Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

forte

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    879
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by forte

  1. I think this is the most salient part of the article:

    After years of steadily climbing upwards, life expectancy in the United States has been dropping in recent years, prompting health researchers to blame the trio of alcohol, suicide and drugs. In 2012 alone, 3.3 million people around the world died due to “harmful” consumption of alcohol, according to the World Health Organization. In Russia, so many men died of alcohol-related causes starting in the 1980s that the country has a recognized demographic of women unable to find husbands. Alcohol abusers get cancer more often, they destroy their organs and they injure themselves more often. In Canada, impaired driving remains the leading cause of criminal death. Roll all of this together and it is an extremely mainstream medical opinion that heavy drinking is always bad.

    It is not just the impact on personal health which is a huge topic. Alcohol use leads to impulsive, extremely poor decision making.  It ruins the lives of not just the drinker, but their families and anyone they come across when under the influence.  It only takes one drink to impair judgement. I don't know how you can quantify the impact but I don't think there is any situation where alcohol causes the outcome to be better.

  2. Using the same line of thought, a practising Christian could refuse service to a Muslim due to the possibility of polygamy as they would think of more than one wife as adultery, a major sin.  Covering your face can be seen as having something to hide and are thereby the person seen as potentially unlawful,  or perhaps serving a covered woman is viewed as supporting the oppression of women. It is a slippery slope.  

    The behaviour of judgement and legal exclusion will be repeated, merely the specifics  of the circumstances will change.

  3. 1 minute ago, 2Timeless said:

    Am I wrong in stating that not all Arabs are racist? And not all Arabs are superior? If you think I'm wrong, then you yourself have a ton of ethnocentric bias. And yes, I am not wrong. No one nation is full of the same type of people. It's honestly just common sense. Simple as that. 

    Perspective means to look at the bigger picture and to also look at others' way of viewing things.  You are stuck in a muddy puddle of a large beautiful field.  It would be very enlightening for you to spend more time listening and learning. 

  4. 1 minute ago, 2Timeless said:

    Of course, dear brother. I did not create apologetics. Because I am not wrong. Yes, there are racist Arabs, but you simply cannot generalise that. End of. If anyone's creating apologetics it's the certain prejudiced individuals replying on here.

    and therein lies the source of your problem

  5. 34 minutes ago, 2Timeless said:

    I know I cannot have it one way. However when you have the same people repeatedly saying incredibly insulting things about your own race, one does get very annoyed and frustrated. Especially when oneself and others have tried to calmly correct those certain individuals, and put it into perspective that not all Arabs are the same. And not all Arabs feel superior. This was done many times, as you've probably seen throughout the three pages of this thread. This is a platform to discuss opinions etc. Myself and other people have tried to get rid of those certain ethnocentric biases by explaining that such generalisations are catastrophic, as they result in borderline (if not completely) racist comments. 

     

    Please link me to where anyone has worshiped a nation. I for one, have not seen it on this thread or anywhere else on the site. Patriotism and love for your country is not the same as nationalism, or worshiping your country. 

     

    No matter how mild or tame comments seem in comparison to comments you've seen, racism is racism. Ethnocentric bias and prejudice is the same. Whether it's magnified to the max, or muted in a sly manner. The comments on this thread, and other threads, have been incredibly rude and offensive to Arabs. No matter how mild you may view them.

    As I said, develop some perspective.  Creating apologetics for your sidekick's behaviour while calling out others on what you see as theirs will not fly.  Use this as an opportunity to reflect and learn.

  6. 17 minutes ago, 2Timeless said:

    It's disgusting how there's a whole thread on ShiaChat, a supposedly respectful Islamic forum, insinuating hatred and racism against Arabs. If this thread were targeted at another race would the response be so neutral? I don't think so.

    Maybe it would be helpful to develop some perspective.

    The flood gates were opened when a thread was started asking if an Arab would marry a non Arab.  The early responses had very strong bias against non Arabs as worthy of marriage to an Arab which is unIslamic.  When extreme ethnocentric bias is stated, you have to be prepared for reaction to that.  You cant have it one way.

    Also worshipping a "nation" will lead you into troubled waters as well, especially in Islam where that is strongly discouraged.  

    The reaction was relatively mild given some of the xenophobic comments.  Actually, this whole site is pretty milk toast nowadays in comparison with the old days where posters were held to account for every phrase.  

  7. That report is a gift to us.

    Any time the Catholic Church was involved in the care of children, there was abuse,  Check out the role they played in the First Nations residential schools.  The abuse was not just sexual, but also physical and emotional and cultural. Children were forcefully taken from their homes, taken to what for them would have been a remote foreign place with no personal support, made to be compliant to these men, reject the values and direction of their family, and remake themselves in the image of the priests who ran them by changing their native religion, language and culture and be easy marks for abuse.  

    This also happened in the "sanctity" of the church throughout the world and only really has been exposed in the west.  Most sexual crimes are crimes of opportunity and being alone with a child with zero accountability for their actions will bring out every child abuser.  Priests operated with impunity.  Exposure of a priest by a child would bring punishment at home and relaying how they had been sexual abused to friends would bring embarrassment and possible censure and so these boys over generations were quiet.  Some boys were not even aware that their friends that they saw on a daily basis were also being abused till decades later.  The child blamed themselves as they felt it was something they did or said that was unique to them alone.  Belief that you are to blame is, in itself, is very damaging.  This damage is often life long.

    Instead of downplaying this, it needs to be screamed out long and hard as abuse of children goes on in schools of religion everywhere - not just the Catholic Church. 

    Religion schools - including Islamic - (whether full time or after school) have not yet exposed the abuse that they know that is happening for a multitude of reasons - not wanting to expose someone who could cause them personal damage due to the perpetrator's status in the community, honour and pride and the stated belief that the organization does a lot more good than harm and so it is best just to be quiet..  It is covered up, the abuser is moved to another location, etc but basically due to the enormity of the problems and lack of being able to know what to do, most in the know, remain silent.   We need to be able to feel we have the power to act on these issues. 

    The Catholic Church was very slow to acknowledge the part they played in the abuse of children despite the many accounts from many damaged young men,  but it is happening now and should be used as a wake up call to everyone that something can be done.  The Catholic Church is no different than any other centre where there is clear opportunity and a  reluctance to act, often due to culture and pride, on the part of the abused child and their family or on the part of those we have entrusted to the care of their children.

    Members of the Catholic Church need to be applauded for the consistent and exceptionally brave (the Catholic Church was very powerful and almost ran some of the communities where people spoke up) outing of abuse.  They did not shrink away from threats, payouts and censure from people who attacked them for attacking the church. Trying to minimize this would be a slap in their face.

  8. On 8/15/2018 at 7:48 AM, notme said:

    I went out to shop yesterday.

    Who puts stop signs in parking lots? Why? I definitely yield at stop signs, but it seems that even in a parking lot with many cars I didn't come to a full stop unless traffic was approaching, so most likely I wouldn't full stop at the hypothetical intersection in the middle of nowhere. 

    In my opinion, stop signs should only be used where an actual stop is necessary, like blind intersections or entering a local highway from a residential street. They should use a lot more yield signs everywhere else. 

    LOL  Seems weird but short tempers seem to be overfed in these situations.  People can get very aggressive in parking lots.  I think the Stop signs are an attempt (probably in vain) to tame the savage "I need to be first!" beast in us.

  9. 6 hours ago, Carlzone said:

    So I guess you tell your fellow citizens to let all foreigners in to your country with the exact same rights as everyone else then? 

    Are you this upset about Iran's rules and regulations towards immigrants? Have you ever critisized that? Or is it only Iraq that you criticize?

    The imams and all of mankind are sons of prophet Adam a.s and prophet Adam a.s. is in Iraq. 

     

    10 hours ago, Carlzone said:

    Are you surprised that people can own land? Are you surprised if a farmer kicks you out of his land if you trespass? When any foreginer wants to stay in your country forever, do you not treat him differently than your natives? Do you not apply a different set of rules and regulations than for your own citizens because he doesn't have the same right to your land as your natives? 

    Or do you tell your officials to tell him that the soil of your country is his as well and therefor he has the same rights to it as every person on this planet? 

    Are you iranian? Do you say that to Iranians as well or do you only have a problem with Iraqis who love their country? 

    Would this apply to all "countries" (delineated my man) - or just a chosen few?  Does love of ones place of birth grant them rights over others?

    Should native born citizens of all countries not afford the same citizens' rights to foreigners?  

    If so, that would impact a lot of us on this site.

  10. 19 minutes ago, alidu78 said:

    Well I agree partially with you because some sunni Muslim countries don't accept at all Shia Muslims but we must not forget that in the west they also promote may things wich are Haram for us and could psychologicaly deviate many Muslims. But I would also say that in many sunni majority countries Shia could live well. I was also for exemple in your country in Tanzania and the sunni Muslims were totally fine with the fact I was a Shia Muslim. 

    You have to watch which country and where you live in many Muslim majority countries -  significant (much more than you would ever find in the west) issues in Qatar, Bahrain, KSA, many parts of Iraq, etc.. come to mind.  

  11. On 8/12/2018 at 5:43 PM, Carlzone said:

    Even if it is the opposite, that does not mean that it is the death penalty per se that is causing the increased number of murders. Why would people be more likely to kill others in a country where there is death penalty than in a country where there is no death penalty? That's not logical. The opposite is more reasonable, so this means something else is the cause.

    It is likely other factors that are causing the increased numbers of murders. Social problems in a country are known to correlate with increased crime rates. So if we want less crimes we need to focus on social justice and taking care of the unprivileged citizens of society, and not on removing the penalty from those who deserve it according to sharia law. 

    And if families are forgiving murderers and that is ok according to sharia law then there is no need to remove the death penalty from the system. It will then only be used in cases where the sharia states so and the family does not forgive.

    The point is NOT that the death penalty increases murders, it is that it does NOT appear to deter them - which is one of the main reasons people say they support the death penalty.

