TO BE the SUPREME law of the land.
The United States has a very rich judicial history of Constitutional jurisprudence of well over 250 years of interpretation.
'International law,' however is a MUCH MORE AMBIGUOUS term which was traditionally interpreted to mean the Customary Commercial [Rules] of mostly CHRISTIAN Europe. Not considered in that 'traditional meaning' were the laws of the Koran, Buddhist, or Hindu legal traditions, and ESPECIALLY not considered were laws in and between socialist or communist societies generally and IF the Code of Hammurabbi was ever considered, its alleged application was limited to the 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and no cast or social limitations were placed thereon as in fact actually existed under the Code of Hammurabbi of slave, freemen and nobels. The often quoted saying, above stated applied ONLY between the nobels themselves and otherwise damages in silver were awarded.
When one today speeks of 'international law,' one is usually referring to TREATY law, which is SELDOM in any way international in scope, with the possible exception of treaties of FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION [FCN.]
And while one could claim that when the West attacks Islamic law, it is therefore a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the issuance of Fatwahs by [excuse the expression] by every religious Tom, Dick and Harry claiming ANY right WHATSOEVER to do so in Islam is of EXTREME CONCERN due to the nature and extent of the INSTABILITY being created thereby.
Further, the well recoginzed +++++EXCEPTION+++++ [and EXPRESS APPROVAL] that appears in the KORAN itself to TRUTH TELLING to those outside of ISLAM only makes the above an even more extreme issue and creates DOUBTS that NO LEGAL SYSTEM can meaningfully and adequately address.
THEREFORE, ISLAM MUST GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND STOP BLAMEING, THE CRUSADERS, THE JEWS AND OUTSIDERS GENERALLY FOR ALL OF ITS PROBLEMS.
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 8, 2007 3:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh Ali Gomaa's commentary above is encouraging, but perhaps the REAL ISSUE is what we, in the Western Democracies especially, would call resolution of CONFLICTS OF LAW and of DIVERGING LEGAL OPINIONS of especially the states and the Federal judicial circuits.
Perhaps even more significant in theory, but far less so in practice, would be resolution of conflicts between 'international law' and the US Constitution itself. Historically, ALLEGEDLY no such conflicts have ever been found, because BOTH are SUPPOSE TO BE the SUPREME law of the land.
The United States has a very rich judicial history of Constitutional jurisprudence of well over 250 years of interpretation.
'International law,' however is a MUCH MORE AMBIGUOUS term which was traditionally interpreted to mean the Customary Commercial [Rules] of mostly CHRISTIAN Europe. Not considered in that 'traditional meaning' were the laws of the Koran, Buddhist, or Hindu legal traditions, and ESPECIALLY not considered were laws in and between socialist or communist societies generally and IF the Code of Hammurabbi was ever considered, its alleged application was limited to the 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and no cast or social limitations were placed thereon as in fact actually existed under the Code of Hammurabbi of slave, freemen and nobels. The often quoted saying, above stated applied ONLY between the nobels themselves and otherwise damages in silver were awarded.
When one today speeks of 'international law,' one is usually referring to TREATY law, which is SELDOM in any way international in scope, with the possible exception of treaties of FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION [FCN.]
And while one could claim that when the West attacks Islamic law, it is therefore a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the issuance of Fatwahs by [excuse the expression] by every religious Tom, Dick and Harry claiming ANY right WHATSOEVER to do so in Islam is of EXTREME CONCERN due to the nature and extent of the INSTABILITY being created thereby.
Further, the well recoginzed +++++EXCEPTION+++++ [and EXPRESS APPROVAL] that appears in the KORAN itself to TRUTH TELLING to those outside of ISLAM only makes the above an even more extreme issue and creates DOUBTS that NO LEGAL SYSTEM can meaningfully and adequately address.
THEREFORE, ISLAM MUST GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND STOP BLAMEING, THE CRUSADERS, THE JEWS AND OUTSIDERS GENERALLY FOR ALL OF ITS PROBLEMS.
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 8, 2007 3:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh Ali Gomaa's commentary above is encouraging, but perhaps the REAL ISSUE is what we, in the Western Democracies especially, would call resolution of CONFLICTS OF LAW and of DIVERGING LEGAL OPINIONS of especially the states and the Federal judicial circuits.
Perhaps even more significant in theory, but far less so in practice, would be resolution of conflicts between 'international law' and the US Constitution itself. Historically, ALLEGEDLY no such conflicts have ever been found, because BOTH are SUPPOSE TO BE the SUPREME law of the land.
The United States has a very rich judicial history of Constitutional jurisprudence of well over 250 years of interpretation.
'International law,' however is a MUCH MORE AMBIGUOUS term which was traditionally interpreted to mean the Customary Commercial [Rules] of mostly CHRISTIAN Europe. Not considered in that 'traditional meaning' were the laws of the Koran, Buddhist, or Hindu legal traditions, and ESPECIALLY not considered were laws in and between socialist or communist societies generally and IF the Code of Hammurabbi was ever considered, its alleged application was limited to the 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and no cast or social limitations were placed thereon as in fact actually existed under the Code of Hammurabbi of slave, freemen and nobels. The often quoted saying, above stated applied ONLY between the nobels themselves and otherwise damages in silver were awarded.
When one today speeks of 'international law,' one is usually referring to TREATY law, which is SELDOM in any way international in scope, with the possible exception of treaties of FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION [FCN.]
And while one could claim that when the West attacks Islamic law, it is therefore a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the issuance of Fatwahs by [excuse the expression] by every religious Tom, Dick and Harry claiming ANY right WHATSOEVER to do so in Islam is of EXTREME CONCERN due to the nature and extent of the INSTABILITY being created thereby.
Further, the well recoginzed +++++EXCEPTION+++++ [and EXPRESS APPROVAL] that appears in the KORAN itself to TRUTH TELLING to those outside of ISLAM only makes the above an even more extreme issue and creates DOUBTS that NO LEGAL SYSTEM can meaningfully and adequately address.
THEREFORE, ISLAM MUST GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND STOP BLAMEING, THE CRUSADERS, THE JEWS AND OUTSIDERS GENERALLY FOR ALL OF ITS PROBLEMS.
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 8, 2007 3:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh Ali Gomaa's commentary above is encouraging, but perhaps the REAL ISSUE is what we, in the Western Democracies especially, would call resolution of CONFLICTS OF LAW and of DIVERGING LEGAL OPINIONS of especially the states and the Federal judicial circuits.
Perhaps even more significant in theory, but far less so in practice, would be resolution of conflicts between 'international law' and the US Constitution itself. Historically, ALLEGEDLY no such conflicts have ever been found, because BOTH are SUPPOSE TO BE the SUPREME law of the land.
The United States has a very rich judicial history of Constitutional jurisprudence of well over 250 years of interpretation.
'International law,' however is a MUCH MORE AMBIGUOUS term which was traditionally interpreted to mean the Customary Commercial [Rules] of mostly CHRISTIAN Europe. Not considered in that 'traditional meaning' were the laws of the Koran, Buddhist, or Hindu legal traditions, and ESPECIALLY not considered were laws in and between socialist or communist societies generally and IF the Code of Hammurabbi was ever considered, its alleged application was limited to the 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and no cast or social limitations were placed thereon as in fact actually existed under the Code of Hammurabbi of slave, freemen and nobels. The often quoted saying, above stated applied ONLY between the nobels themselves and otherwise damages in silver were awarded.
When one today speeks of 'international law,' one is usually referring to TREATY law, which is SELDOM in any way international in scope, with the possible exception of treaties of FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION [FCN.]
And while one could claim that when the West attacks Islamic law, it is therefore a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the issuance of Fatwahs by [excuse the expression] by every religious Tom, Dick and Harry claiming ANY right WHATSOEVER to do so in Islam is of EXTREME CONCERN due to the nature and extent of the INSTABILITY being created thereby.
Further, the well recoginzed +++++EXCEPTION+++++ [and EXPRESS APPROVAL] that appears in the KORAN itself to TRUTH TELLING to those outside of ISLAM only makes the above an even more extreme issue and creates DOUBTS that NO LEGAL SYSTEM can meaningfully and adequately address.
THEREFORE, ISLAM MUST GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND STOP BLAMEING, THE CRUSADERS, THE JEWS AND OUTSIDERS GENERALLY FOR ALL OF ITS PROBLEMS.
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 8, 2007 3:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh Ali Gomaa's commentary above is encouraging, but perhaps the REAL ISSUE is what we, in the Western Democracies especially, would call resolution of CONFLICTS OF LAW and of DIVERGING LEGAL OPINIONS of especially the states and the Federal judicial circuits.
Perhaps even more significant in theory, but far less so in practice, would be resolution of conflicts between 'international law' and the US Constitution itself. Historically, ALLEGEDLY no such conflicts have ever been found, because BOTH are SUPPOSE TO BE the SUPREME law of the land.
The United States has a very rich judicial history of Constitutional jurisprudence of well over 250 years of interpretation.
