Germany’s 1st ‘liberal mosque’ opens in Berlin, bans niqabs & burkas

[Adil_94]

@Cpt.Rishwat nice attempt at a gay joke. I personally dont know why any LGBT person would want to be accepted by religions that have persecuted them for hundreds of years but its better to have religious establishments that accept them than those who spout hate against them simply on the basis of their sexuality.

 

[Madplayer]

Men and women are not segregated inside Masjid al-Haram. Men and women are not segregated when performing tawaf around the Kaaba or when performing Sa`ee (walking) between As-Safa and Al-Marwah.

So if that is the case inside Islam's holiest mosque, Masjid Al-Haram, then surely it's wrong to segregate men and women inside any other mosque?

Not sure about the ruling on it but this is how its practiced generally. Segregation in mosques is the norm. In masjid al haram, i think every worldy act becomes haraam, perhaps thats why the worshippers are considered Pak (pious), free from sin and hence not segregated. I can be totally wrong here. Just trying to put some personal thoughts into it.

 

[Yossarian]

Not sure about the ruling on it but this is how its practiced generally. Segregation in mosques is the norm. In masjid al haram, i think every worldy act becomes haraam, perhaps thats why the worshippers are considered Pak (pious), free from sin and hence not segregated. I can be totally wrong here. Just trying to put some personal thoughts into it.

Eh?

 

[Yossarian]

@Cpt.Rishwat nice attempt at a gay joke. I personally dont know why any LGBT person would want to be accepted by religions that have persecuted them for hundreds of years but its better to have religious establishments that accept them than those who spout hate against them simply on the basis of their sexuality.

So lets get this right.

Fact 1. A Muslim is a Muslim because he/she believes in Islam, including believing and accepting all it's edicts and rules. (Whether he/she actually practices and follows them is a separate question).

Fact 2. Islam forbids any homosexual practices. Says it's a sin.

So if someone says they are LGBT, are they accepting point 2 above?

If yes: Then they are also accepting that homosexuality is a sin.

If No: Then they are not accepting point 1 either, ie they don't accept/believe in all the aspects/edicts/rules of Islam (regardless whether they follow them or not). Therefore on what basis can a LGBT individual claim to be a Muslim if they don't accept/believe in it's rules and edicts (regardless of whether they follow them or not)?

 

[Adil_94]

[MENTION=4930]Yossarian[/MENTION] they play mental gymnastics like LGBT Christians do about the story of Lot in the Bible. The same story is in the Quran and LGBT Muslims and those Muslims who support them say that the story of Lut isnt to condemn homosexuality but rape and debauchery.

They blame the interpretation that God is condemning homosexuals on cultural interpretations of the Quran. A weak argument u could argue but thats how they justify it.

Or others say that God created them like this so he will judge them.

There are plenty of people who hold onto religion as a crutch despite having lifestyles that their God wouldnt like.

 

[Madplayer]

Eh?

Didnt make sense to you did it? Lol same here when i read it the second time.

After reading a bit about it, i have come to know that only after the Prophet passed away did the segregation in mosques start but during his lifetime he preferred that women pray separately at home. It wasnt an absolute though and women could pray in mosques too.

 

[James]

I don't think that any human being should be trying to construct top-down logical arguments which lead them to question the Islamic credentials of others. Never mind the sexual preferencing - a false allegation of takfir is itself a major mis-step.

It is up to God to decide who is and who is not a Muslim. Yes the gays and lesbians will meet their maker one day and will have to answer for themselves. But so will everybody else. And I am not a homosexual, but I am certainly not perfect either!

"Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone" !!

 

[Yossarian]

I don't think that any human being should be trying to construct top-down logical arguments which lead them to question the Islamic credentials of others. Never mind the sexual preferencing - a false allegation of takfir is itself a major mis-step.

It is up to God to decide who is and who is not a Muslim. Yes the gays and lesbians will meet their maker one day and will have to answer for themselves. But so will everybody else. And I am not a homosexual, but I am certainly not perfect either!

"Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone" !!

The post is not 'questioning' the credentials of others. It is saying that these are the rules, edicts, and fundamental basics of Islam according to Islam. So the question is do you believe and accept them (note: regardless of whether you follow them or not)?

And if you don't believe and accept all of them, does that mean you only believe and accept some of them whilst rejecting others? (again note: regardless of whether you follow them or not). More specifically, in this case the rules/edicts regarding homosexuality?

