No, I mean what I said, you can find some examples here.hahahaha commonly accepted translation....don`t you mean a translation that agrees with your limited knowledgte of the Quran???
You've imagined that.You claim to know nothing about the Quran...
Rather, I pointed out the fact that some of the "quotes" Eagle presented were not even full verses, as can be seen by comparing them to any commonly accepted translation of Qur'an....you claim to know that what Eagle posted was full vereses...
Thx for the reply Routan-
The crossroads I was referring to is being played out in many countries. With Girls schools still getting bombed and women being killed for adultery or even eloping against the parents wishes hardliners in multiple faiths are fighting back hard against what they see as a turn away from their religion. You mentioned honor killings in India as well so its not just the Muslim faith that is experiencing this. The emergence of the internet and the globalization of media and knowledge have opened up the world to dangerous ideas in the sense that strict control cannot be maintained even in countries like North Korea.
What I was really trying to get is a sense of what is the role of your religion in the middle east and in Europe and in the US in the next 10-20 years? I do have many friends of many faiths and the general theme has been one of change. The difference between them and their parents is great with many families being torn apart because of choices in husbands/wives/jobs. The manifestation of this change in the western world has led to violence but the troubling frequency of this happening in strict Muslim society has left many westerners afraid of the spread of your religion.
I beg to differ. I would like to know why you hold the opinion above.
What they do want are laws that are not in contradiction/are in conformity with the teachings of the Quran.
Many Muslims do NOT want leadership to be ruled by Mullahs. What they do want are laws that are not in contradiction/are in conformity with the teachings of the Quran.
I can accept that this "IDEA" is not agreeable to non-Muslims. But the irony is that American legal framework is more in conformity than that of Muslim nations. Additionally, the legal framework allows for opinion of all religions/races to be considered. Which is EXACTLY why Muslims migrate to the US, and are successful Americans.
OP I have asked you twice if you supported sharia law but you refused to answer.
Can you tell me what sharia law is?
I wouldn't have asked him if i did not.
Well, can you inform me?
i have read all your post and im pretty sure you know what sharia law is. so no, i wont play your little game or take your silly "test"
I wanted to know what you think sharia law is.
There is no game or test to it?
It doesnt matter what Sharia law is. We dont want it here in the U.S. End of story.
Comparison with law in the United States
Similarities between Islamic law and the common law of the United States have also been noted, particularly in regards to Constitutional law. According to Sameer S. Vohra, the United States Constitution is similar to the Qur’an in that the Constitution is "the supreme law of the land and the basis from which the laws of the legislature originate."[28] According to Asifa Quraishi, the methods used in the judicial interpretation of the Constitution are similar to that of the Qur'an, including the methods of "plain meaning literalism, historical understanding “originalism,” and reference to underlying purpose and spirit."[29] Vohra further notes that the legislature is similar to the Sunnah in that the "legislature takes the framework of the Constitution and makes directives that involve the specific day-to-day situations of its citizens."[28] He also writes that the judicial decision-making process is similar to the qiyas and ijma methods in that judicial decision-making is "a means by which the law is applied to individual disputes", that "words of the Constitution or of statutes do not specifically address all the possible situations to which they may apply" and that "at times, it requires the judiciary to either use the consensus of previous decisions or reason by analogy to find the correct principle to resolve the dispute."[30]
The earliest known lawsuits may also date back to Islamic law. There was a hadith tradition which reported that the Caliph Uthman Ibn Affan (580-656) attempted to sue a Jewish subject for recovery of a suit of armour, but his case was unsuccessful due to a lack of competent witnesses.[31] The concept of a lawsuit was also described in the Ethics of the Physician by Ishaq bin Ali al-Rahwi (854–931) of al-Raha, Syria, as part of an early medical peer review process, where the notes of a practicing Islamic physician were reviewed by peers and he/she could be sued by a maltreated patient if the reviews were negative.[32]
The earliest known prohibition of illegal drugs occurred under Islamic law, which prohibited the use of Hashish, a preparation of cannabis, as a recreational drug. Classical jurists in medieval Islamic jurisprudence, however, accepted the use of the Hashish drug for medicinal and therapeutic purposes, and agreed that its "medical use, even if it leads to mental derangement, remains exempt" from punishment. In the 14th century, the Islamic jurist Az-Zarkashi spoke of "the permissibility of its use for medical purposes if it is established that it is beneficial."[33] According to Mary Lynn Mathre, with "this legal distinction between the intoxicant and the medical uses of cannabis, medieval Muslim theologians were far ahead of present-day American law."
OP I have asked you twice if you supported sharia law but you refused to answer. However the post i just quoted above confirms that you do support sharia law. Since that is the case you are a example of why Americans are "fearful" of muslims. you want all nations in the world to follow the laws of a war mongering child molester. you are no American you spit on the very document (the US Constitution) that gives you the freedoms to practice your cult. your type is not welcome in our country take your bullshit book and get the fuck out.
all arguments you have presented are bullshit, you are no better than the taliban.
OutHouse, i refuse to respond to uncivil and rude posters, especially if they display evidently bigoted views. If your original post was not that in its nature, I can only say sorry, there are way too many posts I reply too, and unlike Islamophobes, I dont sit here all day refreshing the page.
