Moderators: Moderators, Junior Moderators
I think it will be sharia and thats the wish of the people. If one wants secularism then there many countries who offers it.Substance
Either there is secularism for Somalia, semi-theocracy or full fledged religious based law...Im hoping for the first
Where have Sharia been tested and failed? You cant talk like that without giving examples.Somalia has had secularism, almost full secularism in 60s and full secularism during the Siyad Barre regime, sadly though not accompanied by human rights and liberalism. Sharia has already been tested...it doesnt work. And whenever it fails, people will claim its not genuine Sharia.
, but to be honest it's all about your personality, not your race, if i were to go to UAE as a british expat and get a job as a video director/editor and get payed a good salary the arabs would be kissing your hands and feet, but if you are a taxi driver you'd expect to be treated like that, as sad as it may seem, although if i were in that situation, i would smash the guy's head on the dashboard and knock all his teeth out. Saudi's are the Langaabs of Arabia, thats why they act so kibir, they were never in a position of power nor might in history, they were given this position of wealth and mischief by the likes of Britain.The Ottoman Caliphate. Also other multiexperiments with the Sharia, which you'd probably deny as the real Sharia, like Sudan, Aceh province, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan pre war.Where have Sharia been tested and failed? You cant talk like that without giving examples.Somalia has had secularism, almost full secularism in 60s and full secularism during the Siyad Barre regime, sadly though not accompanied by human rights and liberalism. Sharia has already been tested...it doesnt work. And whenever it fails, people will claim its not genuine Sharia.
Aun Jalle Siaad barre.
I cant tell about aceh province but Saudi Arabia, is a kingdom, how can it be Sharia then?The Ottoman Caliphate. Also other multiexperiments with the Sharia, which you'd probably deny as the real Sharia, like Sudan, Aceh province, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan pre war.
LOL ''Aun Jalle Siaad barre'' only a Somali would make the mental gymnastics of supporting Sharia and a very secular leader.
It doesn't matter, the Sharia has not made any specifics on how to elect leaders. In the three first generations, they had several kinds of ways of having new rulers. Because of the Sharia not specifying certain things, many muslim scholars have turned to a western concept which has rotational elected government.I cant tell about aceh province but Saudi Arabia, is a kingdom, how can it be Sharia then?
But for argument sake, Im curious, how did Sharia law fail in Ottoman Caliphate? or Afghanistan pre war?
Nothing mental about it. Siaad Barre is my relative, this is what muslims say about their dead people.
If they implement the way of rule just like the way the prophet and the khulafah arrashidun i think Muslims can be the most powerful people in the world.wolverine just look at 7th century - 9th century arabia, those were the best most successful systems in world history.
Are you joking? Now I'm assuming you are telling me the truth, if this is correct did Sharia fail or did they fail to agreeing on leadership? Are you saying that Sharia law in ottoman Caliphate and Afghanistan had rotational elected government?It doesn't matter, the Sharia has not made any specifics on how to elect leaders. In the three first generations, they had several kinds of ways of having new rulers. Because of the Sharia not specifying certain things, many muslim scholars have turned to a western concept which has rotational elected government.I cant tell about aceh province but Saudi Arabia, is a kingdom, how can it be Sharia then?
But for argument sake, Im curious, how did Sharia law fail in Ottoman Caliphate? or Afghanistan pre war?
Nothing mental about it. Siaad Barre is my relative, this is what muslims say about their dead people.
I think you misunderstood my point. You said ''but Saudi Arabia, is a kingdom, how can it be Sharia then?'', to which I replied ''It doesn't matter, the Sharia has not made any specifics on how to elect leaders.'' which has lead to very important muslim scholars to embrace rotational elected goverment. I was referring to the fact that because of the fact that Sharia doesn't in their interpretation have a single way of choosing goverment....it can lead to monarchy or democracy..or a system in which the leader chooses his successor.Are you joking? Now I'm assuming you are telling me the truth, if this is correct did Sharia fail or did they fail to agreeing on leadership? Are you saying that Sharia law in ottoman Caliphate and Afghanistan had rotational elected government?
Where did you read about this? I want to take a closer look myself.
Ok I stand corrected, but how has Sharia failed? You gave me a couple "failed" countries but have not proved any point yet. And rotational electe goverment should not be solely attached to western world altough they use this system aswell.I think you misunderstood my point. You said ''but Saudi Arabia, is a kingdom, how can it be Sharia then?'', to which I replied ''It doesn't matter, the Sharia has not made any specifics on how to elect leaders.'' which has lead to very important muslim scholars to embrace rotational elected goverment. I was referring to the fact that because of the fact that Sharia doesn't in their interpretation have a single way of choosing goverment....it can lead to monarchy or democracy..or a system in which the leader chooses his successor.Are you joking? Now I'm assuming you are telling me the truth, if this is correct did Sharia fail or did they fail to agreeing on leadership? Are you saying that Sharia law in ottoman Caliphate and Afghanistan had rotational elected government?
Where did you read about this? I want to take a closer look myself.
Certainly I wouldn't be surprised if the Islamic scholars didn't do great damage to the muslim civilization when they branded the most important scientists and philosophers as heretics. For the British historian Bernard Lewis, the most important thing may have been the role of women.Ok I stand corrected, but how has Sharia failed? You gave me a couple "failed" countries but have not proved any point yet. And rotational electe goverment should not be solely attached to western world altough they use this system aswell.
Everytime you post you claim something you cant prove,as your about claim different Sharia ruled nation/states has failed, yet you did not provide evidence for your claim and now you are claiming that the most important scientists was label heretic.Certainly I wouldn't be surprised if the Islamic scholars didn't do great damage to the muslim civilization when they branded the most important scientists and philosophers as heretics. For the British historian Bernard Lewis, the most important thing may have been the role of women.
I'm arguing that it was a relative failure, meaning that in comparison to Europe, the Islamic world was left behind, more because of what Europe did right than anything else. My argument is, if someone claims to have Gods law...they should also have the best results
They were branded as heretics.Everytime you post you claim something you cant prove,as your about claim different Sharia ruled nation/states has failed, yet you did not provide evidence for your claim and now you are claiming that the most important scientists was label heretic.
Yes, for many years Sharia meant rule of law, which is very importnat. However this was surpassed by rule of law and laws based on reson in Europe in the 17th century. Let me say that I'm not suprised that you don't want to blame it on the Sharia...I wont ask you to bring some clarication in this since I know this is false.
In comparison to Europe Sharia law had the best results for many years but overtime people was corrupted and starting to move away from the correct form of rule. Its simple really.
Im not suprised that you dont want to accept the Ottoman Caliphate, Saudiarabia, Aceh province, Sudan, as implementing Sharia, because that would imply failure. If the Hanbali scholars decided, they'd see Saudi Arabia as close to the Sharia as it can be...why is it Saudi Arabia, which is close to the Hanbali school is failing miserably...and their only luck is oil. Why is that countries that are more FAR more closer to the Sharia , than say the Secular world whose laws are blasphemous, are failing comparatively.We dont have Sharia law rigt now and therefore you cant have say about its effectiveness. Thats why your logic Is invalid since their to many other factors to regard.
You should just admit that you did not have anything to stand on when you made that claim about Sharia law has failed.
Return to “General - General Discussions”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests
