What's new

Do you want Shariah law in Pakistan

Do you want shariah rule in Pakistan?


  • Total voters
    92
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ahmedov-Influence-Roman-law-on-Islamic-law

How so-called Shariah plagiarized from Roman Law!
@smuhs1

i think some of the Yes votes were posted by Indians as a trolling attempt..beside we also have the zarvan brigade on this forum!

There are the people who voted Yes!

@A.Rafay, @AdeelFaheem, @Armstrong, @Dushmann, @fateh71, @Fracker, @funtoosh, @ishaqzaade, @Leader, @Monkey D Luffy, @Myth_buster_1, @Not Sure, @pakistanitarzan, @Peregrine, @rickblood19, @Rizwan Alam, @Slav Defence, @tarrar, @Zarvan
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Exactly, thats my stance as well. Nothing wrong with Shariah but knowing Pakistanis, the laws will be abused to fit the powerful peoples own political agendas. Also who's shariah are we talking about? Such a system of law will no doubt divide our society further along sectarian lines as disagreements are bound to emerge between firstly Sunnis and Shias and secondly between Deobandis, Barelvis and goodness knows how many other sects that exist now.

In bhutto's time, they formed this Islamic council which were containing some muftis from major Fiqah. In 3 years time, they formed 36 rules which they all got agree and confirm if Pakistani Constitution get complained by these 36 rules then it's enough to call Pakistani Constitution as Shariah Complained. Which was later thrown into garbage.

Issue is not Islam or Fiqah. But non-religious and unawareness, which is being misused by fake scholars to misguide common muslims. And those Fake Scholars are most of the political parties.

So YES We want "Shariah Law". If we don't want then we are actually going against Islam and Quran. But we don't want politicians or fake scholars using Islam as tool to misguide.

Last not the Least, Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) said: "When you hear about Dajjal, don't go to him". (Mind it He (SAWW) was telling this to Sahaba (RA)). Some one asked: "Why?". He (SAWW) replied, "When you will come back from him, you will think you are Muslim, but in reality He will put Doubt in your heart"

So Stop doubting Islam or Shariah, but the fake scholars or incompetent politicians.
 
.
In bhutto's time, they formed this Islamic council which were containing some muftis from major Fiqah. In 3 years time, they formed 36 rules which they all got agree and confirm if Pakistani Constitution get complained by these 36 rules then it's enough to call Pakistani Constitution as Shariah Complained. Which was later thrown into garbage.

Issue is not Islam or Fiqah. But non-religious and unawareness, which is being misused by fake scholars to misguide common muslims. And those Fake Scholars are most of the political parties.

So YES We want "Shariah Law". If we don't want then we are actually going against Islam and Quran. But we don't want politicians or fake scholars using Islam as tool to misguide.

Last not the Least, Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) said: "When you hear about Dajjal, don't go to him". (Mind it He (SAWW) was telling this to Sahaba (RA)). Some one asked: "Why?". He (SAWW) replied, "When you will come back from him, you will think you are Muslim, but in reality He will put Doubt in your heart"

So Stop doubting Islam or Shariah, but the fake scholars or incompetent politicians.

Why would these scholars need to make a rule and give their certification of Shariah compliance? Isn't that a man made practice in its entirety? A good law is clear, concise and easy to understand for everyone, not a pyramid of confusion and more confusion..

A good law is about we the people, not something copied from 7th Century arabia!

Constitution_of_the_United_States%2C_page_1.jpg
 
.
Ahmedov-Influence-Roman-law-on-Islamic-law

How so-called Shariah plagiarized from Roman Law!
@smuhs1

i think some of the Yes votes were posted by Indians as a trolling attempt..beside we also have the zarvan brigade on this forum!

There are the people who voted Yes!

@A.Rafay, @AdeelFaheem, @Armstrong, @Dushmann, @fateh71, @Fracker, @funtoosh, @ishaqzaade, @Leader, @Monkey D Luffy, @Myth_buster_1, @Not Sure, @pakistanitarzan, @Peregrine, @rickblood19, @Rizwan Alam, @Slav Defence, @tarrar, @Zarvan

Let me get this straight! we have to stone you if we have Sharia law right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Let me get this straight! we have to stone you if we have Sharia law right?

