|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
You really needs to see this if you think Islam is tolerant or gives any freedom.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cairo_Dec … s_in_Islam
Now if anyone wants to say that out of X population count there can't be large number of non-peaceful and less-tolerant crowd then this declaration can open your eyes. Not being hysterical here because it is just declaration of one region and not all islamic countries.
I have just read it and can see nothing in it that is a problem. What is it in there that bothers you - the bit about freedom, anti-colonialism, anti-slavery or what ?
Okay let me pick article from. In this draft they claim about equal rights to females- but as per sharia law no female should live without muhrim(husband,father,brother),they can't marry non-muslim and have no freedom to live outside decisions of muhrim and sharia law.still see no catch?
If you've any experience with sharia law then you can easily see through this declaration which is drafted as per sharia law.
It seems a whole lot less intimidating or strange than many religious sects in America, or cross denominational marriage in Northern Ireland. Your link with Shariah law is in your mind only - (Kirkegaard: "There is nothing outside the text") - it is not in the text except where they have written it.
The way they 'see' females in their culture is their business, is it any worse than the way christian see women as objects and commodities that leads to sexualising children among other things ? Do you really think chanting over and over "The Lord God our FATHER" isn't doing exactly the same thing ?
lol. Yes its no diffrent than fundamental christians. My point with this thread was there is no humanism in this declaration if its inspired by sharia law.
I think this is mostly in your reading - to me it looks just fine and a situation I could live in without too much problem. It looks a better declaration of human rights than is the current real situation in America.
You are relating it with situations in america while i'm relating it with that in asia. So that way your opinion differs with mine. I'm surprised to see that paar doesn't subscribe to sharia laws-which is good thing.
Well - I live in Asia although I am from the UK. My understanding of Sha'ria law is that it is applied differently everywhere depending on the community. It is applied by clerics or judges from within that community and the law only applies to that community. I also understand that the screaming noises we hear about it are just noise mostly. There is no chance of it ever being applied outside Muslim communities. The bad stuff we hear about stoning for adultery and chopping off of hands etc are the excessive aspects in one place or another, it is not hard to point out bad laws in any other country, including the US, that do bad things to people - if not so directly. If a balanced view is taken we can consider the far higher moral values of Muslim communities, the almost toal absence of stealing in some Muslim countries, and the low divorce rate. I would not like these laws applied to me - but that doesn't mean they are not what those communities want and so are none of our business directly.
This declaration does not represent Islam/Muhammad. Quran, the first and the foremost source of guidance of Islam ,whatever the denomination, has not even once quoted or mentioned in it.
Are my meds messing with me, or are you two daffy? Skyfire must have a problem with article 10. No other religions can convert muslims under duress. Par must want the qu'ran to go back to Taliban interpretation, and keep those females from the same as men. Equal pay in jobs, housing,health care, education. That thing sounds more and more westernized than ever. No more selling of family members, what's the problem? The anti converting thing? It doesn'y say you can't decide for yourself. In fact, it guarantees the right to personal freedom. They want to convert, they can on their own. As for not mentioning qu'ran, that's what Shari'ah is. And ever changing with the times religious law. Women are still not to be seen as sexual objects. Shame on them bastards!
Shari'ah is a later terminology not used in Quran and never used by Muhammad. Quran is flexible ,rational and universal; shari'ah is static and does not cover other regions of the world; and West in particular.
Yes. Sharia is static and the problem is it has no tolerance to other faiths,freedom of expression in general.
@paar it doesnot matter what you or me think sharia is..what matters is what masses in muslims think about it..and they believe shariah to be law by allah...
I don't have problem with article 10,i expected that from religious country.
What concerns me is sharia law which is heavily refuted by liberal muslims. They know the catch behind those articles when it is referenced by sharia law.
This article says it all:
"The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification to any of the articles of this Declaration."
Quite frankly, I don't any human rights at all based on that one article.
by andrew savage5 years ago
What are the aspects of the two modes of practical law that make one incompatible with the other?
by weholdthesetruths7 years ago
Whatever the social or anti-social implications of his actions, Terry Jones was making a statement protected as free speech, absolutely protected as free speech. Certainly, had he chosen to burn the flag, instead...
by Onusonus5 years ago
The governor of Kansas just signed a bill that prevents foreign laws (including Sharia law) from being enforced in US courts. opponents to the law say that it singles out Muslims despite the fact that "sharia...
by Jimbo'daNimbo5 years ago
Here's the story:http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/27/obama … ado-court/Oops! Another chink in the armor huh?
by thirdmillenium6 years ago
They amputate limbs, hang the criminals in public and flog adulterers.Have you ever felt, "he/she deserves it"
by Susie Lehto14 months ago
There should not have been a need at all for Senate Bill 97 in the United States. The House voted 56-44 to prohibit sharia law. I'd like the names of the block heads who voted against that bill, they should...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.