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

Haydar Husayn

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Haydar Husayn

  1. There are many reasons, many of which have already been mentioned. One I would add is that I think one of the big attractions of Islam to a lot of people is the pure monotheism and the direct connection with God. These are things that are perhaps not as promoted amongst Shias compared with Sunnis. Shias tend to put more emphasis on talking about the Imams, and the Imams are also at the centre of many of the acts of devotion Shias tend to take part in.

    Another factor to keep in mind in the modern age is that most famous Muslims, and speakers on the internet, are Sunnis. Even many Shias find themselves listening to Sunni speakers because they feel they get something from those speakers that they don’t get from Shia speakers.

  2. On 6/29/2019 at 6:38 AM, khamosh21 said:

    one of the issues with the traditional argument implies that the universe was in creation for past 15 billion years and continues to expand... human beings, Adam entered the scene some x years ago, I don't know what x is, lets assume its 300,000 years ago or whatever people want, the number is besides the point.

    The question is why and how? God is outside of time and space, creates Adam from Earth's clay in another dimension and then eventually pops him and his wife onto Earth like magic... first of all what timeline is this happening? outside of time? he grabs some Earth from eartly dimension, brings it into his, or makes Adam on Earth then etc.. then God pops them in x years along the development of this universe?

    Almost by definition we aren’t going to be able to understand anything that is outside time and space, so it’s kind of pointless to speculate about these sorts of when/how questions. Why as humans do we make the assumption that we should be capable of understanding everything? We are limited in all sorts of ways but for some reason believe that nothing should be beyond our comprehension.

    On 6/29/2019 at 6:38 AM, khamosh21 said:

    sounds a bit silly... how is this supposed to be better than theory of evolution?

    It’s kind of comparing apples and oranges. Evolution is a naturalistic theory that makes good sense of the data that we have at our disposable. Since scientific theories a priori rule out the supernatural, so there isn’t much point in comparing a scientific theory with something for that lies outside of science’s domain. Any theory that relies on information that can’t be accessed through empirical observation is going to appear ‘silly’ compared to one that relies on hard data, regardless of where the truth lies. Most of modern science would have appeared very silly thousands of years ago. This is without factoring in the issues surrounding interpretation of the Qur’an. How much is to be taken literally and how much is metaphorical? Actually, I don’t see any obvious reason why most of the theory of evolution can’t be accommodated within Islam. The main point of divergence comes with Adam and Eve. According to current scientific understanding (and we should remember that this is always in a state of flux), it would appear that Adam and Eve can’t have existed (at least not at the same time), whereas reading that into the Qur’an would leave out in a position of not being able to take anything in the Qur’an at face value. So it would appear that to accept both the full theory evolution and the Qur’anic account, you need to assume that some sort of miracle took place. This shouldn’t be too much of a problem, expect for those who don’t like to believe that God can intervene at all in creation.

  3. On 6/27/2019 at 12:25 PM, Ejaz said:

    Salaam the article says that Tawhidi may be working for Sayed Shirazi. Hasn’t the Sayed denounced him already? 

    No, he hasn’t been denounced. Even if it ever gets to the point where he is, I doubt it will be a real denunciation.


    Also I was under the opinion that the shirazis didn’t like the zionists either?

    It’s complicated by the fact that they probably hate the Palestinians more for being nasibis.

  4. 13 minutes ago, Guest Enquiry said:

    Isn't the idea many or most Shia ulema have gone catastrophically wrong on this issue more frightening than the sex changes themselves?

    Do you have any direct evidence that they allow sex changes in the case of people suffering from gender dysphoria?

    But to answer your question, I reconciled myself to the idea that most scholars have done wrong on some fundamental issues a long time ago. So no, it wouldn’t really bother me even if I found out that they did allow this surgery.

  5. 10 minutes ago, Guest Enquiry said:

    If Allah can create people with the wrong sexual organs, wrong hormonal profiles (which you don't see externally necessarily), extra or fewer chromosomes, why can't he also cause wrong sexual development and maturation of the brain, considered by the scientific community as the most important sex organ? 

    I’m not saying it’s not possible, although it would seem strange to me that every element of a person’s body could be male apart from the brain. In any case, all of this is purely hypothetical, since to my knowledge scientists haven’t objectively demonstrated that such a phenomenon actually occurs.

    10 minutes ago, Guest Enquiry said:

    I don't deny many go through this and might have what you say, but can you rule out some people have the wrong brains in the wrong bodies?

    What difference does it make whether I can rule it out or not? You don’t decide what should be allowed based on theoretical possibilities. And even if it is actually true, it doesn’t follow that the solution to this is hormone and plastic surgery, which only superficially address the problem. The body might look a little more like how the person ‘feels’, but it’s only window dressing, and there are still going to be thousands of little reminders that they don’t actually have the ‘correct’ body, which will still contribute to their mental distress. This may be why there are such massive rates of suicide among post-operative transsexuals. They probably thought surgery would be the solution to their problems, only to find that  it didn’t really address the fundamental issue.

