Leaderboard

Salam Earlier you said that your husband was not interested in mutah and would rather wait for you to be with him: According to your above post, he said he would rather wait (I take it you are not living together at the moment). He probably knows himself and is capable of making that decision, so I dont understand why you are so insistent for him to do something that he has stated he doesnt want to do. And now: I am really trying but i dont understand why would you keep "encouraging" him to do something that he has stated he has no need for. This may be confusing and ultimately hurtful to him as he develops love/admiration/respect for her (as you said above that these levels of emotional connection are necessary for him to have sexual intercourse) and he seems to be initiating this only to please you. My question is - Whose needs are being met here - his or yours?

The truth is, I don't know how long you've been in this relationship for, and quite frankly its none of my business. You could have been married at the age of 10 for all I know, but the fact remains that you're still very young, and you've got a lot to learn, hence I said you were 'inexperienced'. The modern conception of love and marriage is not compatible with polygamy, and there is nothing wrong with it being that way. If you truly were well versed in the experience of an open relationship, your post would not have been about "coming to terms with the laws of Allah", but more about addressing the concerns of the relationship itself. I only guessed you havent been married very long because you implied it yourself in your post. Needless to say, you have admitted you haven't been in this relationship too long, and that you're still a teenager, so my points certainly do hold true. I also know a few women who are engaged in polygamous relationships, and their mindset about the relationship itself is nothing like yours, which again points to your obvious inexperience. Of course, to each their own - I'm not trying to judge you, and I do wish you all the best in your marriage. I felt the need to say something only because I know many young girls read this board, and looking at your post really does oversimplify a polygamous marriage. I believe we've been through this already. I don't know you, and your ridiculous accusations only serve to embarrass you.

According to the institute it was not only Palestinian organs that were being harvested but Israeli organs as well :squeez: all without the permission of the family or a request from the deceased prior to their death. They claim that the bodies were not killed for the purpose of harvesting organs, but if Israel stood to profit economically from this, would they request the bodies of Palestinians killed in combat and would this result in an increase in violence? Of course. The bodies of Palestinians are a lot easier to get (with fewer questions asked) and there would have been few, if any, moral qualms. The fact that Israel vehemently denied this (even going so far as to call the accusations anti semitic in nature) makes people wonder what other theories could have some truth behind them The image of Israeli doctors pulling out cornea's of dead Palestinians seemed like a disastrous conspiracy theory until they admitted it. It just shows how depraved humans become when they can make money.

(bismillah) (salam) Well good thing I was done eating my cake. Lemme tell you, it's a fight that will go on till your old age and maybe even till death. You sexual instinct is your second strongest instinct, if you can defeat it for the sake of islam. You can defeat you strongest instinct which is the desire to live. Then you will be able to give your life for islam.

I have seen this too (in qatar) - women and their children in polygamous marriages are quite separate from their husband - the relationship is more of a business relationship than an intimate one. it is respectful - just distant.

I'm not going to address your preposterous proposition any more than I need to. I haven't been in a polygamous relationship, and my lady parts most certainly are present. I think I've addressed your issue a fair some, and your post above does nothing to speak to any of my concerns about a polygamous marriage. Good luck to you, your husband and his pending mistress. I agree. The circumstance in which a woman "encourages" her spouse to have a mistress is rather intriguing. I'm not going to argue it any more than I have, but I will say that polygamous marriages are typically a lot different in nature than 3ashiqat-Al-Batoul has described. I have friends whose fathers have more than one wife, and their relationships are less about intimacy and more about convenience. I even know western women who have married into arab families as second or third wives, and even they live as women who are quite independent - almost like they're single, yet financially supported by their husbands.

Ban on Hussaini procession in Held Kashmir protested By: Nizam Hussain HELD SRINAGAR, Held Kashmir: Hundreds of Shia Muslims in the Indian-Held Kashmir staged a protest against the years-long ban on Muharram procession here on Monday Dec 21 under the banner of Anjuman- Sharai Shian. The protest rally passed through Lal Chowk and converged at Pratap Park as the protestors carried placards reading ' We want religious freedom.' Murtuza Hussian Abbasi, leader of Anjuman- Sharai- Shian said that they were asking for their religious freedom. "We are protesting against the ban imposed by the government for the last 20 years on 8th and 10th day of Muharram (the first month of the Islamic calendar). We demand that the government removes the unjustified restrictions and give us a sense of religious freedom," said Abbasi.

