Iran's President abandons CNN interview after Amanpour declines head scarf demand

[Hack-Hook]

You need to take into account the geopolitical context of Islamic Iran as well as its domestic implications, brother.

The hostility of western and zionist imperialists, including of the global superpower against Iran happens to be of significantly greater magnitude than their plots against Indonesia. Had the Indonesian people been subjected to cultural soft war, social engineering propaganda and psy-ops of similar extent and intensity as Iran, then chances are that this would have had a negative impact on religiosity in Indonesia.

The Persian language service of the BBC for instance, which has been bombarding Iranians with secularist and liberal propaganda 24/7 (they even have a program called Pargar, meaning pair of compasses in Persian, which is an emblematic symbol of freemasonry, and that program is advertizing things such as feminism, homosexualism, mass abortionism, intimate relations outside marriage and so on), is more prolific even that the Russian and Chinese branches of the BBC on social media! Just to give you an idea of the kind of relentless, all-out cultural assault Iranians are facing, which is historically quite unprecedented.

You cannot suspect how dangerous western-leaning liberals within the system as well as secular ultra-nationalists outside it (many of whom tend to be islamophobic too) really are. To offer you an example, one female reformist member of Majles (Parliament) was openly advocating for the opening of bordellos in every neighborhood of every Iranian city. There are many such cases.

The revolutionary core of the system has no choice but to stand firm on Islamic legislation. If it starts ceding on one matter, the above mentioned forces and their foreign backers aren't going to stop until they eat up our Islamic Republic as a whole and destroy everthing it stands for.



No, I happily criticize any wrongdoings done by Russia vis à vis Iran in recent decades. However, their attitude has been improving since the conflict between the west (and to some extent the zionist regime) on the one hand, and Moscow on the other flared up as a result of the crisis in Ukraine. Furthermore, no matter what Russia's faults consisted in, they never came close to the rabidly hostile measures deployed against Iran by the NATO regimes and Tel Aviv. Thus, a measure of proportionality needs to be observed here.



Chile isn't westernized socially and culturally speaking? It sure is, and pretty much so.

you claim they are more westernized than Japan and S. Korea ? just want to be certain i understand you correctly to reply accordingly

 

[Dariush the Great]

The animals that attack Iranian people/ security forces are as savage as ISIS

''Iranian'' (assuming they are iranian and not some imported goon) security forces can not attack fellow Iranians. They have no right to beating women.
If they beat women, they will get attacked.

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

You talk without prove, where is the hadith about enforcing the private thing ? Dont make mislead analogy by talking about the hadith where people must obey the ruler, that is different context to begin with. And dont forget in Quran which is higher in degree than hadith, God say this one

View attachment 882362
View attachment 882339
View attachment 882340

Now Where is the prove prophet Muhammad impose state enforcement on something considered as privat like wearing hijab, praying and others when he became a ruler ??? The enforcement only happen for criminal law like killing, stealing, and doing non halal sex.

I have debated your kind in this thread and dont just repeat his argument that I have already answered.

What ? Liberal democracy ? Why do you have to put the word liberal on it ?

As I said before, go live in Iran instead of Britain as you value Iranian system better than Western system

يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ لِمَ تَقُولُونَ مَا لَا تَفْعَلُونَ ٢

O believers! Why do you say what you do not do?

كَبُرَ مَقْتًا عِندَ ٱللَّهِ أَن تَقُولُوا۟ مَا لَا تَفْعَلُونَ ٣

How despicable it is in the sight of Allah that you say what you do not do!

Surah As-Saf - 1-14 - Quran.com

Read and listen to Surah As-Saf. The Surah was revealed in Medina, ordered 61 in the Quran. The Surah title means "The Ranks" in English and consists ...

quran.com

First of all, it is in the Quran (4:59) where we have to obey Allah AND his Messenger i.e we follow both Quran in light of the Sunnah, and vice versa:

"O you who have believed, obey Allāh and
obey the Messenger and those in authority
among you. And if you disagree over
anything, refer it to Allāh and the Messenger,
if you should believe in Allāh and the Last
Day. That is the best [way] and best in result."