    10 minutes ago, Guest Enquiry said:

    Did Bruce Jenner do anything wrong according to most Shia Ulema? 

    I can’t really say that I care, since I don’t outsource my brain and morals to scholars. For what it’s worth, I doubt anyone has asked them, but I find it hard to believe that any self-respecting scholar could actually believe that a man who has been married three times and has had six children, is in reality a woman.

  6. 20 hours ago, Guest Questione said:

    One thing that confuses me is what stance Islam takes. 

    1. Does Allah create people without them having any desire and no fair way to exercise their desires I.e gay people?

    What would you say about people born with certain physical abnormalities that make it impossible for them to find a spouse? Or simply those who for whatever reason can’t find someone to marry them? Should they then try to obtain sex by any means necessary simply to fulfil their needs?

    Homosexuals are not the only people who are in situations where they can’t lawfully fulfil their desires. And by the way, most homosexuals could have a relationship with members of the opposite sex if they wanted to. It may not be their preferred choice, but they could do it, as many homosexuals are now acknowledging.

    20 hours ago, Guest Questione said:

    2. Is being gay heavily influenced by nurture and also choice and exposure?

    Like most things, it’s probably a mixture or nature and nurture. Although an interesting question, it’s not really that relevant to the legality or morality of something. The fact that something may be ‘natural’ doesn’t make it moral.


    20 hours ago, Guest Questione said:

    People in the past would have overwhelmingly sided with 2. Now that we are all becoming more liberalised and uniting with the left, many now go with 1, like the Christians have done.

    Why would we want to unite with the left, when they hate everything we stand for? They seek to unite with us out of a desire to attack what they perceive to be a common enemy, but make no mistake, sooner or later they will no longer tolerate orthodox Islam.

    20 hours ago, Guest Questione said:

    Given Shia Islam allows sex changes (I.e. Allah can create people in the wrong bodies for them) what is to say he can't create people without any desire for the opposite sex?

    Who says ‘Shia Islam’ allows such a thing? Certain scholars may allow it, but I have yet to see any conclusive proof of that.

  7. Anyone who thinks ‘gender reassignment surgery’ should be allowed has lost their mind. From what I understand, although this could be wrong, scholars allow operations in the case of intersex people (also known as hermaphrodites), which is a completely different situation to attempting to turn a biological male into a female (or vice-versa). That’s not to say that this doesn’t also go on in Iran, but it may not be what most scholars are talking about when they allow certain operations.

    Gender dysphoria is a mental illness, and those who suffer for it deserve sympathy, but mental illnesses aren’t cured by physical surgeries. You can make a man look like a woman, but that person still knows they aren’t really a woman.

    What’s sad to see are these Shias who are so happy to join in aspects of the moral revolution currently going on in the West by claiming that Islam is pro transgenderism. Why would you want anything to do with this insanity?

  8. 37 minutes ago, notme said:

    It's illegal to use financial influence to buy the election. It's contrary to the ideals of democracy. They don't represent the population, they represent their rich donors.

    Wouldn't this imply that every election is bought? When was the last time anyone got elected without massive amount of financial and media support from big donors?

  9. 2 minutes ago, notme said:

    No, but with proof, action can be taken, if only the people who can are willing. 

    But what was done exactly? Nobody rigged anything. People took part in a free election. They weren't forced to vote one way or the other, and their votes were accurately tallied. I don't see where the moral outrage is coming from. The fact that dumb people are so easily misled is a problem with democracy itself.

  10. 14 hours ago, restinpain said:

    How do you debunk the claim that the kaaba is pagan and the word "Allah" was used pre-Islam and with pagans?

    If anyone can link me shia sources debunking these claims I will appreciate it since I had discussed this with non-muslim friends and do not know how to answer them when they ask about it. 

    [Mod Note: Link to a banned website was removed.]

    The Kaaba was used by pagans, but according to our beliefs it was originally built for the sake of God, and was turned into a site of pagan worship. I'm not sure this can be 'proved' to a non-believer though, and to be honest, I don't think it's man issue worth discussing. Nobody's decision to convert to Islam is going to hinge on this. It's just a way of trying to cause confusion.

    As for the name Allah, it was used by pagans before Islam, as the Qur'an makes clear, but I'm not sure why that would be problematic, since Allah was acknowledged to be the creator of the universe.


  11. I don't really see the big deal. How many people around the world have been elected with far more support from the USA than a bunch of fake tweets and leaked emails? In fact, the Americans helped Yeltsin get elected in Russia: https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-meddling-in-1996-russian-elections-in-support-of-boris-yeltsin/5568288

    Is anyone really naive enough to think the Russians are the only ones playing these games?

  • Create New...