(salam) lol, i do not think i could be able to go up and ask a girl to marry me, it would take me months or a long time before getting away with the shyness to do that. and to get comfortable with knowing her. if i seen someone i considered to want to marry i would become extra shy. although Allah knows best how it would be. i once seen a girl i was interested in at the masjid, i could not even say "salam alaykom" for the first night lol. it took me a long time til i asked my friend about her to find out, it was a not possible one. but shyness really is around some men. i am sure there must be others. i would not mind it at all if i had one day, a woman walk up to me and say would you like to marry me, i would in fact praise Allah for it. (wasalam)

(salam) what if the man is too shy to say anything? and the woman likes him and wants to marry him? this is another good reason why a woman can propose. (wasalam)

Many people are taking a difficult path by standing up to their political, philosofical or any kind of beliefs. This is not a value in itself. Communists were standing up for their beliefs, capitalists were standing up for their beliefs, etc. This doesn't mean their beliefs are right or valueable. Only when somebody is taking the path of Imam Hussein (as), as Imam Khomeini did, it has real value.

That depends on your definition of tolerance. Secular governments are very "faith tolerant" ... so long as that faith serves as a pacifier or a legitimator of their power. But if a faith steps out of its bounds (as set by the secular government) then it will not be tolerated. The argument that secular governments are tolerant of religions simply because they encourage religious groups to have their subjects pacified with mundane rituals is akin to saying Israel is a champion of the rights of Arabs because it is one of the few countries in the Middle East in which they can vote. Saying this ignores the fact that for an Arab, accepting Israeli citizenship is an acceptance of slavery. It also ignores the fact that none of the candidates in an Israeli election can possibly seek to serve the interests of Arabs. Muslims in secular countries can pray all they want, but can they ever (formally) demand anything or try to espouse their point of view? No. There are hardly any Muslim statesmen in the US, and those who do exist are very low-level. Even those low-level politicians cannot reach the position they have reached without completely eliminating anything Islamic from their image and rhetoric. So I think the whole "freedom of religion" thing is an illusion, because it is limited to practice. The PRACTICE of religion is a freedom which can be had regardless of the nature of government, because it is something which cannot be controlled.

daghe sajood agar teri peshani pe hae to kia koi asia sajda bhi kr k zameen pe nishan rahe

I'm not sure if you're saying that you're unable to cry at sad situation, or unable to cry at all? If it's the latter, then try cutting onions. If you still don't produce tears, then maybe you should go see a doctor?

(salam) See, here is the problem I have with this statement. Sometimes people use this banner (Islam and politics cannot be separated) whenever someone wants to garner support to his/her cause. But when an Ayatullah disagrees with them, the Ayatullah is classified as naive and should leave politics altogether. That isn't very fair, is it? :unsure: I am urging both sides to sit down and address any grievousness that you may have without resorting to name-calling. Please try to listen to the other side, and highlight your differences, in a very calm manner.

[Note from Mod: This topic has been temporarily closed for review by a moderator pending one of the following actions: Cleanup: Topic will be reviewed, inappropriate posts will be deleted followed by warnings/bans being implemented and then reopened. 2) Topic will be permanently deleted or sent to the lounge. 3) Topic will remain permanently closed. Please allow up to 48 hours for one of the above actions to take place. Contact the appropriate moderator for any further explanations The ShiaChat.com rules can be found at: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=12120] [Auto]

Content of the dream doesn't make a difference. If you wake up and you have ejeculated in your sleep, trust me, you will know that you have. If there is no stain/wetness then nothing has happened, so relax and carry on with your day.

What I find really disturbing is when people use their own interpretation to say that mutah is only for X,Y,Z purposes for X,Y,Z type of people. This has absolutely no susbstance, and Allah (swt) has unconditionally allowed muta, and that is all that should matter to the believers.