As far as I'm aware, Islam is a 'take or leave it' faith. You can't say "I believe and accept this bit, but reject this bit because I don't like it or agree with it" (again: regardless of whether you follow / not follow any of it)

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The post is not 'questioning' the credentials of others. It is saying that these are the rules, edicts, and fundamental basics of Islam according to Islam. So the question is do you believe and accept them (note: regardless of whether you follow them or not)?

And if you don't believe and accept all of them, does that mean you only believe and accept some of them whilst rejecting others? (again note: regardless of whether you follow them or not). More specifically, in this case the rules/edicts regarding homosexuality?

As far as I'm aware, Islam is a 'take or leave it' faith. You can't say "I believe and accept this bit, but reject this bit because I don't like it or agree with it" (again: regardless of whether you follow / not follow any of it)

But there are vast numbers of different sects of Islam all recommending 'take it or leave it' versions which are contrary to others.

 

[James]

Every faith claims to be a 'take it or leave it' job, but the vast majority of adherents take bits and leave others - sometimes intentionally, but often unintentionally.

The truth is that this happens because humans are inherently flawed beings, a fact that all of the major monotheistic religions acknowledge - hence the concept of Sin.

Has anyone heard of the "No True Scotsman" rhetorical fallacy? If not, look it up. That will give you an idea of how absurd and impossible the idea is of being a self-styled 'pure' follower of a religion.

 

[Yossarian]

But there are vast numbers of different sects of Islam all recommending 'take it or leave it' versions which are contrary to others.

True.
However, in Islam there are various rules/edicts that are universally recognised as being clear cut without any room for different interpretations. In that regard, is there any sect of Islam, mainstream or on the fringes, that says homosexuality and homosexual practices are permissible in Islam?
If yes, then which one?
If not, then the premise of my previous posts stands.

Every faith claims to be a 'take it or leave it' job, but the vast majority of adherents take bits and leave others - sometimes intentionally, but often unintentionally.

The truth is that this happens because humans are inherently flawed beings, a fact that all of the major monotheistic religions acknowledge - hence the concept of Sin.

Has anyone heard of the "No True Scotsman" rhetorical fallacy? If not, look it up. That will give you an idea of how absurd and impossible the idea is of being a self-styled 'pure' follower of a religion.

My posts have already made a distinction between believing in and accepting the rules and edicts within Islam, as opposed to actually following them in all cases. Eg. Every Muslim accepts that Muslims are required to pray 5 times per day, but not everyone (few in fact) actually follows it.

 

[Adil_94]

[MENTION=4930]Yossarian[/MENTION] Islam isnt a take it or leave it faith. Its a if u are born into it u have to take it and if u want to leave do it in secret and live a double life n dont speak out or criticise the faith or u will be put to death or jailed. Its only in western countries somewhat that an actual take it or leave it option is on the table because actual freedom of religion is respected here. Even then thats because the govt n state ensures peoples rights are protected n that prevents largely blasphemy killings n murder of open apostates.

If it was really like hey if u dont want to follow n u will suffer no consequences then it would be a lot better and people would be able to do just that.

LGBT individuals can either reject the religion altogether and live their lifestyle and not feel any guilt.

Or they can be LGBT n live their lifestyle but carry on feeling guilt tripped n shamed because of what their religious texts say because they do retain a belief in God and pray n all that. They Often can end up im developing stress depression and anxietal disorders from the conflict inside them. This can apply to those who are LGBT but dont engage in relationships or have sexual relations with others due to their internal conflict. N u do get scholars now coming out saying that being lgbt is fine but engaging in same sex acts is wrong again causing the internal conflicts.

Or u can develop an interpretation of Islam that is more accepting n tolerant of lgbt people n reinterprets the text with a modernist slant where people can feel a part of the religion but also be accepted as lgbt without having all these mental conflicts.

 

[Yossarian]

[MENTION=136193]Adil_94[/MENTION]
I think there's a misunderstanding of the 'take it or leave it' that I referred to. Probably due to the way I presented it. However, read my post above.