Earl, what exactly is your point? so you quoted a biased web blog on one guys opinion of on how great and wonderful and historic sharia law is.... which is total bullshit. our frame work of laws and government date back LONG LONG LONG before muslims existed. Anybody with an ounce of intelligence would ask themselves "gee i wonder where muhammad got all of his ideas" they sure weren't divine because those ideas were already in existence.
Wiki is a blog now? lol
Go and change it and put up your proof if its all BS
Here's my main point, you guys summed it up almost perfect..
I don't know what it is, but I'm scared of it
I don't what to learn what it is, but I'm scared of it.
I'm scared and that's all that matters..
OutHouse, i refuse to respond to uncivil and rude posters, especially if they display evidently bigoted views. If your original post was not that in its nature, I can only say sorry, there are way too many posts I reply too, and unlike Islamophobes, I dont sit here all day refreshing the page.
Evadman, thank you for your post.
To clarify and to bridge a gap between my words and yours, let me first say that you took that section of my post out of context.
I earlier suggested that I moved to this country to enjoy the freedoms that were not afforded to me in my home country. Thereby, I hold America on a pedestal. This country has made mistakes, and it is the good people in this country who stood up and changed the tide, corrected that mistake, and have tried to not repeat it.
Hence I requested members of this forums (as a subset of Americans) to not tread the path of bad behavior that existed in Americas past.
I hope this helps
-snip-
I do not know what Trump's suggestion was.
In a letter released Thursday by Trump's publicist, the real estate investor told Elzanaty that he would buy his stake in the lower Manhattan building for 25 percent more than whatever he paid.
Alrighty...
Comparison with law in the United States
Similarities between Islamic law and the common law of the United States have also been noted, particularly in regards to Constitutional law. According to Sameer S. Vohra, the United States Constitution is similar to the Qur’an in that the Constitution is "the supreme law of the land and the basis from which the laws of the legislature originate."[28] According to Asifa Quraishi, the methods used in the judicial interpretation of the Constitution are similar to that of the Qur'an, including the methods of "plain meaning literalism, historical understanding “originalism,” and reference to underlying purpose and spirit."[29] Vohra further notes that the legislature is similar to the Sunnah in that the "legislature takes the framework of the Constitution and makes directives that involve the specific day-to-day situations of its citizens."[28] He also writes that the judicial decision-making process is similar to the qiyas and ijma methods in that judicial decision-making is "a means by which the law is applied to individual disputes", that "words of the Constitution or of statutes do not specifically address all the possible situations to which they may apply" and that "at times, it requires the judiciary to either use the consensus of previous decisions or reason by analogy to find the correct principle to resolve the dispute."[30]
The earliest known lawsuits may also date back to Islamic law. There was a hadith tradition which reported that the Caliph Uthman Ibn Affan (580-656) attempted to sue a Jewish subject for recovery of a suit of armour, but his case was unsuccessful due to a lack of competent witnesses.[31] The concept of a lawsuit was also described in the Ethics of the Physician by Ishaq bin Ali al-Rahwi (854–931) of al-Raha, Syria, as part of an early medical peer review process, where the notes of a practicing Islamic physician were reviewed by peers and he/she could be sued by a maltreated patient if the reviews were negative.[32]
The earliest known prohibition of illegal drugs occurred under Islamic law, which prohibited the use of Hashish, a preparation of cannabis, as a recreational drug. Classical jurists in medieval Islamic jurisprudence, however, accepted the use of the Hashish drug for medicinal and therapeutic purposes, and agreed that its "medical use, even if it leads to mental derangement, remains exempt" from punishment. In the 14th century, the Islamic jurist Az-Zarkashi spoke of "the permissibility of its use for medical purposes if it is established that it is beneficial."[33] According to Mary Lynn Mathre, with "this legal distinction between the intoxicant and the medical uses of cannabis, medieval Muslim theologians were far ahead of present-day American law."
http://www.worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki/en/Sharia#Comparison_with_law_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Parallels_with_Western_legal_systems
Private law
Main articles: Ius privatum, Stipulatio, and Rei vindicatio
Stipulatio was the basic form of contract in Roman law. It was made in the format of question and answer. The precise nature of the contract was disputed, as can be seen below.
Rei vindicatio is a legal action by which the plaintiff demands that the defendant return a thing that belongs to the plaintiff. It may only be used when plaintiff owns the thing, and the defendant is somehow impeding the plaintiff's possession of the thing. The plaintiff could also institute an actio furti (a personal action) in order to punish the defendant. If the thing could not be recovered, the plaintiff could claim damages from the defendant with the aid of the condictio furtiva (a personal action). With the aid of the actio legis Aquiliae (a personal action), the plaintiff could claim damages from the defendant. Rei vindicatio was derived from the ius civile, therefore was only available to Roman citizens.
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
Its neutrality is disputed. Tagged since January 2010.
Its neutrality or factuality may be compromised by weasel words. Tagged since April 2010.
An editor has expressed concern that it is unbalanced. Tagged since April 2010.
It may require general cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
You have used this exuse a lot in this thread. And yes, ive read every single post in it. Must be nice to just bury your head in the sand and not have to deal with reasonable thoughts or to explain anything or answer questions you yourself brought upon this thread.