Shaykh Yusuf and Post-Secular Human Rights

[ECKU]

Is the idea of human rights even going to survive the collapse of the American empire?

Always has, always is, always will

[Bear Stearns]

Is the idea of human rights even going to survive the collapse of the American empire?

Always has, always is, always will

Human rights is very much an invention of the post-War Western order. Call me a cynic, but I don't see them surviving the fall of the West.

[ECKU]

Always has, always is, always will

Human rights is very much an invention of the post-War Western order. Call me a cynic, but I don't see them surviving the fall of the West.

Humans rights were created by Allah SWT. Human transgressive 'rights' were created by the West

[Bear Stearns]

Human rights is very much an invention of the post-War Western order. Call me a cynic, but I don't see them surviving the fall of the West.

Humans rights were created by Allah SWT. Human transgressive 'rights' were created by the West

Please elaborate, this makes no sense.

[ECKU]

Humans rights were created by Allah SWT. Human transgressive 'rights' were created by the West

Please elaborate, this makes no sense.

Allah SWT already gives us all the rights we'll need. Anything else is transgression.

[Bear Stearns]

Please elaborate, this makes no sense.

Allah SWT already gives us all the rights we'll need. Anything else is transgression.

oh

[Gagium]

Please elaborate, this makes no sense.

Allah SWT already gives us all the rights we'll need. Anything else is transgression.

Hmmm...

[Fartsniffage]

Allah is Goa'uld?

Allah SWT is Allah SWT.

So why does he want you as a slave?

[ECKU]

Allah SWT is Allah SWT.

So why does he want you as a slave?

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=462608&p=35947709#p35947709

[Al Mumtahanah]

Is the idea of human rights even going to survive the collapse of the American empire?

The U.S. left the HRC.

[Plzen]

Just to make my background clear before I start, I belong to neither a "western" (at least, in the sense usually meant by that term) culture nor the Islamic religion.

Because Al-Islam isn't just a personal "do x in your personal life and get y". It's a whole way of life, including having a system of governance. There are criminal laws and punishments laid out in the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah that must be upheld.

More than anything else said on this thread, this actively concerns and frightens me.

A society is by its very nature not an individual enterprise. Without an agreed-upon, or at least acquiesced-upon, understanding of what any given person is allowed or not allowed to do to any other given person, there is no society. Criminal law and governance is, without a doubt, in that public sphere that must be shared by all members of a society. A citizen cannot be both permitted and not permitted to do something by two separate authorities imposing two separate legal codes.

If Islam is a way of life, and this way of life includes not just the private sphere but also those aspects of life that must by necessity be shared by all members of a society, then Islam is a direct and existential threat to the humanist, liberal, and democratic values that I hold very dear.

In the interest of the continuation of those same ethical and political values that have brought so much freedom and prosperity to the inhabitants of the world in recent decades, I sincerely hope that this perspective, that Islam is an all-encompassing way of life, is not a common one among adherents to that religion.

[Al Mumtahanah]

Just to make my background clear before I start, I belong to neither a "western" (at least, in the sense usually meant by that term) culture nor the Islamic religion.

Because Al-Islam isn't just a personal "do x in your personal life and get y". It's a whole way of life, including having a system of governance. There are criminal laws and punishments laid out in the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah that must be upheld.

More than anything else said on this thread, this actively concerns and frightens me.

A society is by its very nature not an individual enterprise. Without an agreed-upon, or at least acquiesced-upon, understanding of what any given person is allowed or not allowed to do to any other given person, there is no society. Criminal law and governance is definitely, without a doubt, in that public sphere that must be shared by all members of a society. A citizen cannot be both permitted and not permitted to do something by two separate authorities imposing two separate legal codes.

If Islam is a way of life, and this way of life includes not just the private sphere but also those aspects of life that must by necessity be shared by all members of a society, then Islam is a direct and existential threat to the humanist, liberal, and democratic values that I hold very dear.

In the interest of the continuation of those same ethical and political values that have brought so much freedom and prosperity to the inhabitants of the world in recent decades, I sincerely hope that this perspective, that Islam is an all-encompassing way of life, is not a common one among adherents to that religion.

You would be wrong, empires have always employed legal pluralism.

[ECKU]

Just to make my background clear before I start, I belong to neither a "western" (at least, in the sense usually meant by that term) culture nor the Islamic religion.

Because Al-Islam isn't just a personal "do x in your personal life and get y". It's a whole way of life, including having a system of governance. There are criminal laws and punishments laid out in the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah that must be upheld.

More than anything else said on this thread, this actively concerns and frightens me.

A society is by its very nature not an individual enterprise. Without an agreed-upon, or at least acquiesced-upon, understanding of what any given person is allowed or not allowed to do to any other given person, there is no society. Criminal law and governance is definitely, without a doubt, in that public sphere that must be shared by all members of a society. A citizen cannot be both permitted and not permitted to do something by two separate authorities imposing two separate legal codes.

If Islam is a way of life, and this way of life includes not just the private sphere but also those aspects of life that must by necessity be shared by all members of a society, then Islam is a direct and existential threat to the humanist, liberal, and democratic values that I hold very dear.

In the interest of the continuation of those same ethical and political values that have brought so much freedom and prosperity to the inhabitants of the world in recent decades, I sincerely hope that this perspective, that Islam is an all-encompassing way of life, is not a common one among adherents to that religion.