 

[Adil_94]

[MENTION=4930]Yossarian[/MENTION] i get what u are trying to say about Islam being very black n white n thats certainly what salafist wahhabis deobandis are if its in line with quran n sunnah then yes its allowed if not then its haram this is the mainstream scholarly approach too . very simple.

but as we know people are more complex than that. Their environmental and socio-cultural settings shape their views too. This is why u get Muslim feminists n who say things like Islam is feminist even though if u ask the scholars who seriously study quran n hadith its clear that isnt the case. But because they have been brought up in a liberal environment often in the west they want to reconcile their faith with their liberal values n dont want to give up the faith as they find solace in some acts like worship n also dont want a family backlash or ostracisation.

most Muslims arent literalists in practice and generally dont adhere to all the edicts but still pay lip service to the mainstream interpretations of the faith.

they know that islam prohibits pre marital or extra marital relations alcohol free mixing women wearing certain clothing but they still hold an affinity with the faith due to their upbringing n see themselves as lapsed Muslims rather than seeing the need to reinterpret texts.

it comes to the question whether religion should be moulded by its adherents or should its adherents conform to the religion.

Christianity is increasingly becoming the former where the church has to change its stance to keep up with societal progression and people view religion differently now and just take the good parts like love thy neighbour, dont cast the first stone if have sinned etc n reject the dogma that seeks to control peoples lives.

in Islam its mostly still the adherents have to conform to the religion n any notion of reinterpretating scripture or practice of faith along modernist lines is deemed heresy n blasphemy for the majority.

 

[Justcrazy]

[MENTION=136193]Adil_94[/MENTION]

Brother , not following everything required is a different thing. We are weak as humans , also because of circumstances we may not do everything what Islam expects us to do , but doing things which are prohibited is different.

Also doing a sin and then trying to find excuse to prove that it was right its a even bigger sin.

There are matters in which differences of opinions are accepted , but not on fundamentals of Islam.

 

[James]

[MENTION=136193]Adil_94[/MENTION]

Brother , not following everything required is a different thing. We are weak as humans , also because of circumstances we may not do everything what Islam expects us to do , but doing things which are prohibited is different.

Also doing a sin and then trying to find excuse to prove that it was right its a even bigger sin.

There are matters in which differences of opinions are accepted , but not on fundamentals of Islam.

Hypothetically. Muslims who drink alcohol, smoke pot, snort cocaine, or lie with women before marriage. (There are plenty of these I assure you!!) - Are they better or worse Muslims than Gay Muslims? Have they committed a greater or lesser Sin?

We are all Sinners.

 

[Adil_94]

[MENTION=60967]Justcrazy[/MENTION] its the fundamentals that create the fundamentalists the likes of whom we see across the world brutalising people under the religion. for believers coming to grips with the issues of violence n barbarism in the texts is a big issue some accept it some ignore it or play mental gymnastics with it while others attempt to reform it. This battle is for Muslims to work out.

 

[Yossarian]

Hypothetically. Muslims who drink alcohol, smoke pot, snort cocaine, or lie with women before marriage. (There are plenty of these I assure you!!) - Are they better or worse Muslims than Gay Muslims? Have they committed a greater or lesser Sin?

We are all Sinners.

The question is not better or worse Muslims. It's whether or not as Muslims they believe and accept that certain rules and edicts exist in Islam that a Muslim is expected to adhere to, even if their own lifestyle and actions are the exact opposite of those edicts and rules.

It's like, for example, someone believing and accepting that there is a motorway speed limit of 70 mph but still doing 100 miles per hour thinking that they won't get caught. That's very different to someone doing 100 mph and rejecting the fact that there is a 70 mph speed limit in the first place.

And in the case of Islam and homosexuality, arguing that homosexuality and homosexual practices are in fact allowed in Islam.

 

[James]

The question is not better or worse Muslims. It's whether or not as Muslims they believe and accept that certain rules and edicts exist in Islam that a Muslim is expected to adhere to, even if their own lifestyle and actions are the exact opposite of those edicts and rules.

It's like, for example, someone believing and accepting that there is a motorway speed limit of 70 mph but still doing 100 miles per hour thinking that they won't get caught. That's very different to someone doing 100 mph and rejecting the fact that there is a 70 mph speed limit in the first place.

And in the case of Islam and homosexuality, arguing that homosexuality and homosexual practices are in fact allowed in Islam.

I 100% agree that those two scenarios are different. I also 100% agree that Islam does not permit homosexual ACTS. (Platonic companionship is perhaps debatable - but acts are certainly forbidden!)

