Brunei adopts sharia law

[Jaanbaz]

Their country their rule. As much as i would disagree with the decision but isn't this what Hindu trolls say about anti Muslims actions taken in Burma.

 

[JUBA]

You can tell the news report is biased and Anti Sharia law by the title itself.

Good job Brunei and God bless you

 

[Kompromat]

Their country their rule. As much as i would disagree with the decision but isn't this what Hindu trolls say about anti Muslims actions taken in Burma.

Obsession on a mass scale.

You can tell the news report is biased and Anti Sharia law by the title itself.

Good job Brunei and God bless you

Sultan is just using Islam as a political tool. There is no public representative govt to back Sharia up. That will just create a dictatorial autocratic state not an Islamic state.

 

[RanvirSena]

Brunei was once Ancient Hindu land just like Pakistan. We ruled them with a iron fist and now look. Sad development.

 

[JUBA]

Sultan is just using Islam as a political tool.

Can you prove it ?

There is no public representative govt to back Sharia up.

Allah and his prophet are backing Sharia, No need for public backing to obey your God's commands.

Horrible development, crossing Brunei of my list of destinations to visit.

Oh no, I'm sure both the Brunei government and people are devastated by your horrible decision.

 

[KingMamba]

Oh no, I'm sure both the Brunei government and people are devastated by your horrible decision.

Agree with this.

 

[Charon 2]

Strong footsteps back to the stone ages. The Shariah law is definitely one of the most undemocratic and inhumane constitutions in this world and it's the biggest barrier for Muslim countries to evolve themselves progressively.

 

[oFFbEAT]

I am ready for it after we drain corrupts....who use law for their own means..

So basically you're not ready..........typical Pakistani, who wants Sharia/strict laws for others but not for himself/herself........

You think there are no corrupt people in Brunei who could intentionally misinterpret Sharia for their own benefit?......
If there are, then you're being a Hypocrite for supporting Sharia in Brunei but not in Pakistan giving excuse of corrupt people.......
But if you think, there are no corrupt people in Brunei then you are being ridiculous.....

 

[Dubious]

So basically you're not ready..........typical Pakistani, who wants Sharia/strict laws for others but not for himself/herself........

You think there are no corrupt people in Brunei who could intentionally misinterpret Sharia for their own benefit?......

I am ready...my society isnt....why try an ideal law in a chaotic situation and then like you Indians blame the law?

I already answered the later part of the question..help yourself ...by reading maybe!

 

[Kompromat]

Can you prove it ?

Allah and his prophet are backing Sharia, No need for public backing to obey your God's commands.

Brother You fail to understand my point. All societies are made up of different groups. Who is representing Nurses, teachers, engineers, scientists, transgenders, minorities etc?

Lets not see things in 'black & white'. Its not about Muslims and non Muslims, men and women only. Any nation that ignores its technocratic aspect in its development will not evolve as a society.

Sharia law is fine but only when it is implemented in a way that reflects the will of the people. If it is used as a tool for political hegemony over people it is not Sharia but Malookiat with which Muslims have experienced with and suffered from already. Islamic laws of governance are not dynastical so a King cannot represent the rule of Allah unless people entrust him (representative democracy). My concern is not 'legislation' but the 'political blueprint' if the Amir doesn't represent the people and is using it merely for political control, he's directly nullifying the jurisprudence of Islam.

If Islam was a dynastical system of governance, the closest relatives of the Prophet (PBUH) namely the Caliph Ali (R.A) would have been the first Caliph rather than Abu Bakr (R.A) who was selected by the Prophet (PBUH) after a consultation process with His followers and figureheads. Prophet's (PBUH) bid to nominate the Caliph Abu Bakr (R.A) cannot solely be seen as a Prophetic degree but it also has to be seen in its consultative back drop. If there was no consensus and the majority of people the Prophet (PBUH) had consulted been opposed to the His nomination, the rule of the Caliph wouldn't have been stable.

I hope that i clarified my Op.

Thanks

 

[the just]

Brother You fail to understand my point. All societies are made up of different groups. Who is representing Nurses, teachers, engineers, scientists, transgenders, minorities etc?

Lets not see things in 'black & white'. Its not about Muslims and non Muslims, men and women only. Any nation that ignores its technocratic aspect in its development will not evolve as a society.

Sharia law is fine but only when it is implemented in a way that reflects the will of the people. If it is used as a tool for political hegemony over people it is not Sharia but Malookiat with which Muslims have experienced with and suffered from already. Islamic laws of governance are not dynastical so a King cannot represent the rule of Allah unless people entrust him (representative democracy). My concern is not 'legislation' but the 'political blueprint' if the Amir doesn't represent the people and is using it merely for political control, he's directly nullifying the jurisprudence of Islam.

If Islam was a dynastical system of governance, the closest relatives of the Prophet (PBUH) namely the Caliph Ali (R.A) would have been the first Caliph rather than Abu Bakr (R.A) who was selected by the Prophet (PBUH) after a consultation process with His followers and figureheads. Prophet's (PBUH) bid to nominate the Caliph Abu Bakr (R.A) cannot solely be seen as a Prophetic degree but it also has to be seen in its consultative back drop. If there was no consensus and the majority of people the Prophet (PBUH) had consulted been opposed to the His nomination, the rule of the Caliph wouldn't have been stable.

I hope that i clarified my Op.

Thanks

Isn't that's what happened to Saudi?As a Muslim do you believe ,what the so called Badshah s of Arab world has done to Allah's law is OK?

 

[Pakistani shaheens]

Lol... another man down

Yes now USA will put sanctions on this country and other anti Islamic extremist will destroy this country just because it has adopted Islamic law.

 

[Dubious]

Isn't that's what happened to Saudi?As a Muslim do you believe ,what the so called Badshah s of Arab world has done to Allah's law is OK?

Sultanate is not allowed in Islam!

 

[Kompromat]

Isn't that's what happened to Saudi?As a Muslim do you believe ,what the so called Badshah s of Arab world has done to Allah's law is OK?

I do not support the Saudi political system, as in my opinion it doesn't have an inbuilt room for evolution nor a system that keeps power concentrated inside a single family can be Islamic for its transferred from one brother to another without public representation (not to be confused with democracy).

 

[DRaisinHerald]

Can you prove it ?



Allah and his prophet are backing Sharia, No need for public backing to obey your God's commands.

Oh please, as if KSAs laws represent Sharia. Just a cheap imitation at best; all put into place to allow the House of Saud to remain in power.

Brunei was once Ancient Hindu land just like Pakistan. We ruled them with a iron fist and now look. Sad development.

Huh, what's so sad about that?