Niqab wearer asked to leave restaurant in Germany

Scroll to see replies

You're right, it is ridiculous. The analogy is ridiculous too: removing a helmet is a minor inconvenience, it does not compare to violating a deeply held view.

By asking somebody to not wear the Niqab in public you are in no way asking them to violate their own religious beliefs because the Niqab is not in any way a required garment in Islam.

Reply 401

QE2

Original post by &Hope

I agree with you... but why would someone oppose islam in the first place? Why would anyone oppose a religion or a belief?

Erm...because they don't like it? Because they see it as regressive, oppressive and violent. Would you ask "why would someone oppose Marxism, or fascism"? At the end of the day, Islam is just an ideology, and a rather unpleasent one at that.

An obvious example is Hitler... He opposed judaism... does anyone in this entire world think that someone like Hitler deserves to live?

So you do agree that someone who opposes Islam deserves to die.
Nice, but then, that is what it says in the Quran, and as a good Muslim, you must agree with it.

And don't tell me that 5:33 says that ANYONE that opposes islam should/must be killed ( thats just an isis ideology) ... it is the people who oppose and do harm either vebally or physically (not just to islam but to any other belief) who should have no place in society....

So not every opponent should be killed, only those who oppose it physiaclly or verbally. Those who just think about it should be spared. Seems fair enough. I mean, how would you know? I suppose they could write it down? What about people who oppose Islam in writing? Do they die, or are they spared?

it is the people who spread propaganda and hatred and generate divisions between individuals because of beliefs which is ridiculous and so backward...

You mean like calling disbelievers "the worst of all creature" and saying that "enmity and hatred have appeared between us and you forever until you believe in Allah alone" (60:04).

and don't say you're involved in this and go and victimise yourself.... you do no harm, you don't really oppose the religion (or maybe you do and if thats the case then you probably oppose all beliefs but if its just islam, then sorry you're just islamophobic), you just post opinions that show you disagree with the ideologies in this religion ( or all other religions which is whats expected if you're athiest) and thats acceptable... your actions don't do harm to the the belief or to its believers...

But Ibn Kathir explains that 'wage war' includes such things as "opposition, contradiction and disbelief", and that fasad (mischief) includes "disobeying Allah's law". Perhaps your scholarly credentials are superior to Ibn Kathir's - but it's somewhat unlikely.

Also don't tell me to not compare islam to other religions... in fact islam came from christianity and chritianity came from judaism and jews do know that well...
This means a lot of the quran is from the torah and the bible...

Why would I tell you not to compare Islam to earlier religions. It is common knowlegde amongst those familiar with the Abrahamics that Islam was cobbled together from Judaism and Christianity, with a smattering of Zoroastrianism and polytheist practices.

Bare in mind as well that 5:32 says "whoever kills a sole..." https://quran.com/5/32

For Hitchen's sake! Why is it that so few Muslims seem to know what that verse actually says? Do you actually read the Quran, or just get it all from Zakir Naik and Nouman Ali Khan on YouTube? *SMH*

5:32 states that killing is bad unless it is a punishment for murder or mischief (fasad), and we have already established that fasad includes disobeying Allah's law ( and encouraging others to disobey it), so that is basically everyone who does not submit to Islam.
Now, we can appreciate why Muhammad (or whoever) included stuff like that. He was looking at it in the context of establishing a new political/religious system and needed to discourage or remove opposition. He was only considering the local Arabian region. He had no idea that people would be applying the "perfect, universal and timeless" Quran to a world of billions, where not only are but a small minority Muslims, but they often feel aggrieved that the disbelievers have left them behind.

Reply 402

QE2

Original post by &Hope

WHY would you "wage war agaist Allah and his messanger" anyway? I mean aren't you against violence and a peace promoter?

As Allah has no physical form and does not inhabit our reality, it is impossible to physically 'wage war' against him. Therefore, it can only be referring to intellectual war, opposing ideas. You think that people should be killed for opposing ideas? Well, I guess that's what the Quran and sunnah say, so who am I to argue?

Reply 403

L i b

Original post by QE2

On what basis?
And who makes that decision?

A vague understanding of human inclinations. And legislators.

Wait. So now you are saying that the reality of the fetishist's special things takes precedence over the religionists imaginary things? I might just agree with you there.

I'm not sure where on earth you got that conclusion.

Why? Surely you have an argument to support your position?

Yeah, frankly I'm about done with racism and sectarianism.

Reply 404

QE2

Original post by L i b

A vague understanding of human inclinations. And legislators.

So you think there should be legislation to determine whose ideas are more important and valid than others? And you think it should be based on subjective opinion (presumably of those formulating the legislation)?
Crikey, that's almost the definition of tatalitarianism!

I'm not sure where on earth you got that conclusion.

Well, you said that reality takes precedence over the imaginary.

Yeah, frankly I'm about done with racism and sectarianism.

Not too keen on it myself, but we are talking social and political philosophy here.

Reply 405

L i b

Original post by QE2

Erm, no. All legislating is based on moral judgements. We use force to make people who do not agree with those moral judgements comply with them. That's the fundamental purpose of the state.

Not too keen on it myself, but we are talking social and political philosophy here.

With undertones of ethnic and sectarian hate.

Reply 406

Snoopy.cat

Original post by MiszShortee786

Its up to the individual.... they want to practice their faith leave them... Nuns have the same dress code as us fellow Muslims dont see them getting discriminated? Personally I love wearing the Niqaab as it strengthens my faith! its all about pleasing Allah at the end of the day.

Luckily I am not here to please allah and nor are the rest of the world. There is no allowance or tolerance in many countries for Christian worship or even to carry a bible . When you