Which brings me back to the earlier point - how do we KNOW what is in another person's heart? Apart from that individual person of course, only God knows this information for sure. God knows who is a Muslim and who is not.

How then do we, mere mortals, KNOW that a homosexual Muslim views his/her homosexuality as acceptable in Islam? The answer is that we do not. In fact, we can not.

Regardless of what they say or do - that individual person could be experiencing the greatest conflict imaginable between their sexuality and their faith. They could be a more devout Muslim than any of their peers. They could be praying 5 times each day, every day. But they could also be feeling compelled by their body & their psyche to commit homosexual acts.

We don't KNOW if Homosexual X, Homosexual Y or Homosexual Z views their expression of sexuality as Islamically acceptable or not. Only that person and God know the true answer to that.

So leave it up to that final meeting of minds, when the creation meets the Creator, to decide the ultimate destination of that person. What that person certainly does not deserve is to be treated any differently under the law whilst they live on Earth.

Bringing this back to the OP then, my closing thought would be that this LGBT-friendly Mosque should be allowed to open its doors - it just needs to un-ban the Islamic / cultural clothing also!!

 

[Robert]

We are all Sinners.

Are you Farron in disguise? ��

 

[Robert]

[MENTION=4930]Yossarian[/MENTION] they play mental gymnastics like LGBT Christians do about the story of Lot in the Bible.

I would say it is about lack of hospitality.

Lot, supposedly the Godly man, offers his daughters to the rape gang instead of the two angels. Dunno how that can be considered Godly.

 

[Yossarian]

Generally agree with all your points above.

However, specifically,

I 100% agree that those two scenarios are different. I also 100% agree that Islam does not permit homosexual ACTS. (Platonic companionship is perhaps debatable - but acts are certainly forbidden!)
[...]

Bringing this back to the OP then, my closing thought would be that this LGBT-friendly Mosque should be allowed to open its doors - it just needs to un-ban the Islamic / cultural clothing also!!

In which case, why not simply call it a place of worship open to all? I think given the background, given the first and last paragraphs of your post, especially the first, calling it a mosque appears to be more of a political statement designed to garner as much publicity as possible knowing the controversy it would cause due to the strength of the LGBT lobby in righting the perceived wrongs against LGBT's versus the strength of feeling amongst Muslims on this topic.

 

[Jin Chacha]

Hypothetically. Muslims who drink alcohol, smoke pot, snort cocaine, or lie with women before marriage. (There are plenty of these I assure you!!) - Are they better or worse Muslims than Gay Muslims? Have they committed a greater or lesser Sin?

We are all Sinners.

I find this analogy a bit strange. By that logic there should also be mosques that specifically mention that they are open to adulterers, alcoholics and drug users. As long as these acts are done in private the matter is between the individual and God and therefore there is no need for a mosque to specifically take a stance on the issue. It is not as if regular mosques check peoples sexual orientations or criminal records before allowing them to pray. The problem with specifically mentioning people who have an LGBT lifestyle is that the matter is no longer a private affair. The context in which the term LGBT is used nowadays implies not the state of being homosexual but an openly homosexual lifestyle. The mosque is in effect acknowledging that these people are committing what is considered both a sin and a crime from a religious perspective and still endorsing it. In fact under an Islamic legal system an individual openly accepting committing acts of homosexuality would first and foremost be considered a criminal.

 

[James]

I find this analogy a bit strange. By that logic there should also be mosques that specifically mention that they are open to adulterers, alcoholics and drug users. As long as these acts are done in private the matter is between the individual and God and therefore there is no need for a mosque to specifically take a stance on the issue. It is not as if regular mosques check peoples sexual orientations or criminal records before allowing them to pray. The problem with specifically mentioning people who have an LGBT lifestyle is that the matter is no longer a private affair. The context in which the term LGBT is used nowadays implies not the state of being homosexual but an openly homosexual lifestyle. The mosque is in effect acknowledging that these people are committing what is considered both a sin and a crime from a religious perspective and still endorsing it. In fact under an Islamic legal system an individual openly accepting committing acts of homosexuality would first and foremost be considered a criminal.

Yes fair comments. I see the difference between one being homosexual and one being a member of the LGBT community.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

[MENTION=136193]Adil_94[/MENTION]

Brother , not following everything required is a different thing. We are weak as humans , also because of circumstances we may not do everything what Islam expects us to do , but doing things which are prohibited is different.