The verse clearly also states that we must follow those who are in authority. So for you to say that it is not relevant to a Muslim ruler just shows how youre willing to twist your own religion to fit your own desires. Khamenei is a Muslim ruler who is entrusted by Allah to enforce Shariah Law, as is the duty of all Muslim rulers. Also this is not about "private thing" this is about hijab IN PUBLIC! People can do as they please in private, but in public they MUST obey the Muslim ruler:

1) Ali reported: The Prophet, peace and
blessings be upon him, said:

There is no obedience to anyone if it is
disobedience to Allah. Verily, obedience is
only in good conduct.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 6830,

To wear hijab is mandatory so if a Muslim
leader is calling to follow that which is
mandatory, then the people MUST obey the
ruler!

2) O you who have faith, fulfill all of your
contracts.

Surat al-Ma’idah 5:1

According to this verse, a citizen has a
contract with the ruler and has rights up
them and the ruler has rights upon the
subject. So obedience is fulfilment of this
contract.

3) Hudhayfa ibn al-Yaman reported: The
Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be
upon him, said:

Rulers after me will come who do not follow
my guidance and my Sunnah. Some of their
men will have the hearts of devils in a
human body.

I said, “O Messenger of Allah, what should I
do if I live to see that time?” The Prophet
said:

You should listen and obey them even if the
ruler strikes your back and takes your
wealth, even still listen and obey.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1847,

4) Awf ibn Malik reported: The Messenger of
Allah, peace and blessings be upon him,
said:

The best of your rulers are those whom you
love and they love you, who pray for you and
you pray for them. The worst of your rulers
are those whom you hate and they hate you,
whom you curse and they curse you.

It was said, “Shall we confront them with
swords?” The Prophet said:

No, as long as they establish prayer among
you. If you find something hateful from them,
you should hate their actions but not
withdraw your hand from obedience.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1855

5) Umm Salamah reported: The Messenger of
Allah, peace and blessings be upon him,
said:

There will be rulers from whom you will see
both goodness and corruption. One who
recognizes their evil and hates it will
maintain his innocence, but one who is
pleased with it and follows them will be
sinful.

It was said, “Shall we not fight them?” The
Prophet said:

No, as long as they pray.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1854

6) Tamim al-Dari reported: The Messenger of
Allah, peace and blessings be upon him,
said:

Verily, the religion is sincerity.

We said, “To whom?” The Prophet said:

To Allah, His Book, His Messenger, the
leaders of the Muslims, and their common
people.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 55

7) Ma’qil ibn Yasar reported: The Messenger of
Allah, peace and blessings be upon him,
said:

No servant is given authority by Allah and he
does not fulfill its duties sincerely but that
he will never smell the fragrance of Paradise.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhari 6732

According to this hadeeth a Muslim in
authority mjst fulfil their duties and if they
dont they wont be going to paradise. So for a
Muslim ruler to allow sins and trangression
to occur in their society in the name of
"freedom" and liberalism would constitute a
breach of this hadeeth. They would inherit
the sins of their subject as well.

8) Ziyad ibn Kusayb reported: I was with Abu
Bakrah under the pulpit of Abdullah ibn
Amr, may Allah be pleased with him, while
he was delivering a sermon wearing a fine
garment. Abu Bilal said: Look at our leader
wearing the clothes of wickedness! Abu
Bakrah said: Be
quite! I heard the Prophet, peace and
blessings be upon him, say:

Whoever belittles the authority of Allah on
earth, Allah will belittle him.

Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 2224, Grade:
Sahih

So as you can see there are a plethora of verses and hadeeth whereby a Muslim ruler must be obeyed, especially in matters of enforcing shariah. Also this idea of Quran takes precedence over Sunnah, while in essence is true, doesnt negate the fact that for a hadeeth to be Sahih there has to be no contradiction with Quran.

Regarding 3:159, this is a description of the Prophet Muhammad who was of a different character to other human beings. 3:159 also says that once the Prophet has decided a matter that one must Trust Allah, meaning obedience of the ruler's final decision. So is this proof for me or for you?

