[.eXe]

(Original post by zosolobos0)
google/wiki:

ibn khaldun

intisar rabb

rwandan history and legal system

Indonesian history and legal system

venezuelan history and legal system

Modern and ancient history of Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Syria, Ethiopia and papers by scholars of all kinds of socipolitical affiliation past and present.

read.

book a flight to those places.

Ask the civilians from all walks of life in those places

decide the answer to your question.

gimme the cash for this and I'll do it.

[zosolobos0]

(Original post by .eXe)
gimme the cash for this and I'll do it.

click my profile page. Read the last thing under "about me".

you can ask civilians their opinions online. I'm sure many keep blogs and discuss issues in forums. I meant book a flight to experience living in any of those countries to see for yourself as ultimately only you can decide.

[Tpos]

Can someone provide me a decent/reputable link which explains how Saudi actually doesn't fully follow Sharia?

[.eXe]

(Original post by Tpos)
Can someone provide me a decent/reputable link which explains how Saudi actually doesn't fully follow Sharia?

It actually does. Perhaps not 100% perfectly (because they have been slowly modernizing...for example they just allowed a couple female athletes in the olympics), but Saudi Arabia is the closest thing to Sharia in the world today (as a nation).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_A...d_human_rights

[. . .]

(Original post by .eXe)
It actually does. Perhaps not 100% perfectly (because they have been slowly modernizing...for example they just allowed a couple female athletes in the olympics), but Saudi Arabia is the closest thing to Sharia in the world today (as a nation).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_A...d_human_rights

The person asked how Saudi doesn't fully follow it. And you reply by saying it does but not 100% perfectly. Which is basically saying it doesn't fully follow it.

[.eXe]

(Original post by . . .)
The person asked how Saudi doesn't fully follow it. And you reply by saying it does but not 100% perfectly. Which is basically saying it doesn't fully follow it.

No article exists that says Saudi doesn't follow it. Go find one if you are really interested.

It does follow it, but obviously like everything else in life...nothing is perfect so it doesn't follow it perfectly. That doesn't mean it doesn't follow it. What a ridiculous point of view. The only way to follow something is if you perfectly follow it to the t?

What if someone follows democratic ideologies but make a few changes here and there to suit the context? Does that mean that are not democratic anymore?

I know what he was asking, I don't need you to clarify for me.

[Florrick]

(Original post by Tpos)
Can someone provide me a decent/reputable link which explains how Saudi actually doesn't fully follow Sharia?

I think it's cause of its foreign policy. Remember, in history there wasn't a Saudi Arabia either, it existed as a vassal state aside the Ottoman Empire.



With the help of Britain, Saudi Arabia formed and now with the USA, its existence is continually being propped up. It's a state built with Western interests on nationalism (Arabs wanting independence) and not Islamic interests.

[. . .]

(Original post by .eXe)
No article exists that says Saudi doesn't follow it. Go find one if you are really interested.

It does follow it, but obviously like everything else in life...nothing is perfect so it doesn't follow it perfectly. That doesn't mean it doesn't follow it. What a ridiculous point of view. The only way to follow something is if you perfectly follow it to the t?

What if someone follows democratic ideologies but make a few changes here and there to suit the context? Does that mean that are not democratic anymore?

I know what he was asking, I don't need you to clarify for me.

I didn't propose that Saudi Arabia follows sharia law to the t stop implying that I did.

[.eXe]

(Original post by . . .)
I didn't propose that Saudi Arabia follows sharia law to the t stop implying that I did.

No what you said was that just because KSA doesn't follow it 100%, automatically means that it "doesnt" follow it. That is incorrect. You can still follow something without following it to the t. You suggested otherwise.

Here is the exact quote: "Which is basically saying it doesn't fully follow it."

[Tpos]

(Original post by Florrick)
I think it's cause of its foreign policy. Remember, in history there wasn't a Saudi Arabia either, it existed as a vassal state aside the Ottoman Empire.



With the help of Britain, Saudi Arabia formed and now with the USA, its existence is continually being propped up. It's a state built with Western interests on nationalism (Arabs wanting independence) and not Islamic interests.

Doesn't the fact that they have a royal family go against sharia too? Also issues of rights especially for women...?

Also someone told me that makkah and madina follow "proper sharia", I don't see how those places could but not elsewhere. But is that true?

[. . .]

(Original post by .eXe)
No what you said was that just because KSA doesn't follow it 100%, automatically means that it "doesnt" follow it. That is incorrect. You can still follow something without following it to the t. You suggested otherwise.

Here is the exact quote: "Which is basically saying it doesn't fully follow it."

Fully.

Look out for the word and read it again.

[Iqbal007]

(Original post by Tpos)
Doesn't the fact that they have a royal family go against sharia too? Also issues of rights especially for women...?

Also someone told me that makkah and madina follow "proper sharia", I don't see how those places could but not elsewhere. But is that true?

A lot of Muslims are actually against KSA, they've monopolised on the fact they control Mecca and Medina.

[.eXe]

(Original post by . . .)
Fully.

Look out for the word and read it again.

I did, but why does it even matter and why did you even need to re-state it? In the original post you quoted where I provided the link, I acknowledged that it wasn't fully Sharia (but rather the closest thing to Sharia).

All I was saying was that fully or not, it is still Sharia (maybe just a slightly leaner version of it).

[Spaz Man]

It's a case of Shariah being tacked on to tribal/cultural customs and corruption.

[AceStacks]

You will find in all 11 countries that there is no sharia!

[NuckingFut]

(Original post by .eXe)
Okay so contrary to popular belief, this won't be a Sharia bashing thread. Just want you to turn your attention to some objective facts.

All your threads start with a line like this.

All your threads turn out to be what you claim that they wont.

[.eXe]

(Original post by NuckingFut)
All your threads start with a line like this.

All your threads turn out to be what you claim that they wont.

Find me evidence that "all my threads" start like this.

Here's a guess: you won't be replying any more because such evidence doesn't exist.

[NuckingFut]

(Original post by .eXe)
Find me evidence that "all my threads" start like this.

Here's a guess: you won't be replying any more because such evidence doesn't exist.

Just afew. And they dont even account for your deleted threads.

I'm just asking in general. Everyone knows my views on Islam but there is really no place for them on this thread

I do realize my post here can come across as charged and I have addressed that in subsequent posts. However Ill leave the original post intact.

I cannot find a single prophesy by Mohammad and so my question is...how exactly is he a prophet?

[.eXe]

(Original post by NuckingFut)
Just afew. And they dont even account for your deleted threads.

None of those quotes have anything to do with each other. Your job was to explain to me quotes from multiple threads that are the same! Remember: you claimed that all my threads start the same. Now back that claim up.

Is this really your master plan against me? Pick up random quotes from random threads and pass them off as the same thing?

Keep trying

[. . .]

(Original post by .eXe)
I did, but why does it even matter and why did you even need to re-state it? In the original post you quoted where I provided the link, I acknowledged that it wasn't fully Sharia (but rather the closest thing to Sharia).

All I was saying was that fully or not, it is still Sharia (maybe just a slightly leaner version of it).

So how much how sharia law does a country need to follow to say it follows sharia law?