I came across a video and I would like to read your views about it.

Seeing these things, I often wonder how other muslims would react or think when they saw them too.
My journey here isn't to argue with you, or to offend you or upset you, but to discover your psyche, how you think about certain things, so I can understand it better from my p.o.v. I'm sorry if I am sometimes harsh, but I don't like sugar coating and mincing words. I like to tell them as they are.

Having explained my position, (that I feel has been somewhat misunderstood lately), I don't want this to become a slanderous thread, so I'm asking everyone to be clear and concise and try answering by talking in a way that I can relate to as a non muslim. "Because God knows best" or "because it's in the Quran" is (shockingly :rolleyes: ) not enough for me and just makes me think that there is no explainable reason behind the issue.

Anyways, enough of me ranting...

Here is the clip.

http://freemuslims.org/glennbeck-low.wmv

It would be interesting to also have a look at the website www.freemuslims.org (http://www.freemuslims.org) and telling me what you think.

Thanks. :cute:

Why should we listen to a guy who says I'm only afraid from my ex girlfriend. Let him first be a true muslim before talking about Islam.

lol^^ Remember my PM Fengy? :)


You don't go out much IceTea, do you?

Why should we listen to a guy who says I'm only afraid from my ex girlfriend. Let him first be a true muslim before talking about Islam.
This is exactly what I was afraid of.


Icetea, he is joking. It's a joke. You didn't get it, and that's ok. He is talking to a westerner and he joked in a way the westerner would relate to when asked if he fears an attack on his life by a terrorist group.

With this in mind, do you have a different view?

Seems like a NICE website! I didn't get much of their concept of 'modern Islam' because Islam and especially the Holy Qura'an had always been modern: In the age of miracles, it was the miracle of miracles, in the age of poetry and literature, Qur'an proved itself to be among the best Arabic resources ever and in the age of science and technology, Qura'an still stands the test of time with numerous scientific proof within its verses.

Islam was hijacked because of political needs. Nothing more, nothing less. The people who died may have died thinking they're doing the right thing by killing civilians, but the people who planned it probably do not think like that.

Finally, that Glenn Beck video didn't open but anyhow...The dude sounded funny when he was talking to Keith Ellison :D

Seems like a NICE website! I didn't get much of their concept of 'modern Islam' because Islam and especially the Holy Qura'an had always been modern: In the age of miracles, it was the miracle of miracles, in the age of poetry and literature, Qur'an proved itself to be among the best Arabic resources ever and in the age of science and technology, Qura'an still stands the test of time with numerous scientific proof within its verses.

Islam was hijacked because of political needs. Nothing more, nothing less. The people who died may have died thinking they're doing the right thing by killing civilians, but the people who planned it probably do not think like that.

Finally, that Glenn Beck video didn't open but anyhow...The dude sounded funny when he was talking to Keith Ellison :D
you gotta see the vid i posted. It is all about the political needs you are referring to.

It is a blocked site :os I wonder :rolleyes:

It is a blocked site :os I wonder :rolleyes:
what?!?! :omg:

Storm, I found the vid on youtube.

Free Muslims Coalition

I'll take a few print screens of the website. There is absolutely NOTHING that makes it bannable. :mmhmm:

I agree with him, the flaw is in some muslims themselves and in their way of understanding the teachings of the Holy Quraan. Those are the people who need a reform!

Storm, I found the vid on youtube.



Thanks alot Fengy :)

*******************

Yes … a lot of Muslims around the world understand Islam wrong and behave upon that understanding and this is the responsibilities of Islam Ummah to fix such mistaken views about Islam

Moreover, after 9/11 Islam image became worse and non tried to fix it or even try to explain it to the others what is exactly happening because we Muslims know for true that what happened in 9/11 isn’t Islam teaching and doesn’t relate to Islam in anyway

So, To some extend I do agree with that guy

I've attached a few print screens for you storm..

In most parts of the world, you would have to try to reform Islam at the cost of your life.

In most parts of the world, you would have to try to reform Islam at the cost of your life.

Yes, they're slaughtering them like sheep in Oman I hear. The streets run red with their blood. :p

That's what I love about Wudjab: the positive, optimistic note!