Ash-shura 38 is about mutual consultantion between the companions close to Muhammad or to the leader, not of every single person in the Ummah lol. A vote every 4 years is not mutual consultation and I challenge you to bring one example from Sunnah where a one man one vote system was used! So I would kindly ask you to also not misapply verses out of their proper meanings. This is an example of exegetical corruption on your part.

The mufasiroon mention that 2:256 is about forcing people to become Muslim, which is not the same as a Muslim ruler asking people to wear hijab in public. This is all from your own back pocket and it is clear by the fact you have not sited any scholar, hadeeth or verse to counter this.

Do you know I dont follow the Sunnah? Does living in the UK automatically mean I'm not a Muslim or follow Quran and Sunnah? Maybe I'm doing Dawah in UK which is obligatory? Maybe UK is my country of birth which would mean I have every right to remain here providing I can practice my religion. There are also white Anglo Saxons who dont believe in liberal democracy, seems its okay for the goose but not for the gander. Your pro-western kind do have a habit of double standards though.

Of course I have to put the liberal tag on it, because thats where this drive to change Islam to conform to a liberal way of thinking is spearheaded from. But our religion has been perfected by Allah (Democracy is also haraam and not practiced by any of the Muslim leaders! May Allah rectify the affairs of Muslim countries and make hijra easy on us all, but that doesnt negate a single word or evidence I have given, so nice red herring!

How many killing in Iran happen because of fuel increase and demonstration ?

But whoever kills a believer intentionally – his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally, and Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment.

(Quran 4:93)

View attachment 882341

If people are rioting in the street because they dont want to obey the Muslim ruler, then it is the duty of the Muslim ruler to protect the law abiding people. If that means people die then that does not automatically mean it is unlawful since the intention of the rioters is to assault Muslims, people of authority and vandalise with force. So again, another misapplied verse!

are you sure that nobody prevent a guy in Iran to change his religion ?

Nobody in authority. And if anyone other than authority is forcing people to give shahada then that is wrong, but I'll wait for your evidence first.

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

Narrated by Abu Hurairah: The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said,

“Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So you should not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded; and gain strength by offering the Salat (prayers) in the mornings, afternoons, and during the last hours of the night.”
(Shahih Bukhari 39, Book 2, Hadith 32)

Surah As-Saf - 1-14 - Quran.com

Read and listen to Surah As-Saf. The Surah was revealed in Medina, ordered 61 in the Quran. The Surah title means "The Ranks" in English and consists ...

quran.com

[/B]

Sorry, but wearing hijab is not "being extreme" in religion but it is mandatory and part of the Shariah. Please stop misquoting and misrepresenting what our Prophet is saying. This is about ghulat in the religion, i.e. someone over burdening themselves with too much voluntary acts that they wont be able to consistently do:

Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Take up good deeds only as much as you are able, for the best deeds are those done regularly even if they are few.”

Source: Sunan Ibn Mājah 4240

Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Al-Albani

 

[SalarHaqq]

you claim they are more westernized than Japan and S. Korea ? just want to be certain i understand you correctly to reply accordingly

Chile isn't less westernized than the other two. It's actually pretty much a western country, culturally speaking. Founded by western colonialists who as good as exterminated the natives on the subcontinent.

 

[Indos]

Sorry, but wearing hijab is not "being extreme" in religion but it is mandatory and part of the Shariah. Please stop misquoting and misrepresenting what our Prophet is saying. This is about ghulat in the religion, i.e. someone over burdening themselves with too much voluntary acts that they wont be able to consistently do:

Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Take up good deeds only as much as you are able, for the best deeds are those done regularly even if they are few.”

Source: Sunan Ibn Mājah 4240

Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Al-Albani

Hadith about people and the ruler is out of context. In general of course people should obey the ruler, that is common knowledge to make the society can grow and prophet Muhammad does understand about that.

We are discussing about your ruler system whether it is based on Islam or not

Who said wearing Hijab is extreme ? You makes lies over my statement ?