And we will have to execute you by firing squad for high treason if we have the civilian law, Right?
 
. . .
Why would these scholars need to make a rule and give their certification of Shariah compliance? Isn't that a man made practice in its entirety? A good law is clear, concise and easy to understand for everyone, not a pyramid of confusion and more confusion..

A good law is about we the people, not something copied from 7th Century arabia!

Constitution_of_the_United_States%2C_page_1.jpg

Then you should stop eating, do **** etc this is known to the man initial living rules done by humans. lol

You can't deny something because it's too old or something. To reject something you need solid agreements.

Looks like you don't know about Islam, still discussing something related to Islam, Pakistanis and Muslims. You really need to learn something before even saying anything about Islam. It really look dumb, when you don't know anything any still want to discuss, and even lost your own track what you were saying.

The Thing is that, Scholar didn't made any rule. You complain about sects of Islam, I said scholars got agree on the rules, so the conciseness can be made if you are interested. Now you are complain why they needed conciseness. Lol.. You should quit this discussion, it is not meant for you :)
 
. .
Not with these kind of nutjobs present in Pakistan...I.e Taliban, JUI etc...Shariah is not bad, but with the kind of extremists people we have living among us, it would legitimize the mass killing of anyone Hindu or Christian.

For Shariah you need to have sadiq and ameen people who would work on the principles of Hazrat Umar RA, Hazrat Abu Bakr RA etc, not self made Islamic scholars by Abdul Rashid Ghazi and HakeemUllah Mehsud.

very well said and this must be a pre-requisite.

the mechanism of the implementation of shariah is much more important than the debate on whether there should be shariah or not. And there is already some sort of mechanism in-place in the form of Shariah Court which is not fully utilized. Any law which violated Shariah can be challenged at this court and thus revoked. In fact most of our constitution is already in accordance with the Shariah but its more like implicit Shariah rather than of explicit form. For example implicit shariah is when nothing in the constitution must be against the Shariah while it does not necessarily have to be in accordance with it.

However, the idea of islamic welfare state is much more subtle which focuses a lot more on the social/economic aspects as well. Just using 'shariah' state kind of limits the whole idea to what individuals can do and what they cannot do. This is extremely unfair to the term 'shariah state' which encompasses much more than the individual aspects of the law. Infact governance has much more weight in the Shariah State than the aspects of civil law. but people generally tend to overlook this side because it is much more complex and requires one to be innovative in its application.

let me give some examples to make you understand its scope and how unfair we often are to its understanding:
1) in Shariah State any state land can be utilized by anyone of the citizens for agriculture without any formal permission - although you can formalize this if you want to. Similarly, if the land remains un-utilized for 2 years (or 3, i cant remember) then the state has the right to take it away and give it to someone else or keep it to itself.
2) Government is not allowed to get itself involved in any interest based borrowing or lending. However, interest free borrowing like the prize bond schemes etc are allowed. At the same time, government can impose taxes to raise money for any project/expenditure even prior to undertaking the particular project. But once the project finishes, that tax has to be withdrawn.
3) Any CEO or Board members of the company - who make business decisions - have to be shareholders at the same time. You cannot have an employee (who is not a shareholder) making decisions on behalf of the shareholders. Simultaneously, such shareholders who are responsible for taking business decisions must be given autonomy in their decision making.
4) State should assist in paying back loans of those who cannot payback. Even if the person borrowed that money on interest, state has to pay back the interest as well if it decides to get involved. Also, state does not have the right to tell the lender to simply write-off the loan.

etc etc.....

There are 100s of rulings by Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, which are to do with broader governance. Thus to me an Islamic Welfare State is a much better term than a simple 'Shariah State.' Although its the same thing but people in today's world tend to perceive it very differently.
 
. . .
There are 100s of rulings by Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, which are to do with broader governance. Thus to me an Islamic Welfare State is a much better term than a simple 'Shariah State.' Although its the same thing but people in today's world tend to perceive it very differently.

Dude, it all boils down to why is there a need to look up to 7th century as a model to emulate?? USA was not built on Shariah law neither the post WW2 Europe. No great nation as if yet has been built on Shariah law which invalidates the effectiveness of law.
 
. . .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom