You are admitting that Shariah law and Sharia banking in America are on your wish list indicating that I have not read too much into your e-mail. That is your personal choice. I have simply expressed my concerns. I still believe that both the ideas are outdated.
You will know better. But my understanding is that the concept of Shariah law started to be crystallized two centuries after the death of the prophet. The idea of Shariah banking must be a very recent idea. It is also my understanding that Shariah law was a tool for the rulers and clerics to share power. I am saying this using my knowledge on how priests and Christian rulers used to share power. I am sure the same pattern can be found among many Hindu rulers too.
As we have seen some evidences, Sharia law is discriminatory and cruel and that's why there have been and still there are movements against the implementation of this sort of law. In a modern world, laws made by man should be good enough. Clerics should not have any role in the judicial system of a country.
Shariah banking uses a marketing strategy to make money by catering exclusively to a section of highly religious people. Operation wise, basically it is not different from modern banking. It is simply old wine in a new bottle. There is no reason for a Shariah bank to be more efficient than other banks. Even there is no guarantee that management would not be corrupted.
In this connection I want to make reference to the concept of halal meat. As I see it it is also a business strategy of using religious sentiment to make money. I don't understand in what way a well raised cow slaughtered and packed in a safe environment can be a haram food, and to make it halal it has to be religiously certified by a cleric. Here the beef is only a food; the cow has not been sacrificed in the name of God. I may be missing some thing here. Probably you will be able to help me.
From: qar <qrahman@netscape.net>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Can we discuss religion freely?
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Can we discuss religion freely?
It is interesting to know that you also wish that Shariah Law and Shariah Banking could be adopted in America!
>>>>>>> To my knowledge there has been NO initiatives to introduce "Sharia" in America. With due respect, I say you are READING stuff in the post that has NOT been said. As far as I know America kept church and state separate and will remain that way in near future. I do NOT know of any effort to change that from any Muslim organizations of north America. Lastly I think member Hannan is an expert in this field and successfully designed and implemented this system without changing/hurting secular banking system. Maybe you can ask him your questions or share your concerns. Take is easy. ;-) Shalom!
-----Original Message----- From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Sun, Jun 24, 2012 8:27 pm Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Can we discuss religion freely?
It is interesting to know that you also wish that Shariah Law and Shariah Banking could be adopted in America! I thought in this forum we have only a few people including Mr. Hannan, adviser of Jamaat, who vehemently support it. Any way, I am not sure why Sharia Law and Shariah Banking would be more suitable than the current legal and banking systems! It would be O.K to have them in Talibani Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, or any other countries ruled by "Islam-pasand" political parties, but why in America? Why should there be efforts or movements---active or dorment--- to introduce systems based on theological theories whereas the American nation is determined to be secular and keep the church separate from state? I don't understand!!!
I need help.
From: qar <qrahman@netscape.net>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Can we discuss religion freely?
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Can we discuss religion freely?
Yes, there are Muslims who will love to see Sharia Law and Sharia banking in the western world,
>>>>>>>> My observation is this is not a priority of American Muslims. I am sure it would be nice IF it was there but no major Islamic organizations of north America proposed to replace American laws with Sharia. So the whole hoopla in Kansas was about "Nothing". Couple of Bangladeshis are in leadership positions (Both are freedom fighters) in Kansas Muslim community and none of them ever discussed even inside "Bangladeshi Muslim" community. Yeah, if they could have an "Bonoful sweet" shop in Kansas city, it would be nice but I don't think anybody is demanding "Kalojam" in Kansas!! The Sharia topic for Muslims are like that. American Muslims activists are trying to be "Understood" and trying to avoid misunderstanding with mainstream Americans. I would say it is the right choice considering the Eco system over there. Shalom!
-----Original Message----- From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Thu, Jun 21, 2012 9:21 pm Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Can we discuss religion freely?
There are two sides of the story. Edward Said's "Covering Islam: How the media and the experts determine how we see the rest of the world" is now on my dek. "From the Iranian hostage crisis through the Gulf War and the World Trade Center bombing, the West has been haunted by a spectre called 'Islam'. As portrayed by news media-- and by a chorus of government, academic and corporate experts-- 'Islam' is synonymous with terrorism and religious hysteria. (story of one side) At the same time, Islamic countries use 'Islam' to justify unrepresentative and often repressive rgimses" (story of the other side).
Yes, there are Muslims who will love to see Sharia Law and Sharia banking in the western world, and also there are Muslims who do not want Sharia. The story of the other side here is the Kansas story as has been referred to by Mr. Rahman.
Said was born into a Christian family. But he was secular and highly critical of religious fundamentalism and fanaticism.
From: qar <qrahman@netscape.net>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Can we discuss religion freely?
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Can we discuss religion freely?
Anyway, fanatic people (religious/ideological/political) may present themselves as innocent and harmless, on the surface, but inside they hide monsters. Once you hurt their feelings, they could be quite dangerous. We need to be cautious about these people; most of them are not normal thinking people.
>>>>>>>>> As far as I know the term " religious Fanatic" is used when people preach violence or cause harm to other people for belonging to a different religion etc.
I am pretty sure that sort of "Preaching" did not come from me.
He appears to be unhappy about the USA, where people are not yet gagged. I used to think him as a special breed of religious people, as he often preaches free-speech.
>>>>>>>> The true meaning of "Free speech" is to speak your mind. I am very familiar with the "New law" state of Kansas introduced. While no one in Kansas (With a tiny Muslim population) EVER attempted to replace current laws, they are trying to ban it!!
