ISLAMOPHOBIA

islamophobia-and-freedom-of-speech-europe

Man does not have the authority to judge another in matters of faith as he cannot see into the hearts of others therefore Allah enjoins that He be the Judge of such affairs. There are dozens of verses from the Quran which attest to this fact and here are some:[002:188] Do not usurp each other’s possessions unfairly _ by foul means and fraud. Do not, knowingly and sinfully, give (bribes, or false) statements to a judge (or others in authority, intending) to usurp the (rights and) possessions of others.

[005:050] Do they, then, seek the rules (and rites) of the (pagan) ignorance (of earlier days)? For a nation with faith, who could be a better Judge (and Guide), if not Allah?

[026:113] “My Lord alone has the prerogative to judge them, if only you could realize.”

[055:031] For you, the two sin laden groups, (one of men, the other of jinn), We would soon devote Ourselves (exclusively to judge you)!

[060:003] Your relatives and your children will not benefit you on the Day of Judgment; He (God) will judge (all matters) between you. Allah watches everything you do!

[002:113] The Jews say: “The Christians have naught (to stand) upon; and the Christians say: “The Jews have naught (To stand) upon.” Yet they (Profess to) study the (same) Book. Like unto their word is what those say who know not; but God will judge between them in their quarrel on the Day of Judgment.
.
[003:055] ……………(partial verse)…….. Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.

[004:141] …………..(partial verse)……….”Did we not gain an advantage over you, and did we not guard you from the believers?” but God will judge between you on the Day of Judgment. And never will God grant to the unbelievers a way (to triumphs) over the believers.

[006:114] Say: “Shall I seek for judge other than God?……..(partial verse)……….

[010:093] ……….(partial verse)……..Verily God will judge between them as to the schisms amongst them, on the Day of Judgment.

[016:124] The Sabbath was only made (strict) for those who disagreed (as to its observance); But God will judge between them on the Day of Judgment, as to their differences.

[021:112] Say: “O my Lord! judge Thou in truth!” “Our Lord Most Gracious is the One Whose assistance should be sought against the blasphemies ye utter!”
[022:017] Those who believe (in the Quran), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians, Christians, Magians, and Polytheists,- God will judge between them on the Day of Judgment: for God is witness of all things.

[022:056] On that Day of Dominion will be that of God: He will judge between them: so those who believe and work righteous deeds will be in Gardens of Delight.

[022:069] “God will judge between you on the Day of Judgment concerning the matters in which ye differ.”

Even if we judge others we need to do so based on Guidance from Allah and only in those cases where we have permission to judge someone. However we can never judge another person’s faith because that is an impossibility for a human to do.

Also, we should fear hypocrisy and practice what we preach.

Indeed Allah is the best of Judges

header9709098

Source:

The English language needs a moratorium on the word Islamophobia, a term often used to describe bigotry against Muslims. Unfortunately, it is also used reflexively to denounce critics of Islam, who contribute to a valuable and ongoing debate concerning the relationship between the West and the worldwide Islamic community. This subject is important because several Western countries, such as Denmark, Great Britain, and the Netherlands, are being forced to reconsider their approaches to immigration and culture in light of deep clashes between the Muslim immigrants and the native population. These tensions have captured much attention in recent weeks with the series of violent protests that have spread to over twenty countries, emanating from the controversial Innocence of Muslims film.

In the opinion of some scholars, journalists, and activists, the nature of European and North American reaction to Islam is an example of prejudice, falling suitably under the umbrella of what they call Islamophobia. In our estimation, however, the use of this term, and its cognates Islamophobic and Islamophobe, is not only misapplied, as in the case of the Dutch dissidents Geert Wilders and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, but altogether inappropriate and deserving of repudiation.