Jeff,

Are you saying that there is a massive movement in Oman to change Islam?

^^^

Change? Or Reform? The two words don't mean the same thing. Serious believers don't try to "change" their religions. If you believe a religion is revealed truth from God, you don't "change" it. But you can try to recapture things that have been lost through inculturation over time, or you can try to develop it through deeper understanding of original principles, as we can see in Islamic attitudes toward visual art and present day discussions about slavery and execution for apostasy.

I'm pointing out that Oman's Islam is a traditional, moderate variety which simply continues what some call the "Islam of our Fathers" as handed down, rather than radical "reforming" varieties like Wahhabism. Within that tradition, there is a wide variety of thought, as is exhibited here on Sabla.

People in Oman are not trembling in their boots for fear that they will be lashed if they come out and say that they see something positive in movements to reform Islam.

Of course, if you propose that all the ahadith should be discarded in a place like Sudan, you may wind up swinging from a rope as Taha did. In Oman, they'd probably just giggle and start talking about the new coffee shop in Zakher.

So what Wudjab is saying is not without merit. But it's not universally true, it's not usually true of quiet and more moderate broad based attempts which don't sound like they are playing into the hands of those who secretly want to destroy Islam, and it accents the negative.

I admire Wudjab for his refusal to compromise what he believes. He's a very effective advocate and a very smart guy. That's why I suggested his name among others as a good candidate for Best Member of the Month sometime. But I wish he'd say SOMETHING, ANYTHING positive about Islam or Muslims once in a while. Of course, if I suggest that, he always says it's not the topic of the thread.

I agree with him, the flaw is in some muslims themselves and in their way of understanding the teachings of the Holy Quraan. Those are the people who need a reform!
Exactly
If you care of someone who is not praying there's no need to kill him after 3 days cause he'll come back to the right path
Same goes to those who want to leave the religion

I'm pointing out that Oman's Islam is a traditional, moderate variety which simply continues what some call the "Islam of our Fathers" as handed down, rather than radical "reforming" varieties like Wahhabism. Within that tradition, there is a wide variety of thought

People in Oman are not trembling in their boots for fear that they will be lashed if they come out and say that they see something positive in movements to reform Islam.

People in Oman have no fear to change religion cause they know is unlikely to be punished
Here is not like KSA
But is somehow a danger cause a group of Islamists was found

Reading the print screens Fengy posted really shocked me!

1- This site is "Poison Coated With Honey"

2- Free Muslim Collation, is not made by Muslims, this is written and made by non-Muslims.

3- It is trying to stick the word "terrorism" to the word "Islam".

4- Terrorism is not a production of a wrong understanding of Islam, no, it is a production of a foreign force attracting Muslims of "low knowledge" brain washing them, and deploying them to destroy. Leave Muslims who don't understand alone and they will be harmless!

5- Hamas is not a terrorist group.

6- Jihad is an Islamic concept to understand it you should know Islam very well and understand it very wll too.

7- Deprivation of Islamic properties to serve the trend of "war against teerrorism" is just a fake way to kill Islam and send it to grave.

8- We saw Osama bin Ladin only on TV, no actual proof of his existance!

9- 9/11 is made up, to jump on Afghanistan and construct a base in the middle east for a near strike.

10- Iraq Biological weapons are made up, (not my words ask the While House and they will tell you about it)

11- War against Terrorism is in fact war against Islam. Remove women's hair cover, Jews are not Enimies, Jihad is not correct, Don't grew your beard, Don't read some verses in Quran ...etc. Take it all out and then they end up with nothing to Islam just not to be "Terrorists"

12- American army is doing "Jihad" in Iraq but they call it "deuty", different words same meaning. To defend your country against terrorists is "Jihad"

13- Drop Palestine from the Islamic background then it is just a land like any land given to Jews! In your dreams...!

14-Muslims (on the paper only) made a bigbenefit someway or another from Islam. They used it to achieve their goals. They will be punished by Allah on judgement day for this, sever punishment...Just wait and see!

15- It is not about making people more advance, giving them alternatives for Islamic feature, and dropping old ones, no.. it is about killing Islam in the hearts of people!

