In my last question, you would find that taking things as is from either the Quran or the Bible has an entirely different meaning. I have seen too many questions like that in Yahoo!Answers. The problem is also that people who answer does not know the true meaning behind it and detrimentally goes along with that line of thinking.
In all religions like Christianity, Islam or Buddhism the common teaching is to love one another and to live in harmony and peace with each other. It is just the 'bad eggs' within the religion claiming to be acting from religious teaching which are causing ill-will to the main-stream believers. People must learn to know how to differentiate this.
The only difference between the religions is our salvation. There is no point arguing or focussing on this. Unltimately it is your destiny with God and if you pray to God I am sure he will show you the way to him.
2006-08-29
22:33:23
·
10 answers
·
asked by
JasonLee
3
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
For now, we should better understand each others faith but knowing that each one of us doesnt not want war or any more violence and sufferring.
Peace and Blessing of God be with you all!
2006-08-29
22:34:16 ·
update #1
Isn't there anyone out there know what I am saying?
Demonstrate the loving aspect of your religion through yr answers, actions and deeds, not by quoting from any Holy Book.
Lay aside the arguments of which religion is right or wrong but show the love and compassion to one another as your religion commands you to do.
Respect everyone as you would respect one of your own.
2006-08-29
22:58:00 ·
update #2
Yeah you're right..
2006-08-30 00:28:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Quran and Bible and other "religious" books are guidance for the wise and trap for fools. There is nothing holly about them.
It is human wisdom passed on to the next generation.God has given humanity FREEDOM by giving free will. Religions take it away and subject their believers to slavery of human interpretation which suits these men to exploit the unfortunate trusting well meaning people.There is no requirement from God to wear long or short dress, black or brown or spotted, what a slur towards loving God He does not need anything from you He is God, He is all there is, do not make Him in the image of silly men who want to control you.Remember you are free from all religious requirements, you have free will and God will not punish you for what He is allowing you to do. Do not make Him a hipocrate, like the men who try to claim that they speak in His name. Have a free, happy day Stukas
2006-08-29 23:00:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by Stukas 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe in the umbrella of GOD, there are those who believe in GOD and he will reward them in the end, and then there are the disbelivers. Like people standing under an umbrella stay dry and the others get wet. To live under GOD's umbrella just means that you believe in him and he is more powerful than anything we can ever know. It really doesn't matter what religion we call ourselves. Once we know GOD we follow his law
2006-08-29 22:49:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Sherri Z 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
As a word of advice when you present your question .. present it to where you are asking. Otherwise it comes off as an attack.
I genuinely do not have a problem with someone asking any question about islam as a matter of fact i like it when they do even the ones some may think to be disturbing.. but just ask with respect.
Otherwise it misleads people. Just my advice.
2006-08-29 22:43:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jamal 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
according to threat you reside on the floor floor and she or he's buried alive and trys to call you to dig her up yet you basically think of shes asking you to maintain the noise down right it truly is an occasion of a communication between you The 0.5 ineffective lady under: help i'm buried under your floorboards! dig me up! You: ok i'm going to save the noise down T.h.d.w.b.:no heavily i'm working out of oxygen! You: why do you will possibly desire to have an opinion on each little thing i'm able to make noise if i pick! T.h.d.w.b.:MOAN GRUMBLE MUTTER!
2016-11-06 01:21:18
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Brother Lee, Islam is the perfect religion, the final message that came to correct and re-affirm all the message of all the previous Prophets - "There is one God of all mankind"
why this obsession with trying to pick errors where there are none? reminds me of my math teacher who, not finding any mistakes my solution, said that I was using the wrong grade pencil!!
2006-08-29 22:43:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
this for those unbelievers who kept bashing us Muslims
( not those who is unbelievers, but sincere in learning our faith)
AL-KAFIROON (THE DISBELIEVERS, ATHEISTS)
In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful.
Say: O disbelievers!
I worship not that which ye worship;
Nor worship ye that which I worship.
And I shall not worship that which ye worship.
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.
2006-08-29 22:41:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by fadil z 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
i am sorry as there is no answer sorry
and peace be upon u too
but why u speech to wemon only?
plz i couldnot find your question clearly sorry
2006-08-29 22:44:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by why? 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I respect no one. You have a brain that's not in use....
2006-08-30 04:27:15
·
answer #9
·
answered by mutterhals 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
WOMEN UNFREEE UNDER ISLAM
In every society where family affairs are regulated according to instructions derived from the Shariah or Islamic law, women are disadvantaged. The injustices these women are exposed to in the name of Islam vary from extreme cruelty (forced marriages; imprisonment or death after rape) to grossly unfair treatment in matters of marriage, divorce and inheritance.