The extreme one is the enforcement of hijab by the state

Go read what has been written by God here and do you weigh khameini word is higher than God word ?

Quran

(9:31) They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded [in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) to worship none but One Ilah (God – Allah) La ilaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He). Praise and glory be to Him, (far above is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him).”

 

[aziqbal]

well done Iran

meanwhile US is encouraging women rights by telling their men to become women

and women are becoming men

and even the remaining men are pro-feminists

 

[Hack-Hook]

First of all, it is in the Quran (4:59) where we have to obey Allah AND his Messenger i.e we follow both Quran in light of the Sunnah, and vice versa:

"O you who have believed, obey Allāh and
obey the Messenger and those in authority
among you. And if you disagree over
anything, refer it to Allāh and the Messenger,
if you should believe in Allāh and the Last
Day. That is the best [way] and best in result."

The verse clearly also states that we must follow those who are in authority. So for you to say that it is not relevant to a Muslim ruler just shows how youre willing to twist your own religion to fit your own desires. Khamenei is a Muslim ruler who is entrusted by Allah to enforce Shariah Law, as is the duty of all Muslim rulers. Also this is not about "private thing" this is about hijab IN PUBLIC! People can do as they please in private, but in public they MUST obey the Muslim ruler:

1) Ali reported: The Prophet, peace and
blessings be upon him, said:

There is no obedience to anyone if it is
disobedience to Allah. Verily, obedience is
only in good conduct.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 6830,

To wear hijab is mandatory so if a Muslim
leader is calling to follow that which is
mandatory, then the people MUST obey the
ruler!

2) O you who have faith, fulfill all of your
contracts.

Surat al-Ma’idah 5:1

According to this verse, a citizen has a
contract with the ruler and has rights up
them and the ruler has rights upon the
subject. So obedience is fulfilment of this
contract.

3) Hudhayfa ibn al-Yaman reported: The
Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be
upon him, said:

Rulers after me will come who do not follow
my guidance and my Sunnah. Some of their
men will have the hearts of devils in a
human body.

I said, “O Messenger of Allah, what should I
do if I live to see that time?” The Prophet
said:

You should listen and obey them even if the
ruler strikes your back and takes your
wealth, even still listen and obey.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1847,

4) Awf ibn Malik reported: The Messenger of
Allah, peace and blessings be upon him,
said:

The best of your rulers are those whom you
love and they love you, who pray for you and
you pray for them. The worst of your rulers
are those whom you hate and they hate you,
whom you curse and they curse you.

It was said, “Shall we confront them with
swords?” The Prophet said:

No, as long as they establish prayer among
you. If you find something hateful from them,
you should hate their actions but not
withdraw your hand from obedience.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1855

5) Umm Salamah reported: The Messenger of
Allah, peace and blessings be upon him,
said:

There will be rulers from whom you will see
both goodness and corruption. One who
recognizes their evil and hates it will
maintain his innocence, but one who is
pleased with it and follows them will be
sinful.

It was said, “Shall we not fight them?” The
Prophet said:

No, as long as they pray.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1854

6) Tamim al-Dari reported: The Messenger of
Allah, peace and blessings be upon him,
said:

Verily, the religion is sincerity.

We said, “To whom?” The Prophet said:

To Allah, His Book, His Messenger, the
leaders of the Muslims, and their common
people.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 55

7) Ma’qil ibn Yasar reported: The Messenger of
Allah, peace and blessings be upon him,
said:

No servant is given authority by Allah and he
does not fulfill its duties sincerely but that
he will never smell the fragrance of Paradise.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhari 6732

According to this hadeeth a Muslim in
authority mjst fulfil their duties and if they
dont they wont be going to paradise. So for a
Muslim ruler to allow sins and trangression
to occur in their society in the name of
"freedom" and liberalism would constitute a
breach of this hadeeth. They would inherit
the sins of their subject as well.