16- All these are incidents of "Fitna" (Test) which Prophet Mohammad Peace Be Upon Him told us about. It just fines up the good Muslims from the bad one. The strong Muslim from the weak one. Just suddenly every bomb in the world is signed "Islamic"...Unfair, but who can say it loud?

17- The Free Mulims Coalition is a coalition to free Muslims from their Islam in the name of modernism and anti-terrosim.

18- A man who thrws a bomb on a crowd no matter his religion is a devil and worths the most sever punishment.

19- Either be with us or against us .. is the way to kill anyone who says no to evil. Fools believe it, weak act on it, and strong die because of it!

20- Now the war against Islam is not a war with guns and rockets, it is war with EVERYTHING that can make a scar, either on the body or in the soul!

^^^^

Well, some things you say I agree with and others I sympathize with. Other things I disagree with.

But here are two questions I had:

2- Free Muslim Collation, is not made by Muslims, this is written and made by non-Muslims.

I thought it was agreed that anyone who makes Shahada and believes in Quran and Hadith is a Muslim and only God can judge otherwise? I am back to my old question of "Who is a Muslim"?

4- Terrorism is not a production of a wrong understanding of Islam, no, it is a production of a foreign force attracting Muslims of "low knowledge" brain washing them, and deploying them to destroy. Leave Muslims who don't understand alone and they will be harmless!

I don't understand this. I have met Muslims who defend terrorism and they are educated and quote the Quran and Hadiths. And they are all over the internet and the news, also. Please go to the website below ("The Ignored Puzzle Pieces of Knowledge.") And read the guy's posts and argue with him, for example. Try telling him that he is getting his info from non-Muslims. He will laugh at you and quote reams and reams of Quran and Ahadith! And he will say as bin Laden and others do: "You don't know what Islam means."

He not only defends bin Laden and Zawahiri, but he says all Muslims must hate Christians, Jews and Shia or they are not Muslim. Yes, you can kill people in crowd (so long as they are not Muslim) because some of them are guilty and some are not and you can't differentiate and anyway they are all kafirs, who God hates and you must also hate.

No, you can say this is false Islam. (And they will reply that you are the one who believes in a false Islam.) But you can't say that some Muslims don't believe it and find their reasons in the Quran and the Ahadith. Yes, they may interpret them wrongly. But they are not getting it from George Bush.

http://inshallahshaheed.wordpress.com/

That's where the whole problem lies, Jeff, when someone quotes the Holy Quran or The Hadeeth to back up his ideas. But if you consider the case and the condition behind the Verse/Hadith. For example, when someone says that he has verses from the Holy Quraan that support war against all other non-muslims, now true that there are verses that encourage fighting, but the question here is WHEN were these verses revealed to Prophet Mohammed :PBUH: ? WHAT were the conditions? these things are supposed to be taken into consideration while quoting a verse! Because if you compare them with other verses that encourage peace, you will have A Holy Quraan full of contradictions, and all muslims know that The Holy Quraan doesn't have contradictions.


He not only defends bin Laden and Zawahiri, but he says all Muslims must hate Christians, Jews and Shia or they are not Muslim. Yes, you can kill people in crowd (so long as they are not Muslim) because some of them are guilty and some are not and you can't differentiate and anyway they are all kafirs, who God hates and you must also hate.

Now this reminds me of a teenager who used to say that his Father (and Imam) always teach him to hate other sections of Islam. I'm sure he understood them wrong because a reliable Imam would never say that. Anyway, I asked him only one question, which is "Does Islam preach peace and love among it's followers or hate?" he answered "Peace and love" then I asked him "then what the hell are you saying!?" he said "I don't know! I don't know! my dad and our Imam taught me that!" I told him to make sure again having in mind that Islam preaches love and peace among it's followers. It seemed that he realized he was wrong, which made me happy.

^^^^^

Oh, Braiki, I have no problem with the idea that these people are WRONG ABOUT ISLAM. I like your interpretations very much.

My problem is with the idea that such Muslims do not exist. Of course they exist! You can say they twist the Quran or they don't understand it. But you can't say they don't exist or that outsiders invented them. Such people as Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab in the 1700s were preaching such things and leading their armies to massacre innocents long before the West got involved in the Middle East.

