- Moderator
- #281
I did read it.Which says essentially the same thing as the source I had quoted with a bit more information. As long as they aren't forced to go against their faith.
No different than:
Question: "Do Christians have to obey the laws of the land?"
Answer: Romans 13:1-7 states, “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.”
This passage makes it abundantly clear that we are to obey the government God places over us. God created government to establish order, punish evil, and promote justice (Genesis 9:6; 1 Corinthians 14:33; Romans 12:8). We are to obey the government in everything—paying taxes, obeying rules and laws, and showing respect. If we do not, we are ultimately showing disrespect towards God, for He is the One who placed that government over us. When the apostle Paul wrote to the Romans, he was under the government of Rome during the reign of Nero, perhaps the most evil of all the Roman emperors. Paul still recognized the Roman government’s rule over him. How can we do any less?
The next question is “Is there a time when we should intentionally disobey the laws of the land?” The answer to that question may be found in Acts 5:27-29, “Having brought the apostles, they made them appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. 'We gave you strict orders not to teach in this Name,' he said. 'Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood.' Peter and the other apostles replied: ‘We must obey God rather than men!'“ From this, it is clear that as long as the law of the land does not contradict the law of God, we are bound to obey the law of the land. As soon as the law of the land contradicts God's command, we are to disobey the law of the land and obey God's law. However, even in that instance, we are to accept the government’s authority over us. This is demonstrated by the fact that Peter and John did not protest being flogged, but instead rejoiced that they suffered for obeying God (Acts 5:40-42).
Read more: Do Christians have to obey the laws of the land
Obviously, you're desperate to sidestep your attempt at dishonesty (taqiyya) with pointless cutting and pasting.
You seem to have a problem with other people cutting and pasting material. Yet you do it yourself. How odd.
Describe for us the principle of democracy and how that conflicts with islamist sharia.
Why?
Here, I'll lend an assist as you're just too dishonest to objectively examine the matter.
Obeying the Law of the Land in the West - IslamQA
In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful,
Muslims are generally obliged to abide by the laws of the land and the country they live in, whether it is a Islamic state (al-khilafa), Muslim countries, or non-Muslim countries such as those in the west, as long as they are not ordered to practice something that is against Shariah. If they are forced by the law to commit a sin, then in such a case, it will not just be unnecessary to abide by the law, rather impermissible.
The bolded part above was added by me. Now, let's examine the principle of democracy, shall we?
The bold part is exactly what is layed out in Christianity and Judiasm - one can not be forced to obey a law that compels one to sin. That isn't rocket science so while your repetitive cut and paste example is helpful, it's not truly necessary. The point was already made and acknowledged.
Islam and the Challenge of Democracy Boston Review
For Islam, democracy poses a formidable challenge. Muslim jurists argued that law made by a sovereign monarch is illegitimate because it substitutes human authority for God’s sovereignty. But law made by sovereign citizens faces the same problem of legitimacy. In Islam, God is the only sovereign and ultimate source of legitimate law. How, then, can a democratic conception of the people’s authority be reconciled with an Islamic understanding of God’s authority?
As we know, democracy is shirk, at least according to the politico-religious ideology invented by Muhammud (swish).
What's a pious moslem to did?
Decisions, decisions.
Good questions, and those are among the questions being tossed around in Islam these days. That was, by the way an EXCELLENT article, it took a while to read and I still have to read the other articles in the set. Did you read the entire article? If you did, you'll see how he laid out a framework for democracy within Islam. Very interesting.
Speaking of democracy in Islamism:
Ruling on democracy and elections and participating in that system - islamqa.info
107166: Ruling on democracy and elections and participating in that system
What is the ruling on democracy and taking a leadership role in parliment or other levels of the democratical government? What is the ruling regarding voting for someone in democracy? How was the islamic state organized, and governed in the classical times?.
Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly:
Democracy is a man-made system, meaning rule by the people for the people. Thus it is contrary to Islam, because rule is for Allaah, the Most High, the Almighty, and it is not permissible to give legislative rights to any human being, no matter who he is.
It says in Mawsoo’at al-Adyaan wa’l-Madhaahib al-Mu’aasirah (2/1066, 1067):
Undoubtedly the democratic system is one of the modern forms of shirk, in terms of obedience and following, or legislation, as it denies the sovereignty of the Creator and His absolute right to issue laws, and ascribes that right to human beings. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“You do not worship besides Him but only names which you have named (forged) — you and your fathers — for which Allaah has sent down no authority. The command (or the judgement) is for none but Allaah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him (i.e. His Monotheism); that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not”
[Yoosuf 12:40]
“The decision is only for Allaah”
[al-An’aam 6:57]
End quote.
This has been discussed in detail in the answer to question no. 98134.
Secondly:
The one who understands the true nature of the democratic system and the ruling thereon, then he nominates himself or someone else (for election) is approving of this system, and is working with it, is in grave danger, because the democratic system is contrary to Islam and approving of it and participating in it are actions that imply apostasy and being beyond the pale of Islam.
People seem to think that democracy is nothing more than elections. Once you have an election that is it. The article you posted prior was far more detailed and thoughtful, about what a democratic form of government means and whether it can mesh with Islam - the difficulties, the jurisprudence, the historic precedences. You really should have read it.
What we find is that the politico-religious ideology invented by Muhammud (swish) is utterly hostile to representative rule.
You should have made an attempt to understand the ideology.
If that is what you got out of the article you very clearly did not read it. I assume you just cherry picked it. It's worth a read.