8) Ziyad ibn Kusayb reported: I was with Abu
Bakrah under the pulpit of Abdullah ibn
Amr, may Allah be pleased with him, while
he was delivering a sermon wearing a fine
garment. Abu Bilal said: Look at our leader
wearing the clothes of wickedness! Abu
Bakrah said: Be
quite! I heard the Prophet, peace and
blessings be upon him, say:

Whoever belittles the authority of Allah on
earth, Allah will belittle him.

Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 2224, Grade:
Sahih

So as you can see there are a plethora of verses and hadeeth whereby a Muslim ruler must be obeyed, especially in matters of enforcing shariah. Also this idea of Quran takes precedence over Sunnah, while in essence is true, doesnt negate the fact that for a hadeeth to be Sahih there has to be no contradiction with Quran.

Regarding 3:159, this is a description of the Prophet Muhammad who was of a different character to other human beings. 3:159 also says that once the Prophet has decided a matter that one must Trust Allah, meaning obedience of the ruler's final decision. So is this proof for me or for you?

Ash-shura 38 is about mutual consultantion between the companions close to Muhammad or to the leader, not of every single person in the Ummah lol. A vote every 4 years is not mutual consultation and I challenge you to bring one example from Sunnah where a one man one vote system was used! So I would kindly ask you to also not misapply verses out of their proper meanings. This is an example of exegetical corruption on your part.

The mufasiroon mention that 2:256 is about forcing people to become Muslim, which is not the same as a Muslim ruler asking people to wear hijab in public. This is all from your own back pocket and it is clear by the fact you have not sited any scholar, hadeeth or verse to counter this.

Do you know I dont follow the Sunnah? Does living in the UK automatically mean I'm not a Muslim or follow Quran and Sunnah? Maybe I'm doing Dawah in UK which is obligatory? Maybe UK is my country of birth which would mean I have every right to remain here providing I can practice my religion. There are also white Anglo Saxons who dont believe in liberal democracy, seems its okay for the goose but not for the gander. Your pro-western kind do have a habit of double standards though.

Of course I have to put the liberal tag on it, because thats where this drive to change Islam to conform to a liberal way of thinking is spearheaded from. But our religion has been perfected by Allah (Democracy is also haraam and not practiced by any of the Muslim leaders! May Allah rectify the affairs of Muslim countries and make hijra easy on us all, but that doesnt negate a single word or evidence I have given, so nice red herring!



If people are rioting in the street because they dont want to obey the Muslim ruler, then it is the duty of the Muslim ruler to protect the law abiding people. If that means people die then that does not automatically mean it is unlawful since the intention of the rioters is to assault Muslims, people of authority and vandalise with force. So again, another misapplied verse!



Nobody in authority. And if anyone other than authority is forcing people to give shahada then that is wrong, but I'll wait for your evidence first.

shahada are spoken in the ear of Iranian child at the birth time by their parent .
can you explain some Christin converts harassed in Iran and it become so that widespread that gave food to some foreign medias for several weeks

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

Hadith about people and the ruler is out of context. In general of course people should obey the ruler, that is common knowledge to make the society can grow and prophet Muhammad does understand about that.

We are discussing about your ruler system whether it is based on Islam or not

Who said wearing Hijab is extreme ? You makes lies over my statement ?

The extreme one is the enforcement of hijab by the state

Go read what has been written by God here and do you weigh khameini word is higher than God word ?

View attachment 882495


Quran

(9:31) They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded [in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) to worship none but One Ilah (God – Allah) La ilaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He). Praise and glory be to Him, (far above is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him).”

No, they clearly are in context because this issue is about a Muslim ruler, and the hadeeth are also about Muslim rulers. You could argue that Iranian leaders are tyrants, but the hadeeth are clear that one must still follow them! So the general ruling must be applied here and I see no reason for why it shouldn't. Have the Iranian leaders abandoned the prayer as indicated in the hadeeth? No! So one can not lift a finger on them let alone riot!

You can make takfir on Iranian leaders if you wish, however the hadeeth can also he applied to any leader which allows Muslims to practice their religion in their land. The rule of a non-Muslim leader must also be obeyed by the Muslim, unless it goes against Islamic teaching which in this case it doesn't, since Hijab is mandatory and part of shariah. In which case they must make hijra, not riot and vandalise. So no matter where you turn, you have been checkmated here.