Also doing a sin and then trying to find excuse to prove that it was right its a even bigger sin.

There are matters in which differences of opinions are accepted , but not on fundamentals of Islam.

I disagree with you totally.


For 1400 years the condition to register and identify Muslims was Kalima Tayyaba & Pillars of Islam & Articles of Faith acceptance. In the process there were abundant imposter Messiah, Mehdi, Prophets etc but nothing changed and Mohammad Pbuh's definitions existed as it is.


After 1400 years Ulema e Soo thought Hey Islam is not Complete so Now we will complete and added pre requisite to the Kaima, Articles & Pillars.


Logic ? Who gave this authority to adulterate Islamic Shariah and it's Core ?


Today Jehaad Bis Saiff is Suspended by Allah except for self defense or for Army to safeguard national territories and Yet terrorists have lifted weapons killing people disobeying islam and they say we are doing Jehaad when actually its Fasaad fil arzz and terrorism. When countries have paid Armies than what is status of independent anti state Malaysiaz ?


He PBUH said " Yadah ul Harb "


This is why since suspension not even one jehaad against Non muslims has succeeded in more than hundred Years individually and all have failed except for State jehaad done through Army or freedom struggles.


Why because God has suspended it and you keep on exercising it saying it is fundamental and essense of Islam. Islam getting defamed as a result.

 

[Justcrazy]

I disagree with you totally.


For 1400 years the condition to register and identify Muslims was Kalima Tayyaba & Pillars of Islam & Articles of Faith acceptance. In the process there were abundant imposter Messiah, Mehdi, Prophets etc but nothing changed and Mohammad Pbuh's definitions existed as it is.


After 1400 years Ulema e Soo thought Hey Islam is not Complete so Now we will complete and added pre requisite to the Kaima, Articles & Pillars.


Logic ? Who gave this authority to adulterate Islamic Shariah and it's Core ?


Today Jehaad Bis Saiff is Suspended by Allah except for self defense or for Army to safeguard national territories and Yet terrorists have lifted weapons killing people disobeying islam and they say we are doing Jehaad when actually its Fasaad fil arzz and terrorism. When countries have paid Armies than what is status of independent anti state Malaysiaz ?


He PBUH said " Yadah ul Harb "


This is why since suspension not even one jehaad against Non muslims has succeeded in more than hundred Years individually and all have failed except for State jehaad done through Army or freedom struggles.


Why because God has suspended it and you keep on exercising it saying it is fundamental and essense of Islam. Islam getting defamed as a result.

So , you mean to say fundamentals of Islam can be changed ?

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

So , you mean to say fundamentals of Islam can be changed ?

I mean to say that You believe and accepted fundamentals change to soothe your heart & soul. Not me.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Men and women are not segregated inside Masjid al-Haram. Men and women are not segregated when performing tawaf around the Kaaba or when performing Sa`ee (walking) between As-Safa and Al-Marwah.

So if that is the case inside Islam's holiest mosque, Masjid Al-Haram, then surely it's wrong to segregate men and women inside any other mosque?

Men and women can't be segreated in the holy mosque as a woman requires a man to be with her while on pilgramige. This isn't the case when at the local mosque.

 

[Yossarian]

Men and women can't be segreated in the holy mosque as a woman requires a man to be with her while on pilgramige. This isn't the case when at the local mosque.

Fact is Masjid-al-Haram is a mosque, the holiest mosque in Islam. So if men and women can worship together in Islam's holiest mosque, especially during the holiest time of the Islamic calendar (Haj), then there is no reason whatsoever why they can't worship together in any other mosque and at any other time.

Furthermore, women are not obliged to wear the burqua or niqab inside the Masjid-al-Haram, (ie allow their faces to be visible to, and seen by, other men). So why the sudden stricter adherence to more stringent rules when outside Islam's holiest mosque? Surely, if anything, it should be the other way around?

Otherwise it's simply mental gymnastics by maulvis and imams creating their own rules. Not much different to what the Pope does in Christianity.

