• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Official Islamic Thread

ZiZ

ZiZ

Member
Duck Amuck said:
Something about your post rubs me the wrong way. It's probably because you keep saying adultery, as if having sex before marriage counts as such when it doesn't. I also really hate this part of your post, it made me shudder.
Click to expand...

Sorry, English isn't my first language. when I say adultery I actually mean sex out of marriage.

Duck Amuck said:
*shudder* This statement treats women as if they are property and not normal human beings with sexual and emotion desires/needs as well.
Click to expand...

So if a guy isn't cool with his daughter being a slut or a hooker or doesn't support that decision, that means that he treats women as his property?
that statement doesn't just apply to women, it also applies to men. I only mentioned those women because I doubt that he would go around having sex with other guys.

also, when did I imply that women don't have sexual desires or needs? My whole post is about why "guys" shouldn't give in to their sexual desires and take advantage of "girls". if the post was directed towards a female. I would've simply switched the male and female words in the post (son instead of daughter and so on).

Duck Amuck said:
I don't even see why that'd even matter if you two really cared for each other. This statements comes off entirely too selfish.
Click to expand...

how is it selfish? I only expect from her what I expect from myself? besides, I said "I prefer". The same way I'd prefer a girl with a sense of humor or a hot body. I never said that a non-virgin was out of the question. If a guy can prefer a girl without sharp knees, why can't I prefer that she's a virgin like me?

Duck Amuck said:
Adultery's pretty bad, but where did he say he was committing adultery?
Click to expand...

Sorry,I meant sex out of marriage.

Duck Amuck said:
What is "worse" than committing adultery? Having an emotional relationship with someone without the need of a document or tradition to proclaim,"Yes, you may now make love."?
Click to expand...

sex out of marriage is a sin as stated by the Quran. However whether you wish to follow that is entirely up to you.

And by worse I meant the things he was referring to when he said this:
Wrath2X said:
I cant tell you the disgusting shit the other guys do.
Click to expand...

I really can't understand why you're so mad at me brother. Perhaps I couldn't express what I meant correctly.

it's as if I said something absurd like "you're going to hell you evil sinner" or "you may not sleep with other people's women!!! because they are their property not yours". it's quite the opposite really. I mean he seems like a nice guy and I totally understand what that guy is going through, but he asked why is sex out of marriage forbidden and I gave my personal thoughts about the subject. And I have no idea how you twisted that into me degrading women. I would never think of a women as anything else but my equal.
 
ZiZ

ZiZ

Member
Ela Hadrun said:
YESSSS

This is why I love this thread

Thanks Duck!

Shit: How do I make it be a lady? This is always the trouble! ack.
Click to expand...

don't women pray the same way as men?

I think the only difference is what they must cover and how they pray in a group.
 
E

Ela Hadrun

Probably plays more games than you
ZiZ said:
don't women pray the same way as men?

I think the only difference is what they must cover and how they pray in a group.
Click to expand...

Nope. I know for sure that we're supposed to hold our hands over our hearts during a part where the men have their arms folded (or maybe at their sides)?

A badly translated book someone gave me said something about sitting differently, but I couldn't really parse it.

I'm just worried someday I'll do it wrong and offend someone. Bleuauagh. Probably should just get over that.
 
ZiZ

ZiZ

Member
Ela Hadrun said:
Nope. I know for sure that we're supposed to hold our hands over our hearts during a part where the men have their arms folded (or maybe at their sides)?

A badly translated book someone gave me said something about sitting differently, but I couldn't really parse it.

I'm just worried someday I'll do it wrong and offend someone. Bleuauagh. Probably should just get over that.
Click to expand...

where the hands are supposed to be while standing differs from one madhhab (school of thought) to another and has nothing to do with gender.

Shafi'is say that the hands should be placed anywhere between the chest and the navel (this is probably the most common. and why some people prefer to place their hands over their heart area) with the right hand over the left. hanbalis and hanafis believe the hands should be placed lower. Whereas Malikis just let their hands hang at their sides.

Duck. I agree with you that the whole "how do I find a wife/husband" problem is messed up. but there are other solutions that don't involve premarital sex.
 
D

Darackutny

Junior Member
Duck Amuck said:
Post #2303
Click to expand...

Bro, you have said a lot of things that I disagree with. The issue here is our reliance on hadith. Picking and choosing views, sticking with your pre-Islamic morals, and coming up with personal interpretations when it comes to Qur'anic exegesis are freedoms that you enjoy. Fortunately, those things aren't available to those of us that do not have issues with hadith.

You'll notice that those freedoms are also available in Christianity. However, the lack of those things are what define Islam, what makes it a compilation of laws and restrictions, a religion.

+3 respect points to Smiles and Cries... it took me a really long time to get to in the last few months.

Shafi'is say that the hands should be placed anywhere between the chest and the navel (this is probably the most common. and why some people prefer to place their hands over their heart area) with the right hand over the left. hanbalis and hanafis believe the hands should be placed lower. Whereas Malikis just let their hands hang at their sides.
Click to expand...

Do you have any proof that Hanbalis put their hands under their navel?

The Hanafis use the hadith from Abu Dawud to justify their position. However, the hadith is invalid due to the weakness of one of the narrators. As for Malikis, Imam Malik used to pray with his hands placed over each other. This is narrated by Ibn Asakir who mentioned that this was what was reported by the people of Madinah that lived during his time.
 
ZiZ

ZiZ

Member
Darackutny said:
Do you have any proof that Hanbalis put their hands under their navel?

The Hanafis use the hadith from Abu Dawud to justify their position. However, the hadith is invalid due to the weakness of one of the narrators. As for Malikis, Imam Malik used to pray with his hands placed over each other. This is narrated by Ibn Asakir who mentioned that this was what was reported by the people of Madinah that lived during his time.
Click to expand...

unfortunately no I don't have any solid proof just something I remember and a fatwa I read online. but like I said, the majority place their hands on their chest regardless of what madhhab they are. The point of my post was just to explain that it differs from madhhab to madhhab and not gender to gender, and that even if the majority place their hands on their chest, you can't tell a person who doesn't that his prayer is wrong. but you are obviously more knowledgeable on the matter than I am.
 
D

Darackutny

Junior Member
ZiZ said:
unfortunately no I don't have any solid proof just something I remember and a fatwa I read online. but like I said, the majority place their hands on their chest regardless of what madhhab they are. The point of my post was just to explain that it differs from madhhab to madhhab and not gender to gender, and that even if the majority place their hands on their chest, you can't tell a person who doesn't that his prayer is wrong. but you are obviously more knowledgeable on the matter than I am.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I hear ya, but the reason I pointed those things out is because I don't believe that there is much of a difference of opinion on the subject. I'm not aware of any Hanbali scholars that pray with their hands under their navel. I've also been in the UAE for the past four years, and even though they are Maliki, most Emiratis pray with their hands folded.

In any case, the only authentic narrations about the placement of the hands in prayer all detail that the hands are crossed somewhere above the navel.
 
D

Darackutny

Junior Member
samven582 said:
why do hanfi's pray below the navel?
Click to expand...

Mainly it is because of this:

http://www.al-eman.com/hadeeth/view...%E1%D5%E1%C7%C9-%CA%CD%CA-%C7%E1%D3%D1%C9#SR1

657 -

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ مَحْبُوبٍ، حَدَّثَنَا حَفْصُ بْنُ غِيَاثٍ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ اِسْحَاقَ، عَنْ زِيَادِ بْنِ زَيْدٍ، عَنْ اَبِي جُحَيْفَةَ، اَنَّ عَلِيًّا، - رضى الله عنه - قَالَ السُّنَّةُ وَضْعُ الْكَفِّ عَلَى الْكَفِّ فِي الصَّلاَةِ تَحْتَ السُّرَّةِ ‏.‏

Hanafis argue that Abu Dawud didn't comment on this hadith and Abu Dawud's methodology is to not comment on hadiths that he finds authentic. However, this isn't always the case. Abu Dawud sometimes doesn't comment when there is an explicit weakness in the chain of narrations. In this case, the weakness comes from Abdulrahman bin Ishaaq. In the very same chapter, Abu Dawud quotes a statement from Imam Ahmed about Abdulrahman's weakness. This is an example of an obvious weak point in the chain. Also, the name of the chapter is: "The Chapter of Placing the right (hand) on the left." This should be sufficient to prove the weakness of this view.
 
Smiles and Cries

Smiles and Cries

Member
So I went on a 3 day weekend Jamaat in Boston MA - 3 hours from my home. I ended up staying 6 days

Yesterday I found out I am going on a 40 day Jamaat to India with a stop in Makkah for Umrah o_O

I have only been a muslim for about two months I love this Deen :D

dunno how much I need to pack for this journey
 
D

Darackutny

Junior Member
Smiles and Cries said:
So I went on a 3 day weekend Jamaat in Boston MA - 3 hours from my home. I ended up staying 6 days

Yesterday I found out I am going on a 40 day Jamaat to India with a stop in Makkah for Umrah o_O

I have only been a muslim for about two months I love this Deen :D

dunno how much I need to pack for this journey
Click to expand...

Awesome. You will enjoy your first trip to Makkah. I haven't been there in a while, but I don't think it should be too crowded this time of year... which is really really important. =p

...and good luck with the jamaat. I had a chance to join one once, but *shrugs*, forty days is way too long for me. Heck, a weekend is sometimes too much for me to spare... and I have no idea how much you are supposed to pack for something like that.

I still do not understand why one cannot pray extra rakas between ASR and Sunset (the brothers told me that would be like praying to the Sun God) I am ready to fight someone for this one... I was doing two rakas at the masjid during this time and the bros came to me after asking me what was that you were doing?
Click to expand...

I think there is evidence that the Prophet prayed after Asr. I'll look it up for you. Don't give up the good fight! =p
 
A

Ashtar

Member
Salaam Alaykum Y'all

I figured I'd introduce myself in this thread, I'm a Muslim born and raised [my parents converted] I follow the Ja'fari school of fiqh, I'm 24, I stay in Boston but I'm from the Virgin Islands.

I see y'all are into some deep stuff here about marriage and what not, that just so happens to be my older brothers specialty so I MIGHT be able to give some insight into all that.

Salaams
 
W

wRATH2x

Banned
Wa Alaikum Assalam Ashtar.

Hmmmmm....questions about marriage,I got one:

I know if I dated a christian/jewish woman and had sexual relations with her,its a long relationship and we decided to get married,and I know that we can only marry them if their virgins,but would that rule prohibit me from marrying her?

Know same thing but I popped her cherry and we got married later down the road.

P.S.

If I really love a woman I would marry her no matter what nothing can prevent me,but its good to know.
 
Z

Zapages

Member
Guys check this site out... Its written by professor and goes in lengthy details about the Shar'ia on how its human judgement... How Islam and Democracy are very close and that's the reason why there is no Caliph in the modern time...

Link to the site: http://sharia.law.emory.edu/en/introduction_0

It is relevant for our purposes that those seeking to abolish the Caliphate sought to justify their views through religious, as well as political, arguments. Seyyid Bey, the Minister of Justice, published pamphlets and spoke on the floor of the Assembly (GNA). He argued that neither the Qur’an nor the Sunna contained any details about the Caliphate, which proved that the office was not a “religious” institution, but rather worldly and political. The Qur’an, Seyyid Bey observed, contained only two points about the proper system of government: consultation (meshverret) and obedience to authority (ulû’l emr). Islam did not therefore insist on any one particular form of government, and any form of government that followed these principles could be legitimate. Consequently, not only was there no obstacle in Shari`a to a parliamentary government, but in modern times, it was the only form of government that could legitimately realize the Islamic requirements of consultation and the rule of law. In his view, the traditional general overriding authority of the Caliph (Wilaya al ‘Amma) meant responsibility over public affairs that was based on a contract of agency (aqd-î Wakâlet), whereby the Caliph was the agent of the nation, and his power directly derived from its will and choice. According to Seyyid Bey, any Caliphate that was not established through the free choice of the Islamic community at large (Umma) was illegitimate under Shari`a. He therefore concluded that there had been no legitimate Caliph after the death of Ali, the fourth Caliph, since after that time, the Caliphate began to be taken over by force rather than the free will of the Umma (Seyyid Bey 1923, 27-28).
Debates about the abolition of the Caliphate were accompanied by debates over abolishing the Shari`a and religious endowments and the need to reform the educational system by bringing madrasas under the Ministry of Education. While these proposals were all passed by the GNA, some of its members expressed strong concerns about attempts to make religion simply a matter of “the hereafter,” arguing that religion would always affect politics. Other members went even further, maintaining that Islam was different from Christianity and could not be separated from worldly matters, as was the case with religion in European nations (Alpkaya 1998, 231).
Click to expand...


This is very interesting...

and here: http://sharia.law.emory.edu/en/turkey_ottoman_legal

and http://sharia.law.emory.edu/en/topics/list
 
L

Linkhero1

Member
I'm going to stop using the word Sunni, Shia etc. because that just separates Muslims and it's haram to divide the Muslims. I do follow the Hadith Bukhari, Muslim, Malik and Dawud, but from now whenever someone asks me what I am I'll say "I'm a Muslim"

Surat AL-ANAAM Verse 159 said:
Surely they who divided their religion into parts and became sects, you have no concern with them; their affair is only with Allah, then He will inform them of what they did.
Click to expand...

Basically by saying you're under one of these branches you're dividing yourselves up. I will not take part in it even if I truly follow the teachings of one of them.
 
D

Darackutny

Junior Member
Linkhero1 said:
I'm going to stop using the word Sunni, Shia etc. because that just separates Muslims and it's haram to divide the Muslims. I do follow the Hadith Bukhari, Muslim, Malik and Dawud, but from now whenever someone asks me what I am I'll say "I'm a Muslim"



Basically by saying you're under one of these branches you're dividing yourselves up. I will not take part in it even if I truly follow the teachings of one of them.
Click to expand...

Interesting concept, but I'm sure that this has already been thought of by those who's teachings you following. It was Ibn Abbas, the companion and cousin of the Prophet, that coined the term Ahlul Sunnah, as opposed to Ahlul Bida'a (the people of innovation). The names that you mentioned, Imam Malik, Bukhari, Muslim, and Abu Dawud, all made those differentiations when describing groups of people.

The verse from Al-An'aam applies to those who divide their religion by innovating and fabricating the laws. Labeling yourself and others does not cause one to fall into that category.
 
I

Instigator

Banned
Zapages said:
Guys check this site out... Its written by professor and goes in lengthy details about the Shar'ia on how its human judgement... How Islam and Democracy are very close and that's the reason why there is no Caliph in the modern time...

Link to the site: http://sharia.law.emory.edu/en/introduction_0

This is very interesting...

and here: http://sharia.law.emory.edu/en/turkey_ottoman_legal

and http://sharia.law.emory.edu/en/topics/list
Click to expand...

Who are you and how did you hijack Zapages' account?

Our Zapages would never give up on a dream so easily.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=311369
 
K

kobashi100

Banned
Zapages said:
Dude, I am still pro-caliphate as its a religous duty for all Muslims...

Also this is a really good read: http://www.scribd.com/doc/10547094/The-Caliphate-the-Hejaz-and-the-Saudiwahhabi-Nationstate
Click to expand...

Thanks for this brother. Will read it later today.

I am pretty sure I saw that Professor An-Na`im on Islam channel last year debating with a member from Hizb ut tahrir UK.

This is a good article about the Khilfah and if it only existed for 30 years like some people say.

http://www.khilafah.com/index.php/the-khilafah/issues/42-did-khilafah-only-exist-for-30-years

This article refutes the claim that Islam provides no detailed guidance on a governing system.

http://www.khilafah.com/index.php/the-khilafah/issues/1752-the-method-to-appoint-a-khaleefah
 
Y

Yixian

Banned
kobashi100 said:
So it looks like Obama is no different from bush when it comes to attacking muslims.. Remember when President Obama said “to the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect”. Didnt take him long to order a missle attack on pakistan and kill more innocent civilians.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5575883.ece
Click to expand...

The US's relationship with Pakistan is a nationalist and economic one, this has nothing to do with Islamic :lol
 
K

kobashi100

Banned
Only the Khilafah can resolve Differences of Opinion
http://www.khilafah.com/index.php/c...e-khilafah-can-resolve-differences-of-opinion

Ikhtilaf or difference of opinion between Muslims has existed as long as Islam itself. Whilst it is healthy to have a diversity of views it can also be problematic if certain differences are not resolved. It is argued that difference of opinion causes sectarianism, partisanship and conflict within societies.

Indeed the enemies of Islam use such differences to "divide and conquer" the Muslim lands. The US invaders in Iraq for example have stoked up sectarian strife in Iraq between Sunnis and Shia's - so that they could take control of the country.

On the other hand it is argued that difference of opinion that allows nations to have more than a single view held by those in authority and power - this allows accountability, different angles about problems, policies and actions - this is a strength a nation possesses, if managed correctly.

Many view that uniting the Muslims on a single view is an impossible task. They see different opinions held by various schools of thinking, ulema and their followers and groups to be too deep-rooted to be overcome. They feel that followers of different opinions will never accept each another's differences over fiqh or other matters.

It is such understandings that often leave some confused, despondent and apathetic about bringing unity for the Muslims by re-establishing the Khilafah. In this article we seek to examine the issues surrounding difference of opinion and how they will be resolved under the leadership of the Khilafah state.

What is a legitimate Difference of Opinion?

If an individual holds an opinion that a woman can wear western clothing and dress as she pleases in public, or that democracy is a valid form of government, or that acceptance of the state of Israel is permissible- then all these opinions are rejected as valid opinions because there is no basis for them from Islam- rather they are built on other than an Islamic basis.

Muslims are increasingly aware that the opinions held about such matters have to be based upon Islam and they therefore have to have Shari evidences to be acceptable. If these opinions are not based upon Quran, Sunnah, Ijma of the Sahaba, Qiyas or principles deduced on the basis of these - then the opinions cannot be accepted by Muslims.

Indeed Allah سبحانه وتعالى mentioned in the Quran:

فَلاَ وَرَبِّكَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّىَ يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ

"But no, by your lord they can have no Iman, until they make you the judge in all disputes between them." [An-Nisa, 4:65]

فَإِن تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ

"And if you differ in anything amongst your selves refer it to Allah and His Messenger." [An-Nisa, 4:59]

If an opinion is based upon Islamic text then Muslims can accept it. If the opinion is based upon an individuals mind, whim or desire then it is not allowed to accept it.

Some may question about differences in opinion in technical or political matters. For example what is the best location for a highway, school or hospital? These matters are left to those that possess specialist technical knowledge to provide informed recommendations and judgements. This is because on the basis of textual evidences the building of highways, schools and hospitals is permitted. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of those in ruling or in those in charge of a project to decide where the highway, school or hospital is to be built. The location is to be decided to serve the purpose and this is permitted in shariah.

As long as an opinion is based upon daleel (evidence) from Islam then Muslims should accept this is as an Islamic opinion, even if they do not follow it themselves. This is where the differences between the scholars of Islam occurred. Their view regarding the opinion that they deduced to the best of their ability, was that they were correct with the possibility they could be wrong as differences of opinion can only arise where the Islamic rule is not clear cut - therefore a possibility of error exists.

Indeed the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "Whosoever does Ijtihad and errs therein shall have one reward. And whosoever performs Ijtihad and is correct shall have a double reward." (Bukhari & Muslim)

Resolving Differences of Opinion

It is well known that individual sahaba had differences of opinion. An example of such a difference is between Abu Bakr Sadiq رضي الله عنه and Umar رضي الله عنه. When Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه was the Khalifah, he paid equal grants to all the Sahabah رضي الله عنهم. He رضي الله عنه did not distinguish between the early Muslims and the new Muslims. When the Islamic State started receiving larger funds through the liberation of various lands, Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه continued to distribute the wealth equally. Umar رضي الله عنه and some of the Sahabah رضي الله عنهم insisted that the earliest Muslims should be given preference over the later converts. Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه told him that he was aware of the differences that Umar رضي الله عنه had mentioned; however, his opinion was that distributing the funds equally was better in the sight of Allah سبحانه وتعالى than the principle of preference.

When Umar رضي الله عنه became Khalifah, he replaced Abu Bakr's رضي الله عنه adoption of equality with his principle of preference. Umar رضي الله عنه did not like to pay the same amount to those who fought against the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and those who fought with him. Accordingly, he gave a larger amount to the early Sahabah رضي الله عنهم who fought in Badr and Uhud and the relatives of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.

When Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه was the Khalifah, Umar رضي الله عنه left his understanding and enacted the decree of Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه, as did the judges, governors, and all Muslims. However, when Umar رضي الله عنه became the Khalifah, he obliged the enactment of his opinion and the others implemented it. On the basis of this the following shari principles have been deduced.

"The Imam's decree settles the disagreement."

"The Imam's decree is executed openly and privately."

All Muslims including the scholars, have to follow the opinion adopted by the Khalifah. They do not have accept it as the correct opinion and can maintain their opinion and teach it, whilst their obedience should be to the opinion that the Khalifah adopts.

