Islam/Muslim Discussion Thread ٢

[Greater Tezdrian]

All aboard the takfir train. Choo choo motherfuckers.

[Alsheb]

So where do you draw the line? You're not getting of the hook just like that.
So you reserve the right for yourself to attack everyone everywhere whenever you feel like you don't agree with their policies.
World War III would definitely be sure if you had any power anywhere whatsoever.

There is no hooks to get off from since your comparison was shitty from the start.
When you lose an election then cancel the vote of several regions for no reason just to gain a small majority of votes in your favor before; by refusing to step down from power and recognizing the democratically elected new president, by trying to use the army to maintain yourself in your position and encoraging your supporters to fight your adversor's supporters, what you're doing is called a Coup d'état à la Napoléon III and it's in no way akin to a simple electoral fraud such as the one Bush probably perpetrated.

And, please m8. Now you're just making a fool of yourself. When a democratically elected president is calling you to restore the Democracy in his country after a dictator seized power, you aren't "attack[ing] everyone everywhere whenever you feel like you don't agree with their policies.". The mere fact that you try to pull this shit up just show how desespered and arguments less you are.

So, where do you draw the line? Apparently not at Gadhaffi, who was elected democratically within the system that was in place. Apparently not at Assad, who was also democratically elected in Syria. Apparently not at Salvador Allende, who was elected in a liberal democratic system yet was couped and murdered by American-backed thugs anyway. Apparently not at Chávez, who was elected democratically in a liberal democratic system yet was still couped temporarily.

Where do you draw the line to invade, murder and destroy countries? Is "they are not democratic enough" a reason for the death of thousands?

[Aelex]

So, where do you draw the line? Apparently not at Gadhaffi, who was elected democratically within the system that was in place. Apparently not at Assad, who was also democratically elected in Syria. Apparently not at Salvador Allende, who was elected in a liberal democratic system yet was couped and murdered by American-backed thugs anyway. Apparently not at Chávez, who was elected democratically in a liberal democratic system yet was still couped temporarily.

Where do you draw the line to invade, murder and destroy countries? Is "they are not democratic enough" a reason for the death of thousands?

Ho c'mon m8! Stop it now, it's just becoming annoying. I draw your fucking line already.
When you lose an election and still try to maintain yourself in power, that's called a coup d'état. If the legitimate and democratically elected president call a foreign power to help him re-establish the Republic, the subsequent intervention isn't called "Imperialistic".
Do you prefer ten of thousands of people dying in the streets and a year long civil war or a swift foreign intervention that help to mitigate the damages?
Do you think we should just ignore the cry of help of people who were robbed of their democracy just because "we should never intervene in foreign affairs even when the very existence of one of our ally is in danger"?
There were only three thousands deaths in Cote d'Ivoire thanks to the French intervention. How many time this amount of casualties do you think there would have been if we didn't came to the help of our allies after they called for our assistance? For how long do you think the country would have been torn in a civil war? How many war rapes, kids drafted to fight, thieveries, plunders and senseless slaughter do you think would have happened without our role in resolving the situation?

I know it's all good and dandy to scream "Imperialism" each time a Great Power help another Third World Nation but you really should look at the facts rather than let your ideology blind you.

[North Arkana]

So, where do you draw the line? Apparently not at Gadhaffi, who was elected democratically within the system that was in place. Apparently not at Assad, who was also democratically elected in Syria. Apparently not at Salvador Allende, who was elected in a liberal democratic system yet was couped and murdered by American-backed thugs anyway. Apparently not at Chávez, who was elected democratically in a liberal democratic system yet was still couped temporarily.

Where do you draw the line to invade, murder and destroy countries? Is "they are not democratic enough" a reason for the death of thousands?

Ho c'mon m8! Stop it now, it's just becoming annoying. I draw your fucking line already.
When you lose an election and still try to maintain yourself in power, that's called a coup d'état. If the legitimate and democratically elected president call a foreign power to help him re-establish the Republic, the subsequent intervention isn't called "Imperialistic".
Do you prefer ten of thousands of people dying in the streets and a year long civil war or a swift foreign intervention that help to mitigate the damages?
Do you think we should just ignore the cry of help of people who were robbed of their democracy just because "we should never intervene in foreign affairs even when the very existence of one of our ally is in danger"?
There were only three thousands deaths in Cote d'Ivoire thanks to the French intervention. How many time this amount of casualties do you think there would have been if we didn't came to the help of our allies after they called for our assistance? For how long do you think the country would have been torn in a civil war? How many war rapes, kids drafted to fight, thieveries, plunders and senseless slaughter do you think would have happened without our role in resolving the situation?

I know it's all good and dandy to scream "Imperialism" each time a Great Power help another Third World Nation but you really should look at the facts rather than let your ideology blind you.

Remember m8, when us dirty westerners do it, it's ebil imperialism. When Muslims do it, it's spreading glorious truth of their religion.

[Greater Tezdrian]

Now now North Arkana, the problem isn't that Alsheb is a Muslim. It's that he's a Marxist

[Germanic Scyths]

This is a discussion thread regarding Islam.

I kindly request people who want to discuss the term "Imperialism" to do so somewhere else. Either in another thread or to make one of their own.

[Alsheb]

Ho c'mon m8! Stop it now, it's just becoming annoying. I draw your fucking line already.
When you lose an election and still try to maintain yourself in power, that's called a coup d'état. If the legitimate and democratically elected president call a foreign power to help him re-establish the Republic, the subsequent intervention isn't called "Imperialistic".
Do you prefer ten of thousands of people dying in the streets and a year long civil war or a swift foreign intervention that help to mitigate the damages?
Do you think we should just ignore the cry of help of people who were robbed of their democracy just because "we should never intervene in foreign affairs even when the very existence of one of our ally is in danger"?
There were only three thousands deaths in Cote d'Ivoire thanks to the French intervention. How many time this amount of casualties do you think there would have been if we didn't came to the help of our allies after they called for our assistance? For how long do you think the country would have been torn in a civil war? How many war rapes, kids drafted to fight, thieveries, plunders and senseless slaughter do you think would have happened without our role in resolving the situation?

I know it's all good and dandy to scream "Imperialism" each time a Great Power help another Third World Nation but you really should look at the facts rather than let your ideology blind you.

Remember m8, when us dirty westerners do it, it's ebil imperialism. When Muslims do it, it's spreading glorious truth of their religion.

Show me one single line where I defended imperialism coming from Muslim nations, or shut it.

As far as I'm concerned, the nations most responsible for the shit in the Middle East are Saudi Arabia and Turkey, precisely because of their imperialist policies. So try to make sense when you attempt to make a point. Blind ad hominems won't get you far.

[Greater Tezdrian]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFkazjodpeQ

Guys, stop threadjacking ffs.

[Senegalboy]

ok why is everyone called a kufar

[Greater Tezdrian]

ok why is everyone called a kufar

If I recall correctly, kafirs are simply non-Muslims.

[Senegalboy]

ok why is everyone called a kufar

If I recall correctly, kafirs are simply non-Muslims.

yes but why did ghuraba use it again alsheb most of the time in arab countries they use kufar or kuffar

[Greater Tezdrian]

If I recall correctly, kafirs are simply non-Muslims.

yes but why did ghuraba use it again alsheb most of the time in arab countries they use kufar or kuffar

He used it against Alsheb because Alsheb rejects the authority of the Hadith.

[Senegalboy]

yes but why did ghuraba use it again alsheb most of the time in arab countries they use kufar or kuffar

He used it against Alsheb because Alsheb rejects the authority of the Hadith.

ok for a person to truly be a kuffar you need to prove that he is one

[Greater Tezdrian]

So, to really light a fire under this thread:

Last year we had a guy who argued that LSD wasn't haram and we all kinda jumped down his throat for it; myself especially. Now, nearly a year later, I've become a semi-regular user of marijuana and have tripped on LSD on three separate occasions... and I kind of see his point. At what point can haram activities like taking LSD actually be spiritually beneficial to us? Can they at all?

[Senegalboy]

So, to really light a fire under this thread:

Last year we had a guy who argued that LSD wasn't haram and we all kinda jumped down his throat for it; myself especially. Now, nearly a year later, I've become a semi-regular user of marijuana and have tripped on LSD on three separate occasions... and I kind of see his point. At what point can haram activities like taking LSD actually be spiritually beneficial to us? Can they at all?

which country do you live in

[Greater Tezdrian]

So, to really light a fire under this thread:

Last year we had a guy who argued that LSD wasn't haram and we all kinda jumped down his throat for it; myself especially. Now, nearly a year later, I've become a semi-regular user of marijuana and have tripped on LSD on three separate occasions... and I kind of see his point. At what point can haram activities like taking LSD actually be spiritually beneficial to us? Can they at all?

which country do you live in

USA.

[Senegalboy]

which country do you live in

USA.

so do you use marijuana for medical purposes

[Greater Tezdrian]

USA.

so do you use marijuana for medical purposes

It has medical benefits for me, but that isn't primarily why I use it.

[Senegalboy]

so do you use marijuana for medical purposes

It has medical benefits for me, but that isn't primarily why I use it.

what do you use it for

[Greater Tezdrian]

It has medical benefits for me, but that isn't primarily why I use it.

what do you use it for

Recreation.

[Germanic Scyths]

So, to really light a fire under this thread:

Last year we had a guy who argued that LSD wasn't haram and we all kinda jumped down his throat for it; myself especially. Now, nearly a year later, I've become a semi-regular user of marijuana and have tripped on LSD on three separate occasions... and I kind of see his point. At what point can haram activities like taking LSD actually be spiritually beneficial to us? Can they at all?

From the Qu'ran, Asad translation, Surah 2 Verse 219

THEY WILL ASK thee about intoxicants and games of chance. Say: "In both there is great evil as well as some benefit for man; but the evil which they cause is greater than the benefit which they bring."

The Qu'ran says that there can be benefits to intoxicants, but that the evil is greater than good. The evil that is caused can be seen in 5:91

The devil wants to provoke animosity and hatred among you through intoxicants and gambling, and to distract you from remembering God, and from observing the Contact Prayers (Salat). Will you then refrain?

So, my personal guess is that medical marijuana useage is not bad per se. But using it for recreation is bad because you have the risk of missing Salat.

[Senegalboy]

recreational marijuana is bad because if you get hooked you start to have different priorities like for salat you might buy some marijuana

[Germanic Scyths]

recreational marijuana is bad because if you get hooked you start to have different priorities like for salat you might buy some marijuana

Well, I would argue that recreational use of marijuana is bad because the intoxicant state it induces results in a numb state wherein you might forget to do Salat.

[Greater Tezdrian]

So what if you set timers, so even when you're intoxicated you always remember to do salat? It is not impossible to worship and reverence God just because you're not sober.

[Germanic Scyths]

So what if you set timers, so even when you're intoxicated you always remember to do salat? It is not impossible to worship and reverence God just because you're not sober.

Again, I can refer to the Qu'ran 5:91

The devil wants to provoke animosity and hatred among you through intoxicants and gambling, and to distract you from remembering God, and from observing the Contact Prayers (Salat). Will you then refrain?

When a person is intoxicated, and doing salaat, there is a big chance a person will be distracted from remembering God.

I used intoxicants (alcohol, marijuana) before I converted and I do know that, once a person uses marijuana, the odds are that a person will have a "quick mind". In example; distracted quickly, quickly changing thoughts, thinking of something else quickly.

EDIT: Then again, this is an interprentation, and Allah knows best.