'International law,' however is a MUCH MORE AMBIGUOUS term which was traditionally interpreted to mean the Customary Commercial [Rules] of mostly CHRISTIAN Europe. Not considered in that 'traditional meaning' were the laws of the Koran, Buddhist, or Hindu legal traditions, and ESPECIALLY not considered were laws in and between socialist or communist societies generally and IF the Code of Hammurabbi was ever considered, its alleged application was limited to the 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and no cast or social limitations were placed thereon as in fact actually existed under the Code of Hammurabbi of slave, freemen and nobels. The often quoted saying, above stated applied ONLY between the nobels themselves and otherwise damages in silver were awarded.
When one today speeks of 'international law,' one is usually referring to TREATY law, which is SELDOM in any way international in scope, with the possible exception of treaties of FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION [FCN.]
And while one could claim that when the West attacks Islamic law, it is therefore a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the issuance of Fatwahs by [excuse the expression] by every religious Tom, Dick and Harry claiming ANY right WHATSOEVER to do so in Islam is of EXTREME CONCERN due to the nature and extent of the INSTABILITY being created thereby.
Further, the well recoginzed +++++EXCEPTION+++++ [and EXPRESS APPROVAL] that appears in the KORAN itself to TRUTH TELLING to those outside of ISLAM only makes the above an even more extreme issue and creates DOUBTS that NO LEGAL SYSTEM can meaningfully and adequately address.
THEREFORE, ISLAM MUST GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND STOP BLAMEING, THE CRUSADERS, THE JEWS AND OUTSIDERS GENERALLY FOR ALL OF ITS PROBLEMS.
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 8, 2007 3:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh Ali Gomaa's commentary above is encouraging, but perhaps the REAL ISSUE is what we, in the Western Democracies especially, would call resolution of CONFLICTS OF LAW and of DIVERGING LEGAL OPINIONS of especially the states and the Federal judicial circuits.
Perhaps even more significant in theory, but far less so in practice, would be resolution of conflicts between 'international law' and the US Constitution itself. Historically, ALLEGEDLY no such conflicts have ever been found, because BOTH are SUPPOSE TO BE the SUPREME law of the land.
The United States has a very rich judicial history of Constitutional jurisprudence of well over 250 years of interpretation.
'International law,' however is a MUCH MORE AMBIGUOUS term which was traditionally interpreted to mean the Customary Commercial [Rules] of mostly CHRISTIAN Europe. Not considered in that 'traditional meaning' were the laws of the Koran, Buddhist, or Hindu legal traditions, and ESPECIALLY not considered were laws in and between socialist or communist societies generally and IF the Code of Hammurabbi was ever considered, its alleged application was limited to the 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and no cast or social limitations were placed thereon as in fact actually existed under the Code of Hammurabbi of slave, freemen and nobels. The often quoted saying, above stated applied ONLY between the nobels themselves and otherwise damages in silver were awarded.
When one today speeks of 'international law,' one is usually referring to TREATY law, which is SELDOM in any way international in scope, with the possible exception of treaties of FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION [FCN.]
And while one could claim that when the West attacks Islamic law, it is therefore a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the issuance of Fatwahs by [excuse the expression] by every religious Tom, Dick and Harry claiming ANY right WHATSOEVER to do so in Islam is of EXTREME CONCERN due to the nature and extent of the INSTABILITY being created thereby.
Further, the well recoginzed +++++EXCEPTION+++++ [and EXPRESS APPROVAL] that appears in the KORAN itself to TRUTH TELLING to those outside of ISLAM only makes the above an even more extreme issue and creates DOUBTS that NO LEGAL SYSTEM can meaningfully and adequately address.
THEREFORE, ISLAM MUST GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND STOP BLAMEING, THE CRUSADERS, THE JEWS AND OUTSIDERS GENERALLY FOR ALL OF ITS PROBLEMS.
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 8, 2007 3:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh Ali Gomaa's commentary above is encouraging, but perhaps the REAL ISSUE is what we, in the Western Democracies especially, would call resolution of CONFLICTS OF LAW and of DIVERGING LEGAL OPINIONS of especially the states and the Federal judicial circuits.
Perhaps even more significant in theory, but far less so in practice, would be resolution of conflicts between 'international law' and the US Constitution itself. Historically, ALLEGEDLY no such conflicts have ever been found, because BOTH are SUPPOSE TO BE the SUPREME law of the land.
The United States has a very rich judicial history of Constitutional jurisprudence of well over 250 years of interpretation.
'International law,' however is a MUCH MORE AMBIGUOUS term which was traditionally interpreted to mean the Customary Commercial [Rules] of mostly CHRISTIAN Europe. Not considered in that 'traditional meaning' were the laws of the Koran, Buddhist, or Hindu legal traditions, and ESPECIALLY not considered were laws in and between socialist or communist societies generally and IF the Code of Hammurabbi was ever considered, its alleged application was limited to the 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and no cast or social limitations were placed thereon as in fact actually existed under the Code of Hammurabbi of slave, freemen and nobels. The often quoted saying, above stated applied ONLY between the nobels themselves and otherwise damages in silver were awarded.