Because of laws of the US, they could not spell Sharia on the law but everyone campaigned for it spoke about how "Sharia" will take over Kansas. People were fed a bowl of lies and fear mongering was the reason why the law was passed. It is a SAD situation for the country like the USA. Which speaks about "Free people" and "Free speech" but surrendered too many times to racial and religious bigots.
Last year a similar smear campaign was launched about the FICTIONAL "Ground zero mosque". While NO ONE ever proposed to erect any mosque on "Ground zero", people from all over the US decided to be "Against a proposal" that was never proposed by anyone!!
The article I linked spoke clearly about a group of people who are very active in fomenting hate against American Muslims.
I am NOT upset about the US and people are NOT "Gagged". Recently bunch of Rohingas were persecuted for belonging to the wrong race and religion but most of our "Esteemed" group members mocked about it for being "Jamaati". Such is our ethics.
I count myself very blessed and fortunate that, in my REAL life I mixed with people from all back ground and very comfortable being "Me". I do not force my religion or ideologies unto others and some Muslims do lecture me for being so Liberal!!
Since I posted messages here, I do not recall pushing my religion unto anyone. ONLY explaining what it is!!
But even that pushed "Panic" buttons on many members. Because they enjoy simply trading insults without any knowledge of topics they discuss.
Lastly, you are welcome to think of me as your wishes. However it would be "CREDIBLE" if you could present some logic, reasons behind such ideas. Last time I checked, simply trading insult is not the same thing as "Free speech". Most civilized countries with the concept of free speeches have codified laws against "Hate speech". Maybe with some years and evolution, we'll learn to know the difference.
It is not about "Hurt feeling" rather standing up against hate mongering. Hope you understand the differences.
Hope I did not hurt any "Feelings" here. Just speaking my mind. :-)
Shalom!
I am pretty sure that sort of "Preaching" did not come from me.
He appears to be unhappy about the USA, where people are not yet gagged. I used to think him as a special breed of religious people, as he often preaches free-speech.
>>>>>>>> The true meaning of "Free speech" is to speak your mind. I am very familiar with the "New law" state of Kansas introduced. While no one in Kansas (With a tiny Muslim population) EVER attempted to replace current laws, they are trying to ban it!!
Because of laws of the US, they could not spell Sharia on the law but everyone campaigned for it spoke about how "Sharia" will take over Kansas. People were fed a bowl of lies and fear mongering was the reason why the law was passed. It is a SAD situation for the country like the USA. Which speaks about "Free people" and "Free speech" but surrendered too many times to racial and religious bigots.
Last year a similar smear campaign was launched about the FICTIONAL "Ground zero mosque". While NO ONE ever proposed to erect any mosque on "Ground zero", people from all over the US decided to be "Against a proposal" that was never proposed by anyone!!
The article I linked spoke clearly about a group of people who are very active in fomenting hate against American Muslims.
I am NOT upset about the US and people are NOT "Gagged". Recently bunch of Rohingas were persecuted for belonging to the wrong race and religion but most of our "Esteemed" group members mocked about it for being "Jamaati". Such is our ethics.
I count myself very blessed and fortunate that, in my REAL life I mixed with people from all back ground and very comfortable being "Me". I do not force my religion or ideologies unto others and some Muslims do lecture me for being so Liberal!!
Since I posted messages here, I do not recall pushing my religion unto anyone. ONLY explaining what it is!!
But even that pushed "Panic" buttons on many members. Because they enjoy simply trading insults without any knowledge of topics they discuss.
Lastly, you are welcome to think of me as your wishes. However it would be "CREDIBLE" if you could present some logic, reasons behind such ideas. Last time I checked, simply trading insult is not the same thing as "Free speech". Most civilized countries with the concept of free speeches have codified laws against "Hate speech". Maybe with some years and evolution, we'll learn to know the difference.
It is not about "Hurt feeling" rather standing up against hate mongering. Hope you understand the differences.
Hope I did not hurt any "Feelings" here. Just speaking my mind. :-)
Shalom!
-----Original Message----- From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Wed, Jun 20, 2012 6:21 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Can we discuss religion freely?
Now, I am so sorry that I made a boo-boo in my last hurried comment, as shown bellow: "As you know - the fasted growing religion has been the fasted growing problem on earth also." I wrote "fasted" instead of fastest. Thanks to Dr. Das and others who pointed out my mistake. In response to my above statement, Mr. Q. Rahman said the following: >>>>>>> Growth did not cause any problem. Ignorance and politics did. Don't think this comment was based on "Logic". Mostly on assumptions and perception. Specifically if you live in the US, it became "Kosher" to talk about Islam this way (Without any rational). In his response, Mr. Q. Rahman may have revealed his inner self. He is saying that - one cannot say whatever he/she likes about Islam from other places, except USA. He is right; people are already gagged by fanatics everywhere else to say anything against Islam. He appears to be unhappy about the USA, where people are not yet gagged. I used to think him as a special breed of religious people, as he often preaches free-speech. Anyway, fanatic people (religious/ideological/political) may present themselves as innocent and harmless, on the surface, but inside they hide monsters. Once you hurt their feelings, they could be quite dangerous. We need to be cautious about these people; most of them are not normal thinking people. Jiten Roy --- On Tue, 6/19/12, qar <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:
|
__._,_.___