Due to the level of understanding and the presence of many foreign forms of thinking leading to non Islamic opinions in Muslim societies - when the Khilafah state is established it will need to immediately present a constitution based upon daleel (evidence) on the basis of the Islamic sources. This will allow the Islamic opinions adopted by the state to be made clear to the citizens in a rapid manner. Citizens would be obliged to follow the constitution because this would be what the Khalifah adopts and the Muslims would be obliged to follow it. Even if some differed with the rules; as long as the rules were Islamic they would be obliged to follow.

In conclusion, Muslims can only accept opinions that are based upon Islamic evidences. All other opinions cannot be taken. Differences of opinion amongst Muslims have occurred in the past and will occur in the future. The correct framework to handle them is through the Khilafah state - as any other route will merely lead to confusion, conflict, anarchy and chaos. The Khalifah has the right to adopt rules and opinions on the basis of Islam; initially this will be by adopting a constitution to cover all aspects of life's affairs - Muslims would be obliged to follow even if it differed with their understanding.

It should also be remembered that the Khilafah is not a totalitarian state that will adopt on every Islamic issue. The Khilafah adopts on those areas of public life necessary to run the state and that have an influence on society. In the private areas of life such as belief and worships these are left up to the individual. This prevents some of the problems that occured previously where Khalifah's attempted to force their school of thought upon the people such as the Mu'tazilah.
 
Majmun

Majmun

Member
My parents are both muslim. But I became agnostic at a very young age.

The Bible, Kuran and other religious books are nothing more than story compilations to me.

I still respect the books because they can make someone a better person (or worse). But I don't believe much what's written on them.

I don't need a book to tell me what's wrong or right. Because I know what's wrong or right myself. That's how I see it.
 
Z

Zapages

Member
Himuro said:
Is there a good liberal Islamic news site?
Click to expand...

What sense do you mean liberal??? I mean there's a lot of news sites or channels in English, although they all have their own message/agenda:

Al Jazera:http://english.aljazeera.net/

Dawn News: http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/home/

The News: http://thenews.jang.com.pk/ <-Anarchist/ex-Socialist
Geo TV: http://www.geo.tv/index.html <-tv channel for Jang's newspaper group

The Nation: http://www.nation.com.pk/

Aaj TV: http://www.aaj.tv/

All these are in English as well...
 
Z

Zapages

Member
Himuro said:
My problem with many of these sites is that their news doesn't have anything to do with Islam. Take Al-Jazeera for instance, which I read. I wouldn't consider that an Islamic news site because hey - take a look at the front page, what does Iran launching a long range missle have anything to do with Islam? I'm not Iranian, and I don't care about Iran, I want Islamic news.

I've read many of those sites and I hate the anti-semitic agendas they have. Someone in the US government supports Israel! Burn them! KFC supports Israel?! BOYCOTT! I do not care about the Israel/Palestinian conflict. Never have, never will. Pointless war.

This amateurish reporting was also seen during the height of the pig flu epidemic thing about a few weeks ago. PIG FLU THREATENS TO CONQUER THE WORLD, JEWS AND MUSLIMS AM RIGHT, as they concentrate on the "pig" part of pig flu.

When I say liberal Islamic site, I mean a site that doesn't let political affiliation or something like that get in the way of the news reporting, which is what I see in 99% of all Islamic news sites. They're always trying to push something, or they're trying to force their views on the reader, which ain't journalism.

Either that or they have an awful layout that's just extremely confusing.
Click to expand...


Honestly I think you won't get a pure Islamic website as many news sites in general view Palestinian cause as an Islamic cause... But that's totally a different discussion all together. >__>

Ok, I see what you mean... Have you checked here: http://www.world-newspapers.com/islam-magazines.html

http://www.islamonline.net/english/index.shtml <- some political stuff

http://islamonline.com/ <-still some politics here and there

http://www.findingdulcinea.com/guides/Religion-and-Spirituality/Islam.pg_02.html

http://www.altmuslim.com/ <-News with politics...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Too Timid to Tell the Boss You’re Quitting? There’s a Service for That
28
1K
Superkewl replied
NYT: The Palace Coup at the Magic Kingdom (Iger vs. Chapek)
27
1K
Tertullian replied
The man who owes Nintendo $14m: Gary Bowser and gaming’s most infamous piracy case
2
85
6K
SHA replied
Nine minutes of R-rated Deadpool 3 footage shown at CinemaCon (Spoilers)
Spoilers
12
3K
Husky replied
the events for Titus between Space Marine 1 and 2 has been revealed!
6
2K
TintoConCasera replied
Top Bottom