When one today speeks of 'international law,' one is usually referring to TREATY law, which is SELDOM in any way international in scope, with the possible exception of treaties of FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION [FCN.]
And while one could claim that when the West attacks Islamic law, it is therefore a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the issuance of Fatwahs by [excuse the expression] by every religious Tom, Dick and Harry claiming ANY right WHATSOEVER to do so in Islam is of EXTREME CONCERN due to the nature and extent of the INSTABILITY being created thereby.
Further, the well recoginzed +++++EXCEPTION+++++ [and EXPRESS APPROVAL] that appears in the KORAN itself to TRUTH TELLING to those outside of ISLAM only makes the above an even more extreme issue and creates DOUBTS that NO LEGAL SYSTEM can meaningfully and adequately address.
THEREFORE, ISLAM MUST GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND STOP BLAMEING, THE CRUSADERS, THE JEWS AND OUTSIDERS GENERALLY FOR ALL OF ITS PROBLEMS.
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D., L.R. | June 8, 2007 3:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh Ali Gomaa's commentary above is encouraging, but perhaps the REAL ISSUE is what we, in the Western Democracies especially, would call resolution of CONFLICTS OF LAW and of DIVERGING LEGAL OPINIONS of especially the states and the Federal judicial circuits.
Perhaps even more significant in theory, but far less so in practice, would be resolution of conflicts between 'international law' and the US Constitution itself. Historically, ALLEGEDLY no such conflicts have ever been found, because BOTH are SUPPOSE TO BE the SUPREME law of the land.
The United States has a very rich judicial history of Constitutional jurisprudence of well over 250 years of interpretation.
'International law,' however is a MUCH MORE AMBIGUOUS term which was traditionally interpreted to mean the Customary Commercial [Rules] of mostly CHRISTIAN Europe. Not considered in that 'traditional meaning' were the laws of the Koran, Buddhist, or Hindu legal traditions, and ESPECIALLY not considered were laws in and between socialist or communist societies generally and IF the Code of Hammurabbi was ever considered, its alleged application was limited to the 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and no cast or social limitations were placed thereon as in fact actually existed under the Code of Hammurabbi of slave, freemen and nobels. The often quoted saying, above stated applied ONLY between the nobels themselves and otherwise damages in silver were awarded.
When one today speeks of 'international law,' one is usually referring to TREATY law, which is SELDOM in any way international in scope, with the possible exception of treaties of FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION [FCN.]
And while one could claim that when the West attacks Islamic law, it is therefore a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the issuance of Fatwahs by [excuse the expression] by every religious Tom, Dick and Harry claiming ANY right WHATSOEVER to do so in Islam is of EXTREME CONCERN due to the nature and extent of the INSTABILITY being created thereby.
Further, the well recoginzed +++++EXCEPTION+++++ [and EXPRESS APPROVAL] that appears in the KORAN itself to TRUTH TELLING to those outside of ISLAM only makes the above an even more extreme issue and creates DOUBTS that NO LEGAL SYSTEM can meaningfully and adequately address.
THEREFORE, ISLAM MUST GET ITS OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND STOP BLAMEING, THE CRUSADERS, THE JEWS AND OUTSIDERS GENERALLY FOR ALL OF ITS PROBLEMS.
Posted by: Bruce W. Haupt, J.D.,L.R. | June 8, 2007 3:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sammer Muhammad: So what kind of force would you use in stopping these "idiot Sheikhs" from issuing fatwas? I think you prove the point that Frank and others like him are making. Violence against others is not simply a virtue of the fundamentalist Muslims, but in fact, a virtue of the written Word in the Koran. If a great many Muslims choose not to be violent, that does not take away the violent message, only some of the messangers. And also, who do you consider to have the authority to issue fatwas? The Ayatollah of Iran?
The Western media has been following "moderate" and "liberal" Muslims since 9/11 like a bunch of love-sick puppies. So please don't make it out to be a rare thing. The only thing rare about it is the quantity of moderate Muslims on TV denouncing terrorist acts.
Posted by: druvas | June 8, 2007 3:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sammer Muhammad: So what kind of force would you use in stopping these "idiot Sheikhs" from issuing fatwas? I think you prove the point that Frank and others like him are making. Violence against others is not simply a virtue of the fundamentalist Muslims, but in fact, a virtue of the written Word in the Koran. If a great many Muslims choose not to be violent, that does not take away the violent message, only some of the messangers.
Posted by: druvas | June 8, 2007 3:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
PEACE TO ALL.!!
Posted by: Monika | June 8, 2007 3:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment
PEACE TO ALL.!!
Posted by: Anonymous | June 8, 2007 3:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Again,instead of reading and learning from an educated man, we have the muslem bashers coming out in full force. The posters above quote made up verses from the Koran. Please quit the lies. Sheikh Guma, thank you for pointing out that Islam is not frigid in its ways. Many of the fundamentalist muslems must remember our history of education,innovations and enlightenment. Sharia law is only to be applied in countries that want it and are ready for it. The Koran specifically says that there is no compulsion or force in religion. If only the Fundamentalists can remember some of these things. Fatwas issued by idiot Sheikhs who have no authority to issue them, in order to please Bin Laden and his like, must be forced to not issue more fatwas. i appreciate moderate voices like yourself and also commend when the Western media actually shows these voices.
Posted by: sammer muhammad | June 8, 2007 3:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Gomaa has recently apologised for his urine fatwa.
"Gomaa himself is the author of a controversial book which claimed that Prophet Mohammed’s (PBUH) companions used to drink his urine, considering it a blessed act, as reported by Al-Masry Al-Youm newspaper.
Gomaa stuck to his position despite criticism, claiming that everything which emanated from the Prophet is pure and sacred."
Posted by: Anonymous | June 8, 2007 2:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
well hello frank ..the conversation is nothing without you!
Posted by: adil | June 8, 2007 2:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh,
I thank you for making a gesture toward dialog which cannot but help in some manner.
I and many other non-Muslims would welcome a host of fatwas from you and other prominently-followed Islamic clerics and scholars that would condemn suicide bombers, violent attacks on non-militarized civilian targets, and the innate evil of both the honor-killings of women and the practice of female circumcision.
I am curious to know the reason why, in your "Guest Voices" article "Fatwas and Modernism" you did not mention your own recent fatwa that (as I understand it) states that since Islam prohibits statues, none should be allowed in modern Egypt. In part, I need you to help me understand how this fatwa in particular embodies your stance that Islam is flexible.
I earnestly hope you will reply to my requesting you to expand your dialog with us non-Muslims by responding to my sincere questions aimed at clarifying commonalities between our cultures and worldviews that we can use to build bridges of tolerance, understanding, and mutual betterment.
Posted by: Jon | June 8, 2007 2:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Wow Frank, you have a wealth of knowledge at your slimmy fingertips huh? Good for you! If you have so much knowledge about Islamic theology and history then you surely must be fluent in Arabic and have a PhD in history and politics! I am so proud of you. You talk as if your society has done no wrong to the world now and the past. Forget a thousand years ago , let's talk about the last 100 and you'll find plenty of errors on Christians and Americans and Brits and Russians and Germans and Chinese.
Until you can understand the process of issuing a fatwa I suggest you don't comment it b.c you are just wasting time. When the topic of fatwas arise it seems like those uneducated think that throughout Islamic history fatwas were being thrown left and right (as many Christians did in Europe). Some of the greatest scholars would issue so few fatwas b.c. of the fear of misguiding believers, which is the problem of today.
Posted by: Frank the Scholar? | June 8, 2007 2:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Islam and Christianity are two (or, factionally, maybe many) cannonic bureaucracies fighting for power by adopting dogmas that exploit the rage, hate and fear of today aging populations rather than the espoused transcendental freedom from mundane modernity that globalization supposedly espouses. Christianity's strength in America is a popular inferiority complex reaction to science and mathematics, so badly taught in our schools. While math has modeled plausible answers to critical "how?" questions of science, Algebra I is totally beyond 90% of Americans. They prefer to play the lottery and pray that they win rather than calculate the prospects. And science is, after all, not an answers but an endless questions factory. So why not read one book as THE answer to EVERYTHING....To a nation of tolerated crib-sheet operators admired as "clever" when cheating on final exams and of-- at best-- "C" students like GW Bush who bragged at a Yale Commencement that he is proof that a "C" student can be president and Cheney is proof that a "college dropout" can be vice president, he reminded America of the power of Bible-babble per Billy Graham's appeal to the self medicated drugs and booze types like GW.
Much of today's Christian Fundamentalists are 70s "commune gang-bangers" who realized that when it comes to sex: "easy comes, easy goes." So they hope Jesus can serve as a sex cop. Alas, we have seen that abstinence campaigns for Jesus do little more than cover perverts and crooks, tax-exempt!
In Europe, aging is fought off with contraception. The rule is that no pregnancy, no stretch marks and no flab for women. For men, no babies means more money for more mistresses to keep, hence aging is delayed by the subsequent "exercise"-- both physically and mentally as in the art of deception.
