ManSinha
Well-Known Member
To my Muslim friends on the board -
In the US there has been some outcry about Ihan Omar's comments about Israel - whether right or wrong - we can debate that in the political forum - BUT i as a somewhat biased individual wanted to ask this question and see what the answers are:
Other than Indonesia - perhaps there is no Islamic state that allows equal rights to women or allows other religions to practice openly
Remember the second largest concentration of Muslims is in India - and while you may hear (some true) accounts of Hindu nationalism - there are Muslim Universities and Mosques galore and the state of affairs would not have gotten to where it is without a modicum of tolerance from the majority population
Same towards refugees from Muslim African countries (such as Somalia) in Europe and parts of the US
But when I look back to 1300's - Mohammed Ghori, followed by Mohammed Ghazni - then Jehangir and Aurangzeb - it would appear that every time that there are Islamic leaning individuals in power - Shari'ah becomes the law and the kafirs have to pay the Jazi'yah
The middle Sikh history is replete with struggles against a regime bent on Muslim conversion and even now the ISIS while it was still in power - talked about establishing a Caliphate and applying Shari'ah law banning music and education of females etc.
I know the Qu'ran is also a politico - religious document - and indeed just the other day came the news that the largest Muslim organization in Indonesia has requested that the word kafir not be used anymore.
So - where does the truth lie? I know the Sunnis and Shia's have different viewpoints and some of the Sikh practices such as the singing of hymns is very similar to Sufi Mystic practices. Also there is the undeniable stories of Ghani Khan and Nabi Khan and Nawab Sher Khan during the trial of the Guru's younger sons - so no - in no way shape or form - condemning the religion or its people but - the question remains - should they be allowed to rule a multi cultural population?
In the US there has been some outcry about Ihan Omar's comments about Israel - whether right or wrong - we can debate that in the political forum - BUT i as a somewhat biased individual wanted to ask this question and see what the answers are:
Other than Indonesia - perhaps there is no Islamic state that allows equal rights to women or allows other religions to practice openly
Remember the second largest concentration of Muslims is in India - and while you may hear (some true) accounts of Hindu nationalism - there are Muslim Universities and Mosques galore and the state of affairs would not have gotten to where it is without a modicum of tolerance from the majority population
Same towards refugees from Muslim African countries (such as Somalia) in Europe and parts of the US
But when I look back to 1300's - Mohammed Ghori, followed by Mohammed Ghazni - then Jehangir and Aurangzeb - it would appear that every time that there are Islamic leaning individuals in power - Shari'ah becomes the law and the kafirs have to pay the Jazi'yah
The middle Sikh history is replete with struggles against a regime bent on Muslim conversion and even now the ISIS while it was still in power - talked about establishing a Caliphate and applying Shari'ah law banning music and education of females etc.
I know the Qu'ran is also a politico - religious document - and indeed just the other day came the news that the largest Muslim organization in Indonesia has requested that the word kafir not be used anymore.
So - where does the truth lie? I know the Sunnis and Shia's have different viewpoints and some of the Sikh practices such as the singing of hymns is very similar to Sufi Mystic practices. Also there is the undeniable stories of Ghani Khan and Nabi Khan and Nawab Sher Khan during the trial of the Guru's younger sons - so no - in no way shape or form - condemning the religion or its people but - the question remains - should they be allowed to rule a multi cultural population?