What adherents believe means nothing against the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah. Those books do have rules on how a government and citizens should behave.

[ECKU]

Just to make my background clear before I start, I belong to neither a "western" (at least, in the sense usually meant by that term) culture nor the Islamic religion.


More than anything else said on this thread, this actively concerns and frightens me.

A society is by its very nature not an individual enterprise. Without an agreed-upon, or at least acquiesced-upon, understanding of what any given person is allowed or not allowed to do to any other given person, there is no society. Criminal law and governance is definitely, without a doubt, in that public sphere that must be shared by all members of a society. A citizen cannot be both permitted and not permitted to do something by two separate authorities imposing two separate legal codes.

If Islam is a way of life, and this way of life includes not just the private sphere but also those aspects of life that must by necessity be shared by all members of a society, then Islam is a direct and existential threat to the humanist, liberal, and democratic values that I hold very dear.

In the interest of the continuation of those same ethical and political values that have brought so much freedom and prosperity to the inhabitants of the world in recent decades, I sincerely hope that this perspective, that Islam is an all-encompassing way of life, is not a common one among adherents to that religion.

You would be wrong, empires have always employed legal pluralism.

Well, depends on the empire. But yes, legal pluralism is possible.

[Farnhamia]

The Moderation Team has decided that the transliterated Arabic words and phrases being introduced into posts with increasing frequently are to be treated as spam. Post them in a form that can be translated easily or stop using them.

[Pacomia]

Please elaborate, this makes no sense.

Allah SWT already gives us all the rights we'll need. Anything else is transgression.

*gnk*
chortles

...

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Al Mumtahanah]

The Moderation Team has decided that the transliterated Arabic words and phrases being introduced into posts with increasing frequently are to be treated as spam. Post them in a form that can be translated easily or stop using them.

Please name at least one word as an example because no Muslim will expect to be banned for saying haram.

[Pacomia]

The Moderation Team has decided that the transliterated Arabic words and phrases being introduced into posts with increasing frequently are to be treated as spam. Post them in a form that can be translated easily or stop using them.

Please name at least one word as an example because no Muslim will expect to be banned for saying haram.

All the stuff Amin’s been saying, I assume.

Things like this, which I found in his post history:

“Crap like this is what makes me hate this country. Ugh! La'natullah 'alaa Amreeka if it doesn't repent and change, aameen.”

Sure, you could try to figure that out phonetically and get something like “Natola (whatever that means) Allah America, but it’s just an unwanted hassle.

[Farnhamia]

The Moderation Team has decided that the transliterated Arabic words and phrases being introduced into posts with increasing frequently are to be treated as spam. Post them in a form that can be translated easily or stop using them.

Please name at least one word as an example because no Muslim will expect to be banned for saying haram.

Nope. If you can't tell which words are common enough to be understood by the majority of people here, post in English.

[ECKU]

Please name at least one word as an example because no Muslim will expect to be banned for saying haram.

All the stuff Amin’s been saying, I assume.

Things like this, which I found in his post history:

“Crap like this is what makes me hate this country. Ugh! La'natullah 'alaa Amreeka if it doesn't repent and change, aameen.”

You mean all the stuff I've translated?
Edit: Point made, I'll fix

[Farnhamia]

All the stuff Amin’s been saying, I assume.

Things like this, which I found in his post history:

“Crap like this is what makes me hate this country. Ugh! La'natullah 'alaa Amreeka if it doesn't repent and change, aameen.”

You mean all the stuff I've translated?
Edit: Point made, I'll fix

You don't have to go back and fix posts, just post a translation or post it in a form we can translate via computer.

[Pacomia]

Flork boog jub jub. Cloog fnoorp gloop glop.

Can we go back to talking about how ridiculous what Amin said about Allah making all human rights is?

[Al Mumtahanah]

Please name at least one word as an example because no Muslim will expect to be banned for saying haram.

Nope. If you can't tell which words are common enough to be understood by the majority of people here, post in English.

A senior mod got peevish with me for using the word Maturidi, which can't be translated as it is a school named for Abu Mansur al-Maturidi. So yes you will have to elaborate unless you're going to ban people for talking about schools.

[Inkopolitia]

If human rights are so antithetical to the Muslim world that they are considered a form of warfare, then the Muslim world absolutely deserves to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century; out of the shadow of barbarism and into the light of civilisation. I sincerely hope that when Ismail Roger speaks of "true respect for rights rather than [...] LGBT ideology", he doesn't mean the right of Muslims to administer lashes to homosexuals.

This. If by "true respect for rights rather than the LGBT ideology" he means "Right to lash gay/lesbian/trans people" then it's just going back to the 15th century.

If human rights are so antithetical to the Muslim world that they are considered a form of warfare, then the Muslim world absolutely deserves to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century; out of the shadow of barbarism and into the light of civilisation. I sincerely hope that when Ismail Roger speaks of "true respect for rights rather than [...] LGBT ideology", he doesn't mean the right of Muslims to administer lashes to homosexuals.

Only Muslim homosexuals. Either way I doubt Sh. Hamza Yusuf can actually enforce Shari'ah in any meaningful way. He's part the Human Rights Admin, not legislation.

Shari'ah law should not be enforced neither even remotely thought about as a valid way to rule over the people of a country. Period. It's backwards and barbaric, that's it.

[Al Mumtahanah]

I would be very interested to know if this rule applies to Catholics using Latin phrases as well? Or are Muslims the only target?