Muslims who watched a few get filthy rich and a lot get nothing but hungry mouths to feed, Mullahs who bring God's O.K. to crime are highly prized. And for youths who found education NOT liberating but only humiliating in the face of families expecting a pot of gold at the end of supporting kids through college, to become Shahids may or may not provide 70 virgins, but it sure changes your image from worthless moocher to hero of the faith. And worst still are all the rich kids who now can no longer admire "Che" so they do one way acts of terror as suicide bombers to assuage the conscience of being filthy rich kids thanks to pops that are depraved crooks.
All in all, America is getting old and scared so it hates everyone it can't blow up remote-control. Muslims are young and feel like real "mensch" because they CAN blow people up remote control, if not all together now.
Religion is not the problem; it is a mere MEANS to the end of MADNESS. The fuel for this insane process is oil rather than poppy juice or cocaine or booze. Some of us may not go for heroine but we sure are addicted to our SUVs. That hold on the "Great Satan" may be incidental, but it convinces many Islamic radicals that killing themselves killing us is God's work so we can't escape them. Only if we end our fossil fuel dependency can we demonstrated to the young shahids what the Six-Days War of 1967 proved to Arabs: Allah is not with those who call for blood, but with those who use science and technology smart.
Daniel E. Teodoru
Posted by: DE Teodoru | June 8, 2007 2:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
In a nut shell: Shiek Ali Gomaa, haa, haa, haaa, haaa (followed by more hysterical laughter, then trailing off into bored indifference).
Posted by: druvas | June 8, 2007 1:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Juma is a man in a difficult position in troubled times. My heart goes out to him.
In this video he addresses wife-beating:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2YcOMjforY
This from: The Atlantic Monthly-July/August 2005
Although many Muslim leaders have stepped forward to condemn terrorist violence in recent years, no one before had even implicitly attacked the philosophy, often known as Wahhabism, that is thought to give rise to it—in no small part because Wahhabism is the official doctrine of Saudi Arabia, which controls the holy city of Mecca. But Gomaa did so, and went further: he referred to the extremists as khawerig, or "outsiders"—persons who fail to follow true Islamic law. Historically the term has been attached to the early Islamic dissidents who murdered Imam Ali, the son-in-law of the prophet Muhammad. In Arab Islamic society it is traditionally taboo to criticize the lifestyle or personal philosophy of any practicing Muslim. Never before had such a respected Islamic scholar and sheikh—much less the religious leader of the most populous Arab nation—laid bare the division between practicing fundamentalists and the rest of the Muslim umma, or religious community. In a region where extremist sheikhs have all but silenced their moderate rivals, this was a dangerous stance to take.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 8, 2007 1:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I can think of a recent example of a learned Islamic scholar and leader who issued a fatwa that was extreme in its very nature:
The learned scholar: Ayatollah Khomeni
The fatwa that he issued: That Salman Rushdie, the author of the novel The Satanic Letters, be killed.
What is so "moderate" or "tolerant" about this? From what I can tell, absolutely nothing. Man has no right to judge his fellow man is such a way. Only God himself has that right because His judgement is the only perfect judgement. Man's judgement is flawed by its very nature and only breeds injustice as its fruit. Jesus called on mankind to forgive his fellow man instead. It is a concept that all people, including learned Muslims, should follow as God's command.
Posted by: gerald hall | June 8, 2007 1:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Thank you for presenting a measured, enlightened, and full landscape on the subject. It is important for all enlightened and educated Muslims to speak out and write about Islam 10 times more often than the ignorants who kill speak out, or present their ignorant, un-enlightened, cave-era ideas on Islam.
Re Fatwas... my Syrian, Muslim mother tells me *fatwas* of any kind have no basis in Islamic law, are made by men who want to control other people on false authority, and are indefensible because no mufti can achieve the understanding of the world population's widely varied, realities-on-the-ground required to interpret Islamic law "for all". Such a scholar would have to grow up in every village on earth, in every country on the planet, and walk in every man's and every woman's shoes to have the insight as to how Islamic law should be applied via a "fatwa". Since it is impossible to know enough to be correct in judgement for all, it is illegal to issue a fatwa of any kind today.
Everything else you say rings true. Every mufti who issues a fatwa thinks he has all the answers... Based on the points you make alone, and notwithstanding the very nature of humans to attempt control of other humans for personal gain... it is impossible for any fatwa to be legal.