It is worth acknowledging that some degree of hostility toward Muslims does exist in Western countries. This was perhaps clearest in the Balkan Wars of the 1990s, where the West seemed content to allow the mass killing of Muslims as ethnoreligious factions carved apart Bosnia and Herzegovina. The eventual intervention in 1995, aimed at protecting Muslim civilians from aggression by Catholic Croats and Orthodox Serbs, earned the West little respect in the Muslim world. The appalling abuse of Iraqi prisoners at the Abu Ghraib detention facility during the Second Gulf War, widely condemned as acts of torture, could also be cited as an example of anti-Muslim hostility. But to accuse all opponents of Islam of harboring a deep-seated hatred, rooted in irrational fear, is a serious mistake, exemplified by the sweeping and liberal usage of Islamophobia. In fact, the only sentiment in this debate that could actually be described as phobic is the unconditional contempt among many Muslims for people who disagree with them. But one doubts that a formulation like “Infidelophobia” will gain traction anytime soon.

The strategic construction of “Islamophobia,” which is rooted in the word Islam and not Muslim, serves more than a mere lexical purpose.

It is designed foremost to associate voluntary religious belief with involuntary skin color, appealing to widespread and legitimate revulsion to racial prejudice, and further to equate bigotry against Muslims with criticism of Islam, blurring any distinction between these two very different actions. While the prejudging of all Muslim citizens as suspicious and untrustworthy is indeed comparable with other forms of racial and religious bigotry, the study and refutation of Islam’s claims to moral and philosophical authority is a just and necessary enterprise, fully compatible with a pluralistic society that values religious liberty. This is because freedom of belief, if it is to have universal and consistent meaning, must include the freedom to criticize beliefs and believers — a concept that is foreign to the social and political world view of Islam.

Beyond its intrusion upon intellectual inquiry, blind tolerance of anti-Western attitudes in the form of fundamentalist Islam has direct repercussions for the health and security of the West. For instance, the killing, assaulting, and intimidating of gay men in Amsterdam by Muslims enraged by homosexuality, the fatwa against Salman Rushdie for the offense of writing The Satanic Verses, the Danish cartoon affair, and the recent attacks upon American embassies in Libya and Egypt, are all examples of violence related to these clashes. It is doubtless that our unwillingness to pursue a battle of ideas with the Islamic religion for the sake of political correctness will lead to more physical confrontations in the future. And since the word Islamophobia implies disapproval of such critical engagement, it ought to be entirely banished from discourse.

In addition to “Islamophobia,” the earnest employment of the term blasphemy, and its advancement by Islam’s apologists as a tenable concept, is a clear enemy of open and secular society. Free expression, which constitutes the bedrock of the West’s process of deliberating controversial questions of value, cannot be balanced or reconciled with the idea of sacred and unchallengeable beliefs, since it contradicts the first principle of free speech: that even the most profane dissent must be protected. Most importantly, the creeping influence of terms like blasphemy and Islamophobia is undignifying to both Muslims and non-Muslims for two reasons. First, it colludes with Islam’s attempt to infantalize its adherents — convincing them that critical thought, especially about the matters of faith, is immoral. Second, it presumes that Muslims, particularly in the West, are not mature enough to handle criticism of their chosen beliefs, and that their subcultures are reducible to archaic texts and practices. This is the real injustice, involving the basest abandoning of scruple and succumbing to cowardice, and can only be rectified by ditching this thoroughly nonsensical expression.

– Jackson Doughart studies at Queen’s University and is a policy writer for the Canadian Secular Alliance.
– Faisal Saeed al-Mutar is a student in Baghdad, Iraq, who writes about religion and secularism.

header264756757

Advertisements

About Akhi Soufyan

If you see goodness from me, then that goodness is from The Creator. You should be thankful to The Creator for all of that. Cause I'm not the architect of that. I'm only the...the recipient. If you see weakness or shortcoming in me it's from my own weakness or shortcoming. And I ask The Creator and the people to forgive me for that. _______________________________ Website eigenaar voor een betere wereld en doel, niet gericht op verdiensten van geld maar goede daden. In de naam van Allah, de Barmhartige. Als je goedheid van mij ziet, dan is dat de goedheid van de Schepper (God). Wees De Schepper dankbaar voor dat. Want ik ben daar niet de architect van, ik ben alleen de ontvanger.

Posted on December 2, 2013, in ARTICLES and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: