The Student Room Group

British Muslims dancing to hit song Happy attacked as 'sinful'

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/features/video-of-british-muslims-dancing-to-pharrell-williamss-hit-happy-attacked-as-sinful-9268418.html



The group admits it expected "a backlash" from some quarters, but the feel-good project seems to have struck a chord with the majority of the 300,000 viewers so far on YouTube, with Tweets and Facebook messages of support from celebrities, MPs and the wider public.

That hasn't stopped a vocal minority attacking the project as haram (an Arabic term meaning sinful), though, and yesterday the BBC Asian Network held a vigorous debate asking whether the video was halal (an action that is permissible to engage in).

"The issue with this video is that it touches on a lot of deeply entrenched issues within the Muslim community," adds the group's unnamed spokesman. "Lots of people have an idea of Islam that you have to conform to prescribed rules to be a good Muslim, but to us, as young second and third generation British Muslims, that's not the case. We're thankful to have grown up in a British society with freedom of expression... And we're thankful that our faith gives us the room to be British and to be a Muslim. Some people don't see that. They don't see Islam as pluralistic [as we do]."

Scroll to see replies

"clap along, if you feel, that, wearing a headscarf or growing a moustacheless beard is in the qur'an when it's not"
(edited 10 years ago)
People don't need to follow anyone. We're all individuals.
Original post by Snagprophet
People don't need to follow anyone. We're all individuals.


was that intentionally a line from life of brian or was it an accident? :lol:
Original post by Sunny_Smiles
was that intentionally a line from life of brian or was it an accident? :lol:


It started as coincidence, i.e. no-one shouldn't have to follow what someone says is unlawful on the level of eating pork or trying to defuse tensions by encouraging integration and feeling good. But then I instigated the rest.
Reply 5
Avatar for Enderof
Enderof
3
I think the battle between moderate and hardline muslims is something I'm glad I'm not part of.
Reply 6
Avatar for Gjaykay
Gjaykay
11
Why do the 'vocal minority' care so much? I fail to see how it affects them in any way at all.

Urg, attention seekers.
A Muslims worst enemy is not from another religion, no- they're the enemies within. Every positive thing done, gets backlash from our very own 'ummah'.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Sunny_Smiles
"clap along, if you feel, that, wearing a headscarf or growing a moustacheless beard is in the qur'an when it's not"


This lol.

Anyhow I'm not surprised, it's great to see that Britain and the British identity is being vindicated by it's inclusiveness. it shows that Isn't all authoritarian rules and violence as much as it gets that rep.


Still it IS Islam and Islam does seem to have an issue with these kinds of lifeless kill-joys who feel it's fine to restrict the human spirit and body to nothing but miserable drudgery.

STILL, Christianity used to be equally fun-sucking. Just got to give it time.


A Muslims worst enemy is not from another religion, no- they're the enemies within. Every positive thing done, gets backlash from our very own 'ummah'.


The middle-east's conflicts and divides is enough evidence of this. The power-games between Arabia and Iran, the constant sectarian conflicts in Iraq, Syria and all around really.

A people are strong when they embrace their diversity, not shun it. believing that hegemony equals strength is ironically a fast track to mediocrity.
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 9
Avatar for DeLite
DeLite
OP
4
Original post by Gjaykay
Why do the 'vocal minority' care so much? I fail to see how it affects them in any way at all.

Urg, attention seekers.


Maybe TSR's I-Soc can answer that question because we seem to have many from this "vocal minority" in this site. Just browse the society thread and you'll see how much of a hysterically negative reaction this has generated. The same with the most popular Muslim forum, Ummah.com.


Original post by Iqbal007
My norms are not the "Western World", OUR NORMS IS THAT OF ISLAM.............actually I am Muslim first foremost, and I am everything else afterwards..........yes and Allah gave us the Quran to follow, provided us with the prophets to guide us and how we conduct ourselves and how to apply what Allah wishes of us via the Quran.

And of course we can be upset.........it's trying to generalise the many British Muslims out there who do not want to associate themselves with such acts, they could've done it differently by stating "some" or "us", etc but rather they put us all under there banner.


Original post by musa12
Please don't try justify them.


Original post by DarkMystryXxX
wow what is this subhanallah this is haraam in many levels.


Original post by Iqbal007
The video itself to many practicing Muslims shows a side of Muslims trying to bend backwards to try and fit in, essentially trying to change and twist the standard expectations to that of the norms of the Western world. However whatever their "good" intentions were, the video highlighted a different side to the issue and is actually causing a backlash by Muslims.


Original post by Tpos
I agree, it's all about showing we're normal and blah blah blah, yet in the process they're close to going against Islamic rulings, if they haven't already.


Original post by musa12
Lets see

-Music
-Free mixing
-Dancing in front of non-mahram men
-Women bringing attraction on to her self


Original post by #Brownie
[video="youtube;q1WAuWTVuSw"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1WAuWTVuSw&feature=yout u.be[/video]
Standard thing really. EDL-types aside, the biggest obstacle for Muslims wanting to live in the west and be part of wider society (rather than exist in an isolated enclave) seems to be the fundies who share the same religion and attack anyone who deviates from their horrible, oppressive interpretation of it.
Reply 11
Avatar for Enderof
Enderof
3
yeah and the earliest texts don't have the diacritical marks, which leaves it pretty open to interpretation whether parts of it were erroneous when they added the marks.
Oh bloody hell, there's always something with these people
Original post by russellsteapot
Standard thing really. EDL-types aside, the biggest obstacle for Muslims wanting to live in the west and be part of wider society (rather than exist in an isolated enclave) seems to be the fundies who share the same religion and attack anyone who deviates from their horrible, oppressive interpretation of it.


I think the reticence of "moderate" Muslims to rein in their fundamentalist brethren is as much of a problem as the fundamentalists themselves
Original post by MostUncivilised
I think the reticence of "moderate" Muslims to rein in their fundamentalist brethren is as much of a problem as the fundamentalists themselves


Why should moderate muslims be responsible for "reining in their fundamentalist brethren"?
Original post by Savvy Sage
Why should moderate muslims be responsible for "reining in their fundamentalist brethren"?


They are not responsible for regulating them, but they are responsible for publicly repudiating them if they want us to accept that there is something known as "moderate Islam".
Why are licence fee payers subsidising religious debates on BBC Asian Network?

An issue is either worth debating in Radio 4 or not at all. Time to scrap the excess.
Original post by MostUncivilised
They are not responsible for regulating them, but they are responsible for publicly repudiating them if they want us to accept that there is something known as "moderate Islam".


I don't need moderate muslims to repudiate fundamentalists to acknowledge the existence of moderate Islam just like I don't need domestic dogs to "argue" against wild dogs to acknowledge the existence of domesticated dogs. I'm having trouble realizing this obligation, could you express it in symbolic logic or find an analogy I can understand please?
Original post by Savvy Sage
I don't need moderate muslims to repudiate fundamentalists to acknowledge the existence of moderate Islam just like I don't need domestic dogs to "argue" against wild dogs to acknowledge the existence of domesticated dogs. I'm having trouble realizing this obligation, could you express it in symbolic logic or find an analogy I can understand please?


I don't see why you require an analogy to understand, my point is quite clear.

It is interesting that you're asking for a socio-political issue to be expressed in symbolic logic, do you have difficulty with prose?
Original post by MostUncivilised
I don't see why you require an analogy to understand, my point is quite clear.

It is interesting that you're asking for a socio-political issue to be expressed in symbolic logic, do you have difficulty with prose?


Your point was you want moderate muslims to repudiate fundamental muslims. I feel your choice of wording is misleading in that you (as opposed to a majority of people) would only accept the existence of moderate muslims if moderate muslims repudiate fundamentalists - indeed, there is no line of logic that demands the above repudiation to validate the existence of moderate muslims.

Logic helps decipher between fact and opinion/desire. You desire moderates to repudiate fundamentalists instead of "moderates must repudiate to validate their existence." Actually I find people resort to prose when they have a difficulty with symbolic logic.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you