Posted by: JBE | June 8, 2007 1:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
All the above commentators, including the Sheik, miss the essential point that each person pursuing his own agenda will find in The Quran, The Bible, Torah, New Testament, whatever, the necessary words to justify their position and their actions. It is worthless to argue against Fundamentalists, Islamic, Judaic, or Christian, on the basis of their interpretation of scripture. You may know what the book says, but they also know what it says, and the two knowledges just don't match. Proving that a fatwa issued by an ignorant or corrupt mufti is incorrect will do nothing to prevent the followers from obeying the fatwa if it suits them to do so.
Posted by: r paul | June 8, 2007 1:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
what a bunch of garbage.
i know the koran allows you to lie in war, and to you spreading islam is a war, but do you really think that we would fall for this? we are all linked by the net and have a wealth of knowledge about islam, and its cult of hate and death. what kind of religion demands hate, rape, torture, kidnapping, cutting off body parts, murder and forced conversions as well as a death sentence for leaving it. ISLAM and only islam.
and what is the difference between a moderate or progressive islamic and your general run of the mill islamic? tell us which of these verses progressives/moderate islamics dont follow. and dont forget to publish it in a location where the world can see it and will not be saying you did not do it.
here is what the koran demands - and we all know it.
to islam peace does not mean the absence of war, it is the absonce of any religion but islam.
The Hadith No. 284, The Muslim, volume one, says that any Jew or Christian, who heard of Muhammad but did not convert to Islam, and died in disbelief, would rot in hell! Thus Islam withdraws from all Jews and Christians the right to believe in their faiths, and practice them as such.
"The unbelievers of the People of the Book and the idolators shall be in the Fire of Hell therein dwelling for ever; those are the worst of creatures. But those who believe, and do righteous deeds, those are the best of creatures..." (XCVIII: The Clear Sign: 5)
Here those Jews and Christians, who spurn Islam, have been lumped together with the idolators such as the Hindus, and classified as 'the worst of creatures'. Therefore the Koran commands:
"O believers, take not as your friends those of them, who were given the Book before you, and the unbelievers, who take your religion in mockery and as a sport..." (V: The Table: 60)
"The true believers say: Has not God ordered a chapter that commands the holy war" (Sura 47:22); or elsewhere: "Kill the idolaters wherever you find them, imprison them, besiege them, ambush them" (Sura 9:5); and, "Make war on unbelievers" (Sura 9:29). "When you come upon unbelievers, massacre them, tighten the bands of the captives that you will have taken. Then you will set them free, or you will release them for a ransom" (Sura 8:57).
"To Allah, there are no animals viler than those who do not believe and remain unbelievers" (Sura 8:57). That is why it is necessary to Islamize them by force and by humiliation. And those who resist Islam and its founder must be chastised, according to the Koran: "Here is the fate of those who fight Allah and his messenger: you will put them to death or you will make them suffer the torture of the cross; you will cut their hands and their feet alternately. They will be driven from the country" (Sura 5:37).
"Do not display cowardice, and do not call the infidels to peace when you are superior to them" (Sura 47:22). THIS ALLOWS THEM TO MAKE PEACE SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE WAR AGAIN LATER.
4.89": They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.
"4.90": Except those who reach a people between whom and you there is an alliance, or who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people; and if Allah had pleased, He would have given them power over you, so that they should have certainly fought you; therefore if they withdraw from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not given you a way against them.
"4.91": You will find others who desire that they should be safe from you and secure from their own people; as often as they are sent back to the mischief they get thrown into it headlong; therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and (do not) offer you peace and restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given you a clear authority."
or the islamics crying over the crusades when they started them. here is a little short history about that:
The first Crusade began in 1095… 460 years after the first Christian city was overrun by Muslim armies, 457 years after Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies, 453 years after Egypt was taken by Muslim armies, 443 after Muslims first plundered Italy, 427 years after Muslim armies first laid siege to the Christian capital of Constantinople, 380 years after Spain was conquered by Muslim armies, 363 years after France was first attacked by Muslim armies, 249 years after Rome itself was sacked by a Muslim army, and only after centuries of church burnings, killings, enslavement and forced conversions of Christians.
so tell us in what context do you put the war like history of islam, considering that they started the war before anyone ever knew about them. or why there are no longer any jews in mecca?
Posted by: frank collins | June 8, 2007 1:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Sheikh,
Some observations hopefully you can address:
Mohammed was an illiterate Arab. How did this work then? It is obvious he could not proofread the book of Death to verify his hallucinogenic messages from "mythical Gabriel". So are we to rely on the "scribblings" of scribes who obviously plagiarized from the all the ancient religions and then added their own agenda to justify the looting and pillaging of the lands of the non-believers?
And would you be willing to clean up the Koran?:
To get you started:
"The 77 Branches of Faith is a collection compiled by Imam Bayhaqi. In it, he explains the essential virtues that reflect true faith (iman) through related Qur’anic verses and Prophetic sayings." i.e. a nice summary of the Koran and Islamic beliefs.