Fine to say it's not Islam's fault. Fine to blame it on the Devil and the mind of man that twists things to human ends and distorts God's truth. You can even say that injustices make some Muslims more likely to react violently and get the wrong idea of Islam. But don't say Muslims don't go wrong and say we invented all these problems. That's not true. It may be misinterpretation, but they read the texts for themselves and misinterpret them. They don't go to school with Zionists to learn the Quran incorrectly.

Braiki. how are people to know what verses apply to what contexts?

Islam, as we are told, is a religion for all people for all times. That would preclude any concept of 'it applied to when the Prophet was weak, etc, etc'.

Do you not see that fact that Islam has no clergy that might lead to people being free to interpret the verses as they see fit ?

Also, isn't Islam supposed to be the religion of ease ? And wasn't the Quran claimed to be simple to understand ?

None of what we see happening today indicates either of the above.

Braiki. how are people to know what verses apply to what contexts?

Islam, as we are told, is a religion for all people for all times. That would preclude any concept of 'it applied to when the Prophet was weak, etc, etc'.

Do you not see that fact that Islam has no clergy that might lead to people being free to interpret the verses as they see fit ?

Also, isn't Islam supposed to be the religion of ease ? And wasn't the Quran claimed to be simple to understand ?

None of what we see happening today indicates either of the above.
I gotta agree with everything you said above and that's why I feel that Islam does need a reform in a way that only the muslims themselves can bring about. Not a change in Islam itself, because that won't be possible, but maybe the way it's taught and the way it's used.

Mixing islam with politics is really creating a problem within this day's islam itself and for the whole world. Religion should be kept for moral and spiritual guidance. It shouldn't come into political affairs, because it never works out.

Braiki. how are people to know what verses apply to what contexts?
by reading and applying the whole Quraan, not leave some and focus on some

Islam, as we are told, is a religion for all people for all times. That would preclude any concept of 'it applied to when the Prophet was weak, etc, etc'.
yep it is, I din't say 'it applied to when the Prophet was weak, etc, etc' Read my post again :D

Do you not see that fact that Islam has no clergy that might lead to people being free to interpret the verses as they see fit ?

Also, isn't Islam supposed to be the religion of ease ? And wasn't the Quran claimed to be simple to understand ?

None of what we see happening today indicates either of the above.

again, if people don't want to understand, they won't. All stories in The Holy Quraan and the Bible prove so. The Rules are simple and easy to follow, if people make it hard and complicate it then it's really their problem, not the religion's fault. I suggest you to read the story of the cow of the children of Israel. You will get my point then :)

Many muslims should read this story as well, the significance of the story is that God gives us simple instrutctions and we complicate them. But it's a really good story, worths reading

I wasn't quoting you directly.

But all the moslem apologists we see on TV these days explain the situation regarding violent verses in Quran by quoting context - viz the Mecca verses and the Medina verses.

Now on what basis is something to be applied to the context 1500 years ago and differently today ?

I don't get your last question :os the same rules are applied 1400 years ago and today! :os

I am happy to admit that your way of interpreting Islam on these questions is the True Way of God, Braiki. But don't you think it's fair that if Christians mess up in interpreting Christianity or if they act badly, we should blame the Christians and not Muslims or Chinese? I mean, I don't agree with the interpretation of the Christian Zionists, for example, but I don't blame it on the Muslims or even on the Jews. They screwed up and got the wrong interpretation and it's their fault. And don't you think it's fair that we blame Muslim misinterpretations basically on Muslims?

That's all my argument with Haroun is about. I love your ideas about Islam and you know I do! :p

I am happy to admit that your way of interpreting Islam on these questions is the True Way of God, Braiki. But don't you think it's fair that if Christians mess up in interpreting Christianity or if they act badly, we should blame the Christians and not Muslims or Chinese? I mean, I don't agree with the interpretation of the Christian Zionists, for example, but I don't blame it on the Muslims or even on the Jews. They screwed up and got the wrong interpretation and it's their fault. And don't you think it's fair that we blame Muslim misinterpretations basically on Muslims?

That's all my argument with Haroun is about. I love your ideas about Islam and you know I do! :p
To different cases my friend, the first Muslims do admit that there is something wrong, while the second Christians don't admit that there is something wrong. We are talking about the majority, the majority of Muslims admit that bombing is a holly sin so misinterpretation is the job of the few, on the opposite side, the majority of Christians don't admit that Jesus is not a God, so misinterpretation is the job of the massive majority.

Right!

Islam, as we are told, is a religion for all people for all times. That would preclude any concept of 'it applied to when the Prophet was weak, etc, etc'.
Found food for you :


The Islamic teachings that was brought by Mohammed 14 centuries ago should be faced with courage and boldness, we should expose and show its faults and warn humanity of its dangers. We should, even though we are different –look with reason to these teachings that urges people, human beings, to become monsters that don’t know anything in life except killing and looting and plundering and raping and pillaging.
We should stand courageously and boldly against these teachings that became a plague on humanity and is not supported except by extremists like bin Laden and al Zarqawi and al Zawaheeri and the thugs that assaulted our Coptic brothers and burned their homes and stole their properties, and tried to assault their religious men and destroy their churches.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/AhmedSalib60326.htm

Well, now you seem to say that it is Muslims that are making the mistake about Islam, even if it's a minority. That was my dispute about what you said. No fair to blame Muslim crazies on Christians. Or vice versa. Both our crazies are our own responsibility.

I don't see the point in talking this way about who is Right, though. You say I don't "admit" that Jesus is not God. Should I then say that you refuse to "admit" that the Quran was written by Mohammed and some other guys, not Allah? You can say I am illogical and I know better in my mind. Shall I then say you are brainwashed since you were a kid and your heart and ears are stopped with wax? Then we can get frustrated with each other! :p

What good does this exchange do for either of us? I understand your passion and your feeling of commitment to the truth. Better to use patience and politeness and love with each other, I think.

You think Christian teaching on many points is incorrect. I think Muslim teaching on many points is incorrect. You think Christianity distorted and added. I think Islam distorted and subtracted. But you and Braiki and others still think that I and others can see that these bombers are not teaching Correct Islam, even if we don't believe Islam is the True Religion. Similarly, you can say to a Christian who advocates a war that you think is wrong, "Are you being true to your own teaching?" even if you don't accept all of that teaching. We can discuss, "Are Christian doctrine and the Bible truly Zionist" and "Are Muslim teaching and the Quran and Ahadith truly violent" even if we don't believe in each other's religions.

That was the point of my example.

Mixing islam with politics is really creating a problem within this day's islam itself and for the whole world. Religion should be kept for moral and spiritual guidance. It shouldn't come into political affairs, because it never works out.


So you want us to follow this:

"Render unto Caesar things which belong to Caesar, and render unto God things which belong to God" (Matthew 22:21).

Secularism is not accepted in Islam.

Found food for you :

The Islamic teachings that was brought by Mohammed 14 centuries ago should be faced with courage and boldness, we should expose and show its faults and warn humanity of its dangers. We should, even though we are different –look with reason to these teachings that urges people, human beings, to become monsters that don’t know anything in life except killing and looting and plundering and raping and pillaging.
We should stand courageously and boldly against these teachings that became a plague on humanity and is not supported except by extremists like bin Laden and al Zarqawi and al Zawaheeri and the thugs that assaulted our Coptic brothers and burned their homes and stole their properties, and tried to assault their religious men and destroy their churches.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/AhmedSalib60326.htm

Amo, why are you quoting this? Surely you don't agree with it?

So you want us to follow this:

"Render unto Caesar things which belong to Caesar, and render unto God things which belong to God" (Matthew 22:21).

Secularism is not accepted in Islam.

This is one of the key points of the discussion, Fengy, I think. Does Islam have a basically political dimension? If it does, how can it relate to a non-Muslim political situation?

I don't know the answer...

Ice Tea, that quotation of Jesus doesn't endorse secularism! It means something like that a Muslim American, for example, can pay taxes to a non-Muslim government...he doesn't have to go to jail!

Again back to tolerance obligations. Now I start to see tolerance as the only mistake that a honest man must acquire to gain a certificate of rightness! Otherwise, it is just a claim of No X No

You believe in my religion, I believe in yours
You don't belive in my religion, I don't believe in yours...

