DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Enquiries on whose blood is halal in Islam

**Poothevokprot** · 05-31-2012, 10:37 PM

[QUOTE]

Doing without the apologetic fatawa of the "neo-traditionalists" around "seekers guidance" and their selective quoting of Islamic Fiqh, Allah in the Qur'an dictates the conditions after which one may resort to a not-harmful physical punishment.

Not harmful physical punishment? Why would you beat someone without causing any harm or pain? The rasul salal hu alahi wasalam said he never beat his wives and he is the best from amongst us, and he also said it is shameful to beat the wives and then to make love with them. If you mean giving a light tap on the wrist to indicate displeasure then this is not really beating by my definition.

This second "another opinion" is whose? That of modern liberal people? Which scholar ever used the telationship of rmodern retic slogan of "only Allah is to judge", when Allah himself ordered for the apostates to be killed? As you know Fiqh involves all kinds of opinions some strong and some weak, some held by a majority others held by a minority. The opinion I heard was refrenced by Hamza Ysusf in one of his videos, I do not know which one. Anyway the killing of apostates would make many people behave like hypocrites, and or the people would be like a thought police, making sure everyone had the correct beliefs in every detail. The whole point of eeman is that it is voluntary, not forced. If someone claims to have eeman only because they fear being executed for apostasy what is the point of this? I understand that it will prevent the spread of mischeif if people are prevented from spreading their kufr openly, however hypocrites can also cause allot of harm. I also understand that if the law says kill the apostate...it may not actually kill many or any apostates, but the fact that the laws says this indicates that it is a big crime to apostatise and therefore one should not go near it...it is a psychological deterrent, if anything.

Actually, the penalty for homosexual acts is capital punishment. Under an Islamic government, obviously. In the ideal Islamic government, but we have never had this in practice...there were always places where the government did not reach. If you are saying that in a future government we would be able to watch everyone and punish them, then it would be a very bad place to live where everyone looks over their shoulder against a powerful police state. On the other hand if Homosexuals keep their sins private and hidden no one will punish them because the government would need witnesses of 4 sane, adult and trustworthy and virtuous men...actually witnessing the act...which is a near impossibility. Again the fact that the law says this means that homosexuality is a grievous crime and one must not go near it.

Does anyone know how many homosexuals and apostates have been executed by 'Muslim' governments in the last 1400 years? I would be interested in finding out?

The hadiths which recommend the killing of homosexuals and apostates...can be interpreted to mean in particular times and contexts not always, it depends on many conditions. Just saying kill the apostate or homosexual does not really cover all the nuances and conditions and makes Islam appear to be retrograde and it is not, its laws just wants to preserve a well balanced human community...and its laws re-inforce to the human mind the importance of its limits and conditions so humans remain within the boundaries as far as possible, to cut off the means towards corruption.

Hamza Yusuf - Freedom of Religion, Verse of the Sword And Apostasy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naEj915VU20

Regarding apostasy see from 5 minutes where he speaks about it.

05-31-2012, 10:37 PM	#6
Poothevokprot Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 601 Senior Member	[QUOTE] Doing without the apologetic fatawa of the "neo-traditionalists" around "seekers guidance" and their selective quoting of Islamic Fiqh, Allah in the Qur'an dictates the conditions after which one may resort to a not-harmful physical punishment. Not harmful physical punishment? Why would you beat someone without causing any harm or pain? The rasul salal hu alahi wasalam said he never beat his wives and he is the best from amongst us, and he also said it is shameful to beat the wives and then to make love with them. If you mean giving a light tap on the wrist to indicate displeasure then this is not really beating by my definition. This second "another opinion" is whose? That of modern liberal people? Which scholar ever used the telationship of rmodern retic slogan of "only Allah is to judge", when Allah himself ordered for the apostates to be killed? As you know Fiqh involves all kinds of opinions some strong and some weak, some held by a majority others held by a minority. The opinion I heard was refrenced by Hamza Ysusf in one of his videos, I do not know which one. Anyway the killing of apostates would make many people behave like hypocrites, and or the people would be like a thought police, making sure everyone had the correct beliefs in every detail. The whole point of eeman is that it is voluntary, not forced. If someone claims to have eeman only because they fear being executed for apostasy what is the point of this? I understand that it will prevent the spread of mischeif if people are prevented from spreading their kufr openly, however hypocrites can also cause allot of harm. I also understand that if the law says kill the apostate...it may not actually kill many or any apostates, but the fact that the laws says this indicates that it is a big crime to apostatise and therefore one should not go near it...it is a psychological deterrent, if anything. Actually, the penalty for homosexual acts is capital punishment. Under an Islamic government, obviously. In the ideal Islamic government, but we have never had this in practice...there were always places where the government did not reach. If you are saying that in a future government we would be able to watch everyone and punish them, then it would be a very bad place to live where everyone looks over their shoulder against a powerful police state. On the other hand if Homosexuals keep their sins private and hidden no one will punish them because the government would need witnesses of 4 sane, adult and trustworthy and virtuous men...actually witnessing the act...which is a near impossibility. Again the fact that the law says this means that homosexuality is a grievous crime and one must not go near it. Does anyone know how many homosexuals and apostates have been executed by 'Muslim' governments in the last 1400 years? I would be interested in finding out? The hadiths which recommend the killing of homosexuals and apostates...can be interpreted to mean in particular times and contexts not always, it depends on many conditions. Just saying kill the apostate or homosexual does not really cover all the nuances and conditions and makes Islam appear to be retrograde and it is not, its laws just wants to preserve a well balanced human community...and its laws re-inforce to the human mind the importance of its limits and conditions so humans remain within the boundaries as far as possible, to cut off the means towards corruption. Hamza Yusuf - Freedom of Religion, Verse of the Sword And Apostasy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naEj915VU20 Regarding apostasy see from 5 minutes where he speaks about it.
	Quote