The companions of the Holy Prophet (Saws) also did muta (as mentioned in Sahih Muslim), hence you should also be vary of following the sunnah from the "sahabbas".

Actually, some of us are neither pro or anti-Sayed Khumayni. There are people here who regard him as a very learned, pious 'alim, but they may not agree with some of his political ideas. It's not a case of "you're either for us or against us." . I suspect one of the reasons why many don't spell out what errors they think he committed is because they don't want to offend his supporters, who tend to be extremely sensitive of any criticism direct at him ...

Sifting through this thread I gather that most people here are Team Tiger Woods You wish all women allowed their husbands to sleep around every time they felt themselves a little bit of a hard on? I'm sorry, but 3ashiqat-Al-Batoul's post is clearly out of inexperience. Having an open relationship is certainly not as simple as she puts it. There are a lot of complications in a marriage when a man is allowed to sleep with other women. Many of us here come from a culture of arranged marriages where a man and woman become close to each other after marriage; that is, after experiencing sexual pleasure from each other. Of course, that is not the only factor that is involved in making a man and woman become close - but certainly, becoming comfortable with each other's body's (as your "husband" would also be able to do in Mutaa) is, in large part, a great portion of a successful marriage. In many relationships, people feel some element of ownership over their spouses...and I don't mean that in a condescending way - its actually one of the most beautiful things about love. Many people who are in open relationships (that is the term used when you are married to someone but are allowed to have sex with other people) have to come to terms with the idea that they are not sexually "satisfying", and/or the possibility their spouses may have sex with another person more enjoyable than you, and as such, that element of ownership or posessorship is no longer present. Moreover, what prevents a man from having feelings for his mistress? I'm pretty sure we're all familiar with some of the Tiger Woods stories. It has absolutely nothing to do with the "preconceptions" polygamy is bad, or anything to do with "coming to terms with the laws", its about being able to be in a relationship in which you can fulfill each other. And lastly, girls have sexual desires too (sometimes more than men), and if we can control it, we can expect our spouses to do the same.

Lets be reasonable here.. literally NO ONE would be posting on this forum if the requirements were having authority or knowledge. Half the threads are on mutah and the rest are dedicated to 15 year old boys who need help because they can't stop masturbating, so spare me the indignation. I don't know who my "circle of friends" are, but you are probably referring to anyone on this site whose ever said anything even remotely critical of your absolute truths. Here is the thing 3ashaqat, you don't own spirituality and faith and you don't get to decide who has an ounce of it. Sometimes people on this forum make shia islam look backward, outdated, stupid, and I will continue to call them out on this whether or not it makes you uncomfortable. You can reply as much as you like (which you ALWAYS do when you can find something trivial to nitpick on) but I highly doubt I will have a lot of trouble coming up with a response.

there is a difference, for example: prophet Mohammad has right to criticize on the actions prophet Noah has taken, but, do we, as an ordinary people, have right to hurl stones of insults on Noah in the name of criticism prophet Mohammad has made??? there is a difference, Khomini or Khamenei or Montaziri, they are Marja'as of shias worldwide, they can criticize each other, they can object each other, they can differ with each other, but, who are we, to hurl stones of insults from one to another??? why on earth we??? where Montaziri has said to humiliate Khomini??? where Khomini has said to humiliate Montaziri??? where Khamenei has said to humiliate Montaziri??? where??? who are we to hurl stones of insults on them from one side or from another???? those, who insult Montaziri, from the side of Khamenei, or, those, who insult Khamenei, from the side of Montaziri, both are devision makers and enemy of shia societies, both use honorable personalities to create hatred among shia societies, both use honorable personalities to destroy prestige of holy figures in shia societies, we should identify them, we should treate them both as enemies, both have one goal, destruction of respect of holy personalities in shia societies.

Lets not get into the business of avatars because yours is an indicator that you (like a lot of members on this forum) can't pull your head out of Iran's backside long enough to think critically or put together a coherent argument that doesn't start and end in groveling oblivion. I don't need your stamp of approval because I don't take you seriously as an intellectual.

Like Dirac said, Sunni Arabs are absolutely loving this because of its timing and the political implications (if they cared about being exploited they would be more vocal about Kuwait forcefully taking oil from Basra) but that doesn't change the fact that it is exploitation and recognizing it as such is necessary. The troubles don't need to be created btw, and the fact that you even said that indicated you are oblivious to political realities on either side of the border.

The latter. Why would I side with such an irrational ruling?

Saddam did, sure. Iran was one of the first countries in the region to offer its support for the new Iraqi government (despite its clash with America) in order to secure its own interests. Politics. No one's feelings are hurt. Lets just not pretend that Iran won't step all over Iraq if it gains something by doing so (something that members on this board fail to recognize). Its not necessarily a zero sum game where any gain for Iran has to come at a loss for Iraq (interests can coincide) but Iran will not hesitate to undermine Iraq and create disunity and tension if it sees its power slipping. Again, politics.. or, as you put it, "the game."

Irrational, illegal, and downright stupid.

Well, you're inevitably going to have some sort of lens through which you understand and interpret the religion. When you tnk hiabout it a bit, it's not possible to simply "read it off" the primary texts (Qu'ran and narrations) in some bare, unmediated way. It is a set of revelations to a profoundly different time and place. Some work and methodology is needed to peer beyond the veils of differences of time and place to determine what is core and what is merely context. What was the context? What were the key essential details of the situations to which the revelations and narrations related? What were the goals the prophet and aimmah were looking to achieve with their solutions? But such is key if we want to understand what, if any lessons of guidance to draw from these texts for our own time, place context. It is tempting to be simplistic and just say "that's overcomplication; these texts are timeless guidance, and we should take that to mean that legal judgements within them are always true literally as written, always and everywhere." But this tends to lead to Wahhabi literalism, or its Shia equivalent.

Obama has a lot of people feeling pretty disillusioned right now. Even when he calls meetings and pretends he is going to get tough on the banks its all just a show. They know its a show and the American people know it is a show. Like Lion said, there is a lot behind the scenes and changing from one leader to another is not going to heal a crumbling system of big government in the hands of the corporations. I don't have any issues with the Peace Prize because the bar has not been set particularly high and it is now really just a joke. The point of him winning was not because he ended the wars immediately (I don't think this would have been a smart move) but because he took a new multilateral approach to foreign policy and "engaged" the rest of the world. Whatever. Basically it was just Europe giving the middle finger to Bush. This could mean one of two things. 1) That the Americans practiced ethnic cleansing and genocide- in which case I invite you to look up the definition 2) That the deaths caused by the war are worse than the genocide caused by Saddam (not that he didn't fight wars every other day)- in which case I encourage you to explore the profound difference between war and genocide. I am not going to get into a debate about the rest because it will just be a wasteful digression.

Salam Religion, whichever one it is, is dynamic and definitely changes and gets impacted by the societies we live in. It'd be naïve to expect religion to remain a solid substance which no outside-coming element can impact. Islam is supposed to be applicable to anybody anywhere at any time...it cannot have that function if the religion is stuck in year 600.

Conservapedia? :unsure: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Partisan

No thanks. I'd take the findings of a palm tree more seriously than those of a christian oriented "researcher." She talks like a first year medical student because she disagrees with you.. stop pretending it has anything to do with a clever examination of context clues Sherlock. I am beginning to see why the researcher peddling his christian agenda is so much more appealing :angel:

You don't have to be comfortable with this and being uncomfortable does not = homophobia. Homophobia is outright contempt and hatred which fuels irrational behavior and to suggest that it is an irrelevant term is simultaneously ignorant and dismissive of the plight of gays and lesbians who have been subjected to the fruits of this irrationality. Not only does it make light of that glaring reality, it also dismisses the fear some people have of a man who they believe behaves too "feminine" or a woman who isn't feminine enough which has resulted in deep psychological scars for both children and adults and is a direct result of rampant homophobia in society. Yes it does exist and we need to acknowledge and address that.. if you want to dismiss that as condescendingly enlightened or apologetically progressive.. well that says more about you than it does about the issue at hand. Also, it is an expression of love and you can't take that away from them no matter how much you disagree with it. Love is love and you can't restrict it to something between a man and a woman even if this family structure is (in my opinion) essential for a healthy society. I am not even going to address the rest of your rubbish about how you feel the need to counter argue against humanism by pointing out Islam wants us to burn homosexuals. Lets just say you aren't being particularly helpful. It is something that is accepted as an alternate sexuality to heterosexuality :huh:. The term makes perfect sense unless you are an imbecile "m8." Why didn't you add bestiality to the list since you had already decided to be illogical? Imam Khomenei should have studied that issue a tad more because that theory is.. well.. stupid? I am impressed with your knowledge ms. Naqvi :wub:

hmm I dno.. all this "equality" defeats the purpose of me being an angry feminist :P

pm Aal-e-Imran with the new name

I will repeat myself: It is rarely ever STRANGE men who commit these acts (its rare for the crime to be random). I volunteered at a battered women shelter before and one of the women was raped by her older brother. Edit: Please stop talking you sound like a blithering imbecile

If her concern is a broken hymen she should know that hymens are not an indicator of a girls virginity and she is not even Islamically obligated to disclose information about her sexual history. The concern is that the relationship between her and her husband may feel tainted or unfulfilled because she is unable to explain to him something tragic that happened to her without feeling judged or worried that he might not believe her. Their level of emotional intimacy and trust will undoubtedly suffer as a result of this lack of disclosure. She needs to figure out how to feel better about herself before even contemplating marriage, because right now she is showing signs of self-doubt and hesitency to accept that she is nothing more than the victim in all of this. She is not any less "chaste" because she was raped, nor is she in any way at fault. I suggest she speak to her family if possible about this incident (I know this is EXTREMELY difficult and has a lot of implications) because it would give her a supportive group. If this is not possible she should seek out profession help or the comfort of anonymous support groups. She needs to work past the unnecessary guilt and realize that she does not owe anyone an explanation and that anyone who does not "believe her" can go to hell. Yes, when I was 8 years old I was around men who were trusted adult figures and I am sure most of us grew up around trusted adults of the opposite sex. It is an unfortunate reality that many of these adults abuse the trust and prey upon a child. Pedophiles are usually people close to the child and close to the family and rape is rarely a random attack of violence against a complete stranger, it may even be a relative of the child who she trusts. Another unfortunate reality is dim wits who would rather cast doubt on a child's character.

Because permanent marriage is the real deal, the idea situation in which two individuals have made the critical decision to stay with each other forever. Men can stray with or without mutah so it depends on the man more than the institution. Mutah just helps irresponsible married men deal with their religious hang ups as they go around carelessly fulfilling their sexual desires at the expense of marital stability, trust, and their childrens best interests. They would have done it anyway. This question is like asking someone why they would rather be married than be a guys serious longtime girlfriend.. cause girls like being the only one.. FOREVER. I have always assumed that in a permanent marriage my husband will a.) be so insanely in love with me that he could never contemplate taking another wife b.) on the off chance that he even thinks about taking another wife (moment of male weakness) the fear I will have systematically instilled in him will dissuade him from making such a foolish decision c.) if both a and b fail, I will personally see to it that he is both broke and miserable *crosses fingers for option a*

I think the relationship between Muslims and non Muslims in Europe absolutely needs repairing and a lot of this is due to our practices. There is a legitimacy in suggesting that we integrate in the community and not react violently when people practice their rights to freedom of speech, even if it is against Islam. My concern is that these fundamental rights are being voted on by a movement that is funded and supported by ignorance. I can't see this concession not opening the door for other concessions that may not be as benign and are still motivated by the same Islamophobes. I understood where you were coming from and I can appreciate your points.. but your response just doesn't cut it for me. If we know this thing is not threatening, if we know it comes from ignorance, if we know it has no place in the law books.. then why are we so passively accepting its legitimacy? The minarets are symbolic of a deeper, profound tension and clash between Islam and Europe.. so where do we draw the lines? We both know that 4 minarets in Switzerland are NOT ruining Swiss culture.. its not like Muslims are trying to integrate them into Sweedish society by putting them on top of court houses and public libraries.. they are on top of mosques like a cross would be on top of a Church. They are sparse and this overreaction has absolutely no place on a ballot. As for calling these people "bigots" I really have no choice in the matter. I can't imagine that they were anything but fundamentalist Christian groups who were selling the idea that Muslim minarets were scary and evil, a threat to Swiss culture :huh: . I don't even accept this as a clash of cultures, but rather a clash of religions where one faith is being singled out because they are in the minority right now. This is outright oppressive and I would be furious and am furious when it happens in the Middle East to Christians or other minorities. The difference is that in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia in particular) they don't pretend that they advocate religious freedom and diversity. What about when they find my hijab scary or a threat to their culture.. should I remove it? Should I comply because noncompliance won't make the relationship between Muslims and non Muslims any smoother? I just can't follow the logic of that. If my country says it has freedom of religion then I don't care what Christian Islamophobes have to say about a minaret.. it stays because it posses no threat except the one inside their paranoid heads.. and that is not my baggage.

^ Let me tell you something. A man has a lot more important things to worry about a lot of the time than satisfying his already satisfied desires. In the case where the man is never satisfied and he needs to have mutah every time he is out of the house (everyday?) then that becomes difficult for him because the number of females out there that are also looking for mutah is limited.. and even if there is a lot of females, how is one to find them? The process of finding a female who is willing to engage in mutah is very difficult and time consuming, so if he is out looking for different types of sex partners so that he can have "variety" then he is most probably, IF he finds one girl, going to have to constantly engage with mutah with only her as well, which won't really be helpful for what he wants. Now as for my husband personally, he is the type of man that finds it extremely difficult to get attracted to/engage in intercourse with a women whom he doesn't have love/admiration/respect for, so he says he would rather just wait for me to be with him rather than engage in mutah, HOWEVER he has my full permission and encouragement to go out and engage in it, as much as he wants, if he feels like he needs it and can't abstain anymore. In the case where i am with him and he still wants to do mutah, obviously i would let him he if wanted to, but my husband and i have a very open, honest, trusting and loving relationship, that is why we can talk about and agree on these things to begin with, so if in this situation he wanted it we would first sit down and have a conversation about what the reasons are for him desiring to engage in it to begin with, is it something that is lacking in our own relationship that we can work on/fix? Talking and coming down to the bottom of the desire will either bring us to a solution to the problem with us or an agreement that he should engage in it in order for the problem to go away. Anyway the best way to live a happy life is to accept Allah swt's laws psychologically, not just using your tongue, convince yourself that this is halal for a reason, you don't want to be like aisha who got upset when the prophet wanted to marry again, but like his other wonderful wives who went looking for a wife for him. It is VERY difficult erasing the already embedded mindset that society forces you to believe, polygamy is bad, your husband should love only you and care for only you, he is only allowed to remarry if there is a very good reason, etc. But when you tell yourself you want to better yourself and come to terms with Allah swts laws it honestly completely sets your free, makes you feel better about yourself and make your relationship all the more stronger. Instead of making a fight with your husband and being angry and threatening divorce, pouting etc, why don't you sit down and have an honest talk with him about why he is doing what he is doing, what he hopes to get out of it, what he feels is missing in your relationship, etc. This might fix many problems in your relationship and bring you closer together, trust me you wont regret it. And finally lol, if my mother or any other close female relatives of mine saw that this is my opinion they would go crazy :D lol cuz they are still all about "womens rights" "your husband is scum if he marrys another" etc.

Religion does not define citizenship. Unless being non Muslim is a prerequisite for citizenship in Switzerland, your statement is ridiculous. I am a Muslim American who was born and raised in the United States and when someone tries to take away my rights as a citizen of the United States I will not stand for it, nor will I stand for someone describing me as "the other" group in "their country."

If Saudi Arabia has passed a law forbidding MacDonalds near the haram (something I was unaware of) that does not make it legitimate for Switzerland (a country that is not theocratic or abusive) to forbid Muslims from having a minaret on their mesjid that harms no one? Maybe I am not understanding the analogy? The only similarity I see is Crazy extremist Muslims are scared of KFC.. Crazy fundementalist Christians are scared of minarets? Sane, rational people call out the crazies and tell them that their points are not valid or acceptable and have no basis no matter what religion they are attempting to suppress. It isn't about religion here..If you hear about the government forbidding a cross on a church you will get complaints from me because I believe that the government should stay out of our mosques and churches unless we infringe on the rights of others, which was not the case here.

I believe that religion should not take away from the quality of other peoples lives, so if they had loud adhaan every morning for fajr I could understand why the Swiss government would feel compelled to pass a law or allow a vote to forbid that. I don't want anyone's religious beliefs to inconvenience me in that manner, so Muslims should not expect their religious beliefs to be above scrutiny. There should be an obvious benefit to laws. But the minaret on the mosque does nothing to take from their quality of life and the only purpose of this law seems to be a barely concealed Islamaphobia in a country with a growing Muslim population. The minarets do not do any harm except remind people in that country that Muslims exist, just like a hijab would, and I see a problem with being so nonchalant about this very obvious attempt at suppression. I can't see anything too ominous about 4 minarets in a country with 400,000 Muslim citizens. This is not being peddled in the name of unity, it is being pushed by Christian groups who are not concerned with making Islam more welcoming and compatible. The intentions are not nearly as benign as we are painting them. Edit: The government should stay the hell out of peoples mosques and churches unless they are disturbing the lives of the citizens.. in EVERY instance.

Yea sure doc Cyan, loving the diagnosis maybe you can post me the medical report of my disorder so I can get a prescription. As for the rest of your post yes believe in what you may or try as hard as you can to create a self thought image regarding the two Marjas I mentioned but the reality is quite different. If what you say is the true then it is funny how Ayatollah Makarem and others of his calibre still meet and are receiving delegations from the Government. Just because you and your likes have a low opinion of Ayatollah Khamenai and the Government does not mean that the same is shared by others. Funny how you did not answer any other questions put forth as always; long serving politicians, the righteous pious and god fearing Ulama of Iran, the aspect of injustice by Green revolutionaries, the lack of proof regarding the insults at Ayatollah Dastghayb and so on. Its funny how you talk to people about derailing and digression while if someone put forths to you questions seeking proof and explanation relating to your post, you deem it as a waste. Peace.

^ thats a very good analysis mashallah!

A person who takes his salat seriously, doesn't watch/listen to [Edited Out] and doesn't go crazy in Muharram with beating his poor hairy chest. Come in all shapes and sizes. Beautiful and sexy too. I am talking about his son. :P

What are you on, boy? See: God tells scenario A and B both are allowed. A person opts for A but not B, for whatever reasons. How would that translate into "disagreeing" with God's laws if the person has decided not to choose scenario B for themselves? Are you with me? And how do you divide the reasons for refusing a proposal into the categories of Islamic and unislamic? My sister recently rejected a proposal because the guy did not earn enough and wasn't likely to support her as per the financial norms of our society. Kindly opine how unislamic is that? There was another proposal from a divorced guy with one young boy. We instantly rejected this proposal. Now, how unislamic would that be? These two things happened with us just recently and so I ask how badly "unislamic" is this if my sister rejects a hypothetical proposal from a man already with a wife and kids? You don't realise that these are personal choices everybody can exercise. It has nothing to do whatsoever with "rejecting" God's laws. Get that in your head, boy! Conversely, how many of e-momins would publicly agree with something but wouldn't ever dream of doing it in real lives cos they know it's not for them. I'd love to attend the ceremonies of Bro Macisaac and Bro Haji's polygamous marriages. Allah's wisdom was to allow this arrangement. Your "wisdom" is to impose it on today's women and accuse them of kufr if they dare disagree. You don't get to decide who is momin/mominah and who isn't. If she is happy with her arrangement, fine. Well and good. Don't expect everyone to tow your line. No need to throw personal insults on other posters if you fail to defend your proposition with civility.

There are lots and lots of poor sisters (in Islam) too. If the guys don't have the confidence, they can send their parents/guardians. In our family, we send the parents anyways. A lot of families do that in my country of origin. Guys don't go knocking people's door asking for rishta. Salams

I would prefer a well to do religious person.But a poor religious person is far better than a very rich but un-islamic man. There is no point being afraid of approaching.I mean not asking will lead them nowhere. Of course,it helps if there are good looking!!!! :blush::blush:

A classical music concert or performance is an amusement gathering.