But sure right is right and wrong is wrong. Denial as a way of gaining approval is exactly a blind man forcing his blindness. You can't compare dead to alive nor sick to healthy brain unless there is a ground zero of basic recognition.

Muslims bombing is nothing to do with Islam. Those who kill in Iraq with a truck full of explosives to kill babies and women, cats and dog, with no mistake they did is by no mean a Muslim. Just having his ID card says he is a Muslim, doesn't make Islam guilty.

I just wonder why all sins of humans on this earth is to be bound to their own brain, while if this human is a Muslim it is bound to Islam?? What logic is this? I think blaming Islam now is a fashion and the job of those who are jobless, that is why everyone now ready to speak his anger from "Muslim Terrorists" while on the other hand never bother to listen to a brain discussion on the "actual" truth.

How many died in the WTC 9/11? How many did die because of it as consequences? A successful strategy to create enemies from Muslims. Give bombs to stupids to make the show and pronounce the sentence of death on all as a consequence!!!

Now life is just about turns, and could be the turn now on Islam targeted to block the lights of Allah and to put it off, but Allah for sure will continue it to its fulfillment, either "they" like it or not, the lights are coming ...

Haroun, I agree that Right is Right and Wrong is Wrong.

But there are ways of expressing that that make discussion difficult or impossible. If we just trade proclamations of truth, then it's difficult to discuss anything. We just talk past each other. "You are false! No YOU are false! This is stupid! No, THIS is stupid!"

I know what you believe is True. You know what I believe is true. But even if you are sure that your idea is God's truth, there is more than one way to climb the mountain. You don't have to say everything directly.

You want to state the Truth and to persuade me of the Truth. But Language is not just testifying to the Truth. It's also communication and persuasion. There is a time for each one. When you are trying to climb a mountain, you can try to go straight up a cliff. But maybe the best way to the top is to go by the road around the side. That's not denying the Truth as you understand it. It's just recognizing that you are talking to human beings, that's all.

Tolerance is bad if it is indifference. But sometimes tolerance serves the truth, because it is really just patience. If you insist on shouting all the time, human beings will stop listening.

As far as Muslim terrorism is concerned, well, you have a point. But there is something to be said the other way, too. It's one thing to say Islam is not guilty of the bomber's action. I understand that.

But people are teaching and preaching that this is Islam and they are part of the Muslim community. They think they are Muslims. Many other Muslims think they are Muslims. That's why Muslims join them.

Sure, if a Muslim or a Christian murders, it is not the fault of Islam or Christianity. But if a Muslim or a Christian murders because they read something in the Bible or Quran or they were taught wrongly by those who identified themselves as Muslim or Christian, then it is related to the religion.

If a Muslim murders out of anger, no one should ask about his religious ideas. But if a Muslim murders and says, "Allah commands it!", then people will naturally ask about his religious ideas. And if many do it, then more questions will naturally come.

Okay, maybe this is the Irani-Khomeini idea or that is the Wahhabi-Saudi idea or something else. Maybe it is not true Islam and we should not blame the whole religion or all Muslims. But it's reasonable for Muslims and non-Muslims to ask questions about the role of religion when the people doing this are using religion as their motivation.

Anyway, I think I have said enough on these topics! I will let Haroun be Haroun and not lecture him anymore! I like him and enjoy his company and Sabla would be poorer without him.

Anyway, I think I have said enough on these topics! I will let Haroun be Haroun and not lecture him anymore! I like him and enjoy his company and Sabla would be poorer without him.
That is really kind of you...Thanks Jeff brother :)


Sure, if a Muslim or a Christian murders, it is not the fault of Islam or Christianity. But if a Muslim or a Christian murders because they read something in the Bible or Quran or they were taught wrongly by those who identified themselves as Muslim or Christian, then it is related to the religion.
That is the subject of my new thread "Which are the verses in Quran considered to be motivation for terrorism?" (http://www.englishsabla.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44948)

Ice Tea, that quotation of Jesus doesn't endorse secularism! It means something like that a Muslim American, for example, can pay taxes to a non-Muslim government...he doesn't have to go to jail!

I think it is, as separation of church and state is widely accepted in the West, check below article:


Separation of church and state is widely accepted in the West and thus has become a globally political thought. Historically, the idea emerged as a practical strategy for dealing with issues related to the Christians and other people in the Western culture.

Gradually, however, separation of church and state has become a popular premise for all modern states. It is now seen that citizenship rather than religion should be the basis for belonging to a state, since different citizens may have different religions. If the state commits to one religion, members of other faiths would feel alienated since a foreign religion would be imposed upon them. They may be prohibited from practicing the rituals of their religion and they may be deprived of their right to hold certain positions in the state, such as president, or other key positions. This would create disturbances and conflicts that would present obstacles for the progress of the state.

For these reasons, advocates of this policy of separation find that it is best if a state takes a secular approach, neither supporting nor denying any religion. It is up to the citizens to follow whatever faith and values they choose and practice what rituals they please.

This is the ideal side of a neutral secular state that Western politicians wish to project. However, the theory of separation of state and religion makes several underlying assumptions that are hard to come by in the real world. Let us consider some of them.

It is assumed that it is possible for a secular state to take a neutral stand toward all religions, based on the implication that religion interferes with, and possibly upsets, matters of state. This could be the case if there was in fact no relationship between state affairs and religion, and the two were separate entities. However, religions do not only deal with collections of beliefs, rituals and individual behaviours that do not affect the society. Most of the well known religions -Judaism, Christianity and Islam- have laws that regulate relationships between people; whether on an individual basis, among the family, or with the society at large, in addition to other laws observed regarding food and drink, and many other daily details that cannot be separated from the business of the state.

To accommodate for this, Western politicians had to make a compromise. They decided to include some of the values of their religion -Christianity- in the making of the rules of the state. And Christian values are certainly vivid in Western foreign policy, particularly in its dealings with the Islamic world. At the same time, some important aspects of the Christian religion were left out. Recent liberal movements have come to attack The Sacred Book of Christianity, claiming that what was always believed to be the word of God is no more than the writings of people who were deeply influenced by the culture in which they lived. This view was supported by the existence of many different versions of the Bible with discrepancies between them. Thus, certain restrictions made in the scriptures, such as homosexual behaviour, should be seen as mere laws of the society at a certain time so that there would be no reason to abide by such dated laws today. This movement has gained support from politicians, leaders and even scholars of religion. The result is that secularism has taken a life of its own and is no longer a neutral or unbiased point of view. It might be seen as a religion in itself, which, in the West, has its own fervent followers who attack and fight Christianity.

So how are Muslims to approach the modern trend of separation of religion and state? The basic belief in Islam is that the Qur'an is one hundred percent the word of Allah, and the Sunna was also as a result of the guidance of Allah to the Prophet sallallahu allayhe wasalam. Islam cannot be separated from the state because it guides us through every detail of running the state and our lives. Muslims have no choice but to reject secularism for it excludes the law of Allah.

Supporters of the secular state argue that the values of one religion cannot be imposed on members of different religions that are present in our countries. However, whether the non-Muslims in a state are few or many, secularism is not the answer. The non-Muslims in Muslim states will either be secularists themselves, in favour of abandoning the laws of Islam in the state, or will be devoted followers of their own religion, who wish that the state follow the rules of that religion. So in either case, a compromise cannot be made in accordance with the Islamic point of view. What needs to be pointed out is that under the law of Islam, other religions are not prohibited. At the same time, people are provided with doctrines for legislation and running of state that will protect people of all faiths living in the state.

Secularists in the West will agree with this, then they will point out that under Islamic law, people are not all equal. No non-Muslim, for example, could become the president. Well, in response to that fact, in turn, secularism is no different. No Muslim could become president in a secular regime, for in order to pledge loyalty to the constitution, a Muslim would have to abandon part of his belief and embrace the belief of secularism — which is practically another religion. For Muslims, the word 'religion' does not only refer to a collection of beliefs and rituals, it refers to a way of life which includes all values, behaviours, and details of living.

Secularism cannot be a solution for countries with a Muslim majority or even a sizeable minority, for it requires people to replace their God-given beliefs with an entirely different set of man-made beliefs. Separation of religion and state is not an option for Muslims because is requires us to abandon Allah's decree for that of a man.