Show me a hadeeth or verse which says following hijaab is extremist. A ruler has the right to enforce anything that is mandatory in Islam, it is their duty.

Please dont misquote verses of the Quran. The Jews and Christians changed the laws of Allah and made assumptions about things without any knowledge and based on their own desires. If anything 9:31 goes against you, which is what you're doing right now.

45:23

"Have you seen he who has taken as his god his [own] desire, and Allāh has sent him astray due to knowledge1 and has set a seal upon his hearing and his heart and put over his vision a veil? So who will guide him after Allāh? Then will you not be reminded?"

25:43

"Have you seen the one who takes as his god his own desire? Then would you be responsible for him?"

Im not saying everything that Velayat e Faghee says is correct. However in this instance we have to apply al wala wal bara (love and hate for the sake of Allah) in that following that which is mandatory in Islam and obeying the leader is something that does not negate any other ruling which goes against Quran and Sunnah. We must also enjoin the good (hijab in public places) and forbid the evil (any other rulings which go against Quran and Sunnah). Its about being just.

Here are some Quranic quotes about enjoining the good and forbidding the evil:

"Let there arise from you a nation inviting to good, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong, and those will be the successful."

Surat Ali Imran 3:104

"You are the best nation produced for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah."

Surat Ali Imran 3:110

The believing men and believing women are allies of one another. They enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and establish prayer and give charity and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah will have mercy upon them. Verily, Allah is Almighty and Wise.

Surat at-Tawba 9:71



Ubadah ibn As-Samit reported:

We pledged allegiance to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, pledging to listen and obey in hardship and in ease, in pleasure and displeasure even if someone is wrongly favored over us, and pledging not to dispute the rule of those in authority and that we should speak the truth wherever we are and not to fear those who blame us regarding Allah.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1709, Grade: Sahih

Abu Sa’eed Al-Khudri reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:

Beware of sitting in the roads.

They said, “O Messenger of Allah, we have nowhere else to sit and talk.” So the Prophet said:

If you insist, then give the road its right.

They said, “What is its right, O Messenger of Allah?” The Prophet said:

Lower the gaze, avoid harming others, return greetings of peace, enjoining the good, and forbidding the evil.

Source: Sunan Abī Dāwūd 4815, Grade: Sahih

The above two hadeeths shows how a Muslim should behave, not rioting, vandalsing beating up believing righteous women and burning Quran!

shahada are spoken in the ear of Iranian child at the birth time by their parent .
can you explain some Christin converts harassed in Iran and it become so that widespread that gave food to some foreign medias for several weeks

First of all it is the Adhaan that is whispered in the right ear, which includes the Shahada. Its merely a duah. Also whispering something in someone's ear doesnt constitue forcing someone to convert nor is it an accepted form of Shahada. Shahada is declared by the mouth! Muslim says this continuously throughout their lives and are seen in their actions.

If Christians are converting Muslims in Muslim lands to Christianity then the Muslim ruler can punish them. These foods were essentially bribes while they preached their pagan trinitarian beliefs in Muslim lands. You clearly have no gheyra for Islam! This is also a different matter and not forcing people to convert.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Chile isn't less westernized than the other two. It's actually pretty much a western country, culturally speaking. Founded by western colonialists who as good as exterminated the natives on the subcontinent.

are you kidding me they are westernized because European funded them , they were funded by European of 16 & 17 century , they were far from westernized as they were funded by religious southern European not the less religion Anglo-Saxon and northern European, you see santiago and say all the country is like that.
but let humor you why the rate in korea and japan which are westernized even to the remotest places are 2% even less than Muslim turkey but in chile and France its north of 60 closer to 70. how you explain that only with westernization ?