 

[Yossarian]

I find this analogy a bit strange. By that logic there should also be mosques that specifically mention that they are open to adulterers, alcoholics and drug users. As long as these acts are done in private the matter is between the individual and God and therefore there is no need for a mosque to specifically take a stance on the issue. It is not as if regular mosques check peoples sexual orientations or criminal records before allowing them to pray. The problem with specifically mentioning people who have an LGBT lifestyle is that the matter is no longer a private affair. The context in which the term LGBT is used nowadays implies not the state of being homosexual but an openly homosexual lifestyle. The mosque is in effect acknowledging that these people are committing what is considered both a sin and a crime from a religious perspective and still endorsing it. In fact under an Islamic legal system an individual openly accepting committing acts of homosexuality would first and foremost be considered a criminal.

But then the LGBT brigade wouldn't get the publicity they need in order to use to pressurise media barons/ societies opinion formers/brainwashers and law makers to get special dispensation from society at large.

Controversy generates publicity. And what can be more controversial in this day and age of rampant Islamophobia than having a 'gay mosque'!

 

[Jin Chacha]

But then the LGBT brigade wouldn't get the publicity they need in order to use to pressurise media barons/ societies opinion formers/brainwashers and law makers to get special dispensation from society at large.

Controversy generates publicity. And what can be more controversial in this day and age of rampant Islamophobia than having a 'gay mosque'!

"Niqabs and burkas will be banned from the place of worship, with its organizer saying they are a political statement and have nothing to do with religion”

It is ironic that the article mentions this. The statement applies equally well to the idea of an LGBT mosque.

 

[Markhor]

Have many crimes have been committed recently by people wearing niqabs?

Does the burka present a threat to people?

In Chad and Cameroon, there have been suicide bombings carried out by burqa-clad Boko Haram militants, and consequently they have banned it. One of the terrorists in the Red Mosque siege of 2007 in Islamabad tried to escape in a burqa.

I guess my question is - if it's not harming anybody - who cares?

Why do people have to be easily identifiable when they are walking about? Who wants to know?

Do we have a "right" to know who we are looking at? - do they have the "right" for us not to know who they are?

Yes women have the democratic right to exercise their choice in wearing the burqa. However I also have the democratic right to say the burqa is an eyesore and totally alien in a Western society where many non-Muslims not only perceive it as intimidatory but also as a symbol of Islamist extremism. It is counter to human nature and our interactions where we pay each other the basic courtesy of seeing each others' face.

How can it be fair that Muslim societies expect adherence to dress codes yet when Muslims from those same societies go take up jobs and earn livelihoods in Western countries then demand the West compromise with their values ? You can't have your cake and eat it.

There is no such thing as absolute freedom or absolute liberty. From a practical point of view - these women will need to reveal their identities anyway at banks, to apply for a driving license, passports, rail cards, student cards etc so there's an already of element of compromise ! If Muslim men have the interests of Muslim women at heart - they would forbid the wearing of something that'll make them stick out like a sore thumb as it will limit that woman's employment and social opportunities in this climate of rising Islamophobia.

This argument of "what's your problem if a woman CHOOSES to wear a burqa" is not based in reality either. What choice do you have if you are conditioned and brainwashed by your family or pressured by social expectations from an early age that the burqa is a religious requirement ? How many women in the stifling heat of Northern Nigeria, Syria, Afghanistan and northwest Pakistan are wearing those suffocating jailsuits out of choice ?

As [MENTION=141922]ExpressPacer[/MENTION] rightly says, the burqa is not an Islamic requirement. There is no specific mention of the burqa anywhere in the Quran, only an edict to dress modestly.

 

[Markhor]

In Today's world Mary Pbuh would have been ridiculed, abused, threatened & targetted by millions. She wouldn't have been allowed to do certain jobs / customer services because of covering her head and body modesly. Such has the world come to in 2017.

I side with [MENTION=1842]James[/MENTION] , as a liberal one does not have the previlage to dictate women on what they can or should wear and what they shouldn't wear.

What is religious freedom ? If as per a religion a women is supposed to cover her face and state does not permit this than the state is denying her basic fundamental human rights. Identification can be done through cards, biometric machines, scanners aswell. Women who wear veil can be checked by women security officers (physically) as well to ensure security and safety or people could pass through scanners aswell.

In a liberal world a women isn't compelled to show Robert her face or how she looks. If she wants she can. If she wants not to than she cannot be compelled.

Liberal countries can ban whatever they like but then they should stop calling themselves liberal because when they take away the right of a person to dress or eat the way they want, they cease to be liberal. And perhaps if these liberal countries werent colonizers in the past and perhaps if they would stop bombing muslim countries for geo-political strategic advantages, the muslims wouldnt have to flee their own countries and find safe places in these "liberal" countries.