Muslim women across the world are caught in a terrible predicament. They aspire to live by their faith as best they can, but their faith robs them of their rights. Some women have found a way out of this dilemma in the principle of separation of organized religion and state affairs. They fight an uphill battle to achieve and hold on to their basic rights. Two cases demonstrate just how difficult that struggle can be, in the context of new as well as established democracies.
The first is the draft constitution of Iraq, now due next week. Iraqi women like Naghem Khadim, demonstrating on the streets of Najaf, are fighting to prevent an article from being put in the constitution that would establish that the legislature may make no laws that contradict Shariah edicts. The second case is the province of Ontario, in Canada. There, Muslim women led by Homa Arjomand, an activist of Iranian origin, are fighting -- using the Canadian Charter of Rights -- to keep Shariah from being applied as family law through a so-called Arbitration Act passed as law in Ontario in 1992.
It seems strange to associate the context of Canada with that of Iraq, but a closer look at the arguments used to reassure the demonstrating women in both countries reveals the similar ordeals that Muslim women in both countries must go through to secure their rights. It shows how their legitimate and serious worries are trivialized, and how vulnerable and alone they are. It shows how the Free World led by the U.S. went to war in Iraq, allegedly to bring liberty to Iraqis, and is compromising the basic rights of women in order to meet a random date. It shows how the theory of multiculturalism in Western liberal democracies is working against women in ethnic and religious minorities with misogynist practices. It shows the tenacity of many imams, mullahs and self-made Muslim radicals to subjugate women in the name of God. Most of all, it shows how many of those who consider themselves liberal or left-wing see their energy levels rise when it comes to Bush-bashing, but lose their voice when women's rights are threatened by religious obscurantism.
Hamam Hamoudi, the head of Iraq's constitution committee, refuses to discuss the article that worries the Muslim women. He also refused to put in the draft constitution that men and women have equal rights, creating a bizarre situation whereby the women had more rights under Saddam Hussein's regime than in post-Saddam Iraq. Mr. Hamoudi insists that women will have full economic and political rights, but the overwhelming evidence shows that when Shariah -- which gives a husband complete control over his wife -- is in place, women have little chance to exercise any political rights. Does Mr. Hamoudi realize that it took the removal of Saddam and the establishment of a multiparty democracy for men to vote, while if his draft constitution is ratified, women will need the permission of their husbands to step out of the house in order to mark their ballot? I thought that President Bush and all the allies who supported the Iraq war aspired to bring democracy and liberty to all Iraqis. Aren't Iraqi girls and women human enough to share in that dream?
Under Shariah, a girl becomes eligible for marriage from the moment she starts to menstruate. In countries where Islamic law is practiced, child-brides are common. Do the drafters of the constitution grasp what this will mean for the school curriculum of girls or the risks of miscarriages, maternal fatalities and infant deaths? These and other hazards that affect subjugated women are common phenomena in the 22 Arab-Islamic countries investigated in the Arab Human Development Report. An early marriage also means many children in an area of the world that is already overpopulated and poor.
The draft Iraqi bill of rights favors men in other respects, such as the right to marry up to four wives, and the right to an easy divorce, without the interference of a court, simply by repeating "I divorce you" in the presence of two male witnesses. A wife divorced in such a fashion will receive an allowance for a period of three months to one year, and after that period nothing. On the other hand, if a wife wants a divorce, she must go to court and prove that her husband does not meet her material needs, that he is infertile and that he is impotent. Once a divorce is finalized, if there are children, the custody of the children will automatically go to the father (for boys at age 7 and for girls from the start of menstruation). Inheritance based on the Shariah means that wives will get only a small portion of the property of their husbands and a sister will get half what her brother gets.
Canadian women are told that the Arbitration Act of 1992 was passed in order to provide citizens with the opportunity to resolve minor conflicts through mediation and thereby save valuable court time. They are reassured that Muslim women in Canada have nothing to fear because parties must enter into arbitration out of their free choice, and that there are enough limits to safeguard the rights of women. The Muslim women's arguments that "free choice" is relative when you are psychologically, financially and socially dependent on your family, clan or religious group seem to fall on deaf ears.
The populations of battered Muslim women in "tolerant" Canada's women's shelters seem to be ignored. In Canada, battered Muslim women say that their husbands told them that it is a God-given right to hit them. If the current Iraqi constitution goes through, Iraqi wife-abusers will be able to add "It is my constitutional right to beat you."
An Iraqi constitution is necessary, and the need for urgency is apparent, but urgency is a bad argument for passing a bill that strips half the nation of its rights. In Ontario, minorities come first and individual women within minorities last, living as second-class citizens and suffering in silence.
Ms. Hirsi Ali, a member of the Dutch parliament for the Liberal Party, was born in Somalia. She took refuge in the Netherlands in 1992 to escape an arranged marriage, and has had armed bodyguards after receiving death threats from Muslim extremists.
2006-08-29 22:44:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by NIGHT_WATCH 4
·
0⤊
0⤋