"30 qualities are connected to the heart"
(five at a time)
"1. Belief in Allah"
No problem but "aka as God, Yahweh, Zeus, Jehovah, Mother Nature, etc." should be added.
"2. To believe that everything other than Allah was non-existent. Thereafter, Allah Most High created these things and subsequently they came into existence."
No problem but evolution and the Big Bang cannot be ignored and the "akas" for Allah should be included.
"3. To believe in the existence of angels."
A major item to delete. Angels/devils are the mythical creations of ancient civilizations, e.g. Hittites, to explain/define natural events, contacts with their gods, big birds, sudden winds, protectors during the dark nights, etc. No "pretty/ugly talking wingie thingies" ever visited or talked to Mohammed, Jesus, Mary or Joseph or Joe Smith. Today we would classify angels as fairies and "tinker bells". Modern devils are classified as the demons of the demented.
"4. To believe that all the heavenly books that were sent to the different prophets are true. However, apart from the Quran, all other books are not valid anymore."
Another major item to delete. There are no books written in Heaven just as there are no angels to write/publish/distribute them. The Koran, OT, NT etc. are simply books written by humans for humans.
Prophets were invented by ancient scribes typically to keep the uneducated masses in line. Today we call them fortune tellers.
Prophecies are also invalidated by the natural/God/Allah gifts of Free Will and Future.
"5. To believe that all the prophets are true. However, we are commanded to follow the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) alone."
Mohammed spent thirty days fasting in a hot cave before his first contact with Allah aka God etc. via a "pretty wingie talking thingie". Common sense demands a deletion of #5. #5 is also the major source of Islamic violence i.e. turning Mohammed's "fast, hunger-driven" hallucinations into horrible reality for unbelievers.
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 8, 2007 11:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Thank you, Sheikh Ali Gomaa, for a very informative and hopeful post. That laws should change while maintaining what is good from the past is, I think, a necessity for any culture to remain viable.
My main problem with contemporary Islam as I know it (which I confess isn't well)is the same problem I have with Christian fundamentalism. I mean the literal interpretation of scripture. It seems to me that Islam would benefit as much from some of the new methods when wisely applied as the Protestants and now the Roman Catholic exegetes have found them. I mean the methods which show that literal interpretations were apparently not the intention of the writer.
I read recently about a method of studying the rhetorical structure of the Qu'ran which shows it to have an extremely intricate rhetorical structure which was, in fact, typical of Semitic writings of the early times. Unfortunately, such rhetoric, not being understood today, easily causes misunderstandings in contemporary readers both Islamic and otherwise. Is there much movement among Islamic scholars to use some of these contemporary methods of exegesis? I must confess that certain parts of the Qu'ran seem to be ungenerous calls to violence and war. And this is what frightens so many of us non-Muslims. This apparent bellicosity contradicts the gentle approach to life that poets such as Rumi express so wonderfully well for all of us.
Posted by: Ann O. | June 8, 2007 11:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr.Juma’s piece is long over due but still very timely and refreshing to hear from an authority on Islam and Islamic Jurisprudence. It is co-incidental that I saw Dr. Juma today on the Arabic TV channel MBC1 discussing the prerequisites for a proper FATWA.
The only chronic Problem and Risk that faces Islamic Fatwa’s is not from the few radicals that hijack Islam here and there but from the Politicization of Fatwa’s, namely by those scholars-hired guns- who have sold their souls to dictators in the Arab and Muslim world and produce custom-made Fatwa’s to justify the despotism and totalitarianism of these dictators who in fact have no political legitimacy at all; repression and dictatorship is radical by definition and can only produce radicalism and extremism; besides these dictators are often corrupt: observe, for example, the scandal about the huge briberies received by Saudi prince Bandar from BAE-the tip of the iceberg.
Islam is democratic, flexible, and adoptable-as Dr. Juma succinctly stated. Also Islam is moderate by Quranic definition and its improper to say a “moderate Muslim†or a “radical Muslim†because the radicals are as such not because of Islam but because they are radical by themselves hiding behind an Islamic garb-radicals come in all sizes and colors from all cultures and faiths.
We need to hear more from Dr.Juma and others like him but more importantly from independent Islamic Doctors of the Law especially those that are living in the West- because they are freer and more independent.
Posted by: Asim | June 8, 2007 11:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.

Twitter










http://iete.biz/user/view.php?id=817 > busty secretaries videos
http://student.osnext.org/Members/freedownloadantivirusprogramsi > free download anti virus programs
http://seidle.org/Members/greatforumsforvirusinfoi > free anti virus software downloads