Even in a liberal democracy, society sets limits on one's rights. As I said in the above reply to James, there is no such thing as absolute freedom or absolute liberty. In some places you cannot burn a flag, cannot drink and drive, cannot use a mobile phone and drive, excessively speed or roam around naked.

You argue that governments should respect people's right to choose. Well if we respected the democratic choice of people here in the UK, the burqa would be banned as that's what the majority support if you look at the polls.

Again I point to a double standard. How can you accept Muslim countries demanding women adhere to a dress code yet demand the West to compromise with their beliefs and accept the burqa ? Or would you be willing to accommodate a woman wanting to dress less modestly in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia ?

Also [MENTION=138980]TalentSpotterPk[/MENTION] - where are the references to the burqa in the Quran ? There is not one yet you keep referring to it as a right based out of a religious requirement. There is an edict to dress modestly. I am not a scholar so if one can point that reference out to me I'll be happy to stand corrected.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Also [MENTION=138980]TalentSpotterPk[/MENTION] - where are the references to the burqa in the Quran ? There is not one yet you keep referring to it as a right based out of a religious requirement. There is an edict to dress modestly. I am not a scholar so if one can point that reference out to me I'll be happy to stand corrected.

Thank You for the Question.


There is not a Single Verse of Quran which mentions Burqa, Abaya, Naqaab or Face-Veil.


Quran also does not mention what Salaat is and how it is going to be practised.

 

[Justcrazy]

I mean to say that You believe and accepted fundamentals change to soothe your heart & soul. Not me.

what fundamental changes ? Give an example.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Fact is Masjid-al-Haram is a mosque, the holiest mosque in Islam. So if men and women can worship together in Islam's holiest mosque, especially during the holiest time of the Islamic calendar (Haj), then there is no reason whatsoever why they can't worship together in any other mosque and at any other time.

Furthermore, women are not obliged to wear the burqua or niqab inside the Masjid-al-Haram, (ie allow their faces to be visible to, and seen by, other men). So why the sudden stricter adherence to more stringent rules when outside Islam's holiest mosque? Surely, if anything, it should be the other way around?

Otherwise it's simply mental gymnastics by maulvis and imams creating their own rules. Not much different to what the Pope does in Christianity.

Women can ONLY worship together if they have A MALE with them in the holy mosque. In local mosques, a male partner is not needed, therefore they have their own area of worship. How hard is this to understand?

There is no ruling women have to cover their faces anywhere they go, mosque or to the local park. This is cultural and only a small minority argue this is Islamic.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

what fundamental changes ? Give an example.

Post English or Urdu Translation of Kalima, Articles of Faith & Pillars of Islam. Than give a statement as to these are the Fundamentals of Islam because previously you have disagreed on this.

 

[Yossarian]

Women can ONLY worship together if they have A MALE with them in the holy mosque. In local mosques, a male partner is not needed, therefore they have their own area of worship. How hard is this to understand?.

In that case, going by the same logic, why can't women also worship together in a local mosque if they have a MALE with them instead of being segregated like sheep into a separate area?

"How hard is it to understand" that local mosques aren't more religious, and should not pretend to be, than Masjid-al-Haram, the holiest mosque of all?

"How hard is it to understand" that the rules, standards and practices prevailing inside Masjid-al-Haram, the location of Al-ka'bah al-Musharrafah, should be the benchmark that other local mosques should follow, and not arbitrarily set their own rules, standards and practices based upon the whims of local maulvis and imams?

 

[imrankhannsu]

I for one will not attend such a place of worship.

 

[Justcrazy]

I for one will not attend such a place of worship.

No Muslim should do that.

 

[Justcrazy]

Post English or Urdu Translation of Kalima, Articles of Faith & Pillars of Islam. Than give a statement as to these are the Fundamentals of Islam because previously you have disagreed on this.

I cannot get you , do you think fundamentals of islam can be changed or not changed.

 

[kabbirann]

At work ,we have guidelines which always have a review date.
It's crazy that religions are exempt to same.
All religions should have at the minimum 10 yearly review where they are updated to what's common sense and current and this is not only for Islam, but all who think they belong to the doodh ke dhule huey religions.