 

[Hack-Hook]

First of all it is the Adhaan that is whispered in the right ear, which includes the Shahada. Its merely a duah.

it consist of shahadah . also we also read several quranic sura after that . so the Shahada is technically will be spoken in the ear of newborn

If Christians are converting Muslims in Muslim lands to Christianity then the Muslim ruler can punish them. These foods were essentially bribes while they preached their pagan trinitarian beliefs in Muslim lands. You clearly have no gheyra for Islam! This is also a different matter and not forcing people to convert.

so you admit they will be harassed because it take another Christin to baptize the convert.
so you once says nobody prevent them to convert , but you say no Christian allowed to convert a Muslim . can you explain how that Muslim if wants to convert can do that ? go abroad get converted there and then come back Iran ?


and your definition of gheyrat is different from mine . to me its not beating and arresting the converts . its to introduce the religion how that people see its beauty and don't want to leave it what you suggest is equal to say we have a religion that people don't want and we have to force it on them.
sorry but I'll never accept your view of our religion

 

[SalarHaqq]

are you kidding me they are westernized because European funded them , they were funded by European of 16 & 17 century , they were far from westernized as they were funded by religious southern European not the less religion Anglo-Saxon and northern European, you see santiago and say all the country is like that.
but let humor you why the rate in korea and japan which are westernized even to the remotest places are 2% even less than Muslim turkey but in chile and France its north of 60 closer to 70. how you explain that only with westernization ?

Southern Europe has not traditionally been so much less religious than northern Europe. To stay with the example of colonized America, ever heard of the Puritans and Quakers who founded the USA? Even today the Protestant-majority USA is ruled by a regime not quite as secular as the French one, France being a Latin and Catholic-majority country (although nowadays atheism and agnosticism abound).

And no, Korea and Japan aren't "more westernized" than Chile. Chilean culture is European, it's essentially a white country populated by European settlers with minimal input from Native Americans who had been subjected to genocide.

Korea and Japan however are in fact very well known for their cultural hybridation, since in many regards they've tried to maintain some traits of their original culture - in certain areas it has kind of worked more or less to this day, in others not. There's even been a deliberate state policy to this effect, which in Japan dates back to the Meiji era with its famous slogan wakon yōsai ("Western techniques, Japanese spirit").

 

[Hack-Hook]

Sorry, what? Southern Europe has not traditionally been "less" religious than northern Europe. To stay with with the example of colonized America, ever heard of the Puritans and Quakers who founded the USA? Even today the Protestant-majority USA regime is not quite as secularist as the French one, France being a Latin and Catholic-majority country (although nowadays atheism and agnosticism abound).

And no, Korea and Japan aren't "more westernized" than Chile at all. Chile's culture is European, it's essentially a white country populated by European settlers with minimal input from Native Americans who had been subjected to genocide.

Korea and Japan however are in fact very well known for their cultural hybridation, since in many regards they've tried to maintain some traits of their original culture. There's even been a deliberate state policy to this effect, which in Japan dates back to the Meiji era with its famous slogan wakon yōsai ("Western techniques, Japanese spirit").

so now japan and south Korea not westernized , recall it and use it against you in time
specially that part that you said all the European countries have the same culture
fun part in USA and Canada its 30-40 guess they are less westernized than rest of Europe and chile

 

[SalarHaqq]

so now japan and south korea not westernized , recall it and use it against you in time
specially that part that you said all the European countries have the same culture

Here's what I stated in this regard:

"Korea and Japan aren't "more westernized" than Chile ..." Doesn't mean that they've been spared from any and all westernization.

"they've tried to maintain some traits of their original culture - in certain areas it has kind of worked more or less to this day, in others not." Again doesn't mean they've been spared from any and all westernization.

Nor did I claim all European countries have the exact same culture. I addressed the contention that southern Europe has been historically more religious than northern Europe. As well as the issue of westernization - last time I checked all of western and central Europe is western, regardless of the differences between individual European nations. They do share things in common.

 

[Hack-Hook]

"they've tried to maintain some traits of their original culture - in certain areas it has kind of worked more or less to this day, in others not." Again doesn't mean they haven't been westernized at all.

so it has to do with certain trends than being westernized or not.

last time I checked all of Europe is western, regardless of the differences between individual European nations. They do share things in common.

every human have something in common