    And if we truly focus on addressing the social problems of underprivileged members of society due to poverty and circumstances through no fault of their own (those who happen to be disproportionately executed), it would be very hard to justify killing them within the social justice we are affording them.

    No one said to remove the death penalty from Sharia.  It was emphasized that the death penalty is permissible - not wajib. There are mitigating factors (such as mental illness) that can affect the sentence, and families can forgive and there is the option of blood price, etc.  

    The OP asked: "What are your thoughts on the death penalty (ie capital punishment)? You can discuss it from the Jurisprudence angle, but I'm also interested in the social, political, and practical/real life dimension."  That is what I was responding to.

  12. Never assume.  I would stop.

     A driver who skipped the stop sign probably assumed that there was no traffic:

    On April 6, 2018, sixteen people were killed and thirteen injured when a westbound semi-trailer truck struck a northbound coach bus near Armley, Saskatchewan, Canada <aka in the middle of nowhere with very flat terrain where you would not expect to see anyone for hours even going at top speed>. The semi-trailer had failed to yield at a flashing stop sign at the intersection of Highways 35 and 335. Both the bus and the semi trailer were travelling at top speed when they collided. Most of those that survived have severe life long paralysis and brain injury.    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humboldt_Broncos_bus_crash

  13. 6 hours ago, alidu78 said:

    I support death penalty for cases where sharia law consider it must be applicated. I think also that my position is supposed to be the position of all Muslims. 

    Not necessarily.  The death penalty is permissible but I am not aware of where it absolutely must be applied.  The judge has the right to discretion when applying sentence.  Mitigating factors can be taken into account such as mental health issues, circumstance, power position of the individuals involved etc.  Countries applying Sharia law differ in their interpretation of when the death penalty should be used.  Tunisia, for example, rarely uses the death penalty.  Then again, there is forgiveness by family members and the possibility of blood price.

    Muslim family members who forgive the killer of their loved ones are definitely saying no to the death penalty.  If it is applied, it is yet another life taken and it has no constructive purpose other than to hurt another family. The woman in the film clip above wants to have her son's death have some sense of meaning so it is not just a senseless loss.  If she can turn this guy's life around, she can benefit his family and hers and is ultimately working for the greater good of the community.  

    Being a Muslim means you accept that the death penalty is permissible, but you do not have to support its application.

    My biggest objection is that it is grossly disproportionately applied to people with low social-economic status in both Muslim and non Muslim countries and therefore open to abuse.

    7 hours ago, Mahdavist said:

    Not sure if this is always true (Saudi Arabia for example)

    I dont know either.  I know that Saudi applies the death penalty as a punishment for more than just murder; they have a myriad of reasons as to why they execute people, including political, so it would be hard to correlate.  It is easier just to look at countries that do not have the death penalty vs countries that do not have the death penalty and then. compare violent crime statistics

  14. There are so many things wrong with the death penalty process that it is hard to support it. However, extreme heinous crimes lead to wanting to exact revenge on the person who committed the crime, and even though I am not sure if revenge is a good motive for killing someone, I would probably support it.

    Anyway, problems with the death penalty in general:

    Highly disproportionate number of people who receive the death penalty are poor and have little to no advocacy or means to advocacy.  People with money (and/or power) who commit murder can get themselves out of the situation anywhere in the world through everything from paying for huge specialized legal teams to engaging in clear corruption - giving bribes or giving threats against judges, jurors etc, .  Unless it is one law for all members of society, it should not be used.

    Keeping some young marginalized, deluded kid (often a teen) in a small cell for 23 hours a day for many years, often decades, is cruel and inhumane - it is psychological torture and leads to significant mental disorders.  I understand the legal appeal process takes a long time but originally the death penalty was the penalty.... not lengthy imprisonment and then the death penalty.  

    Lengthy process causes stress for victims' and perpetrator's families.  People cannot move on with their lives as the death penalty hangs over their heads for a generation of people. 

    Actual commission of the death sentence has many mis-steps.  People killing the prisoner are not properly trained to carry out the process of the death sentence with the equipment given.

    Also, countries with the death penalty do not see a reduction in murders; it is the opposite.  Countries without the death penalty have lower rates of violent crime.

  15. 1 minute ago, Carlzone said:

    I'm glad that you finally realised that God was right!!! This is worth celebrating! Allahumma salli 3ala Muhammad wa ale Muhammad!!! :clap:

    Glad you are not feeling hateful thoughts at the moment - How long have you thought you were God?

     

  16. 1 minute ago, Carlzone said:

    Obviously you oppose God's views. May Allah SWT guide you InshaAllah. 

    You know, it's ok to be wrong and correct ones faulty views. I was recently corrected by Abu Nur when I held views that opposed God. As soon as I found out how I was at fault regarding God's laws I admitted it and corrected them. The world did not come to an end. God has mercy on us and forgives us even when we are at fault, if we repent. That's the beauty of Allah SWT. 

    I oppose YOUR behaviour - How long have you thought you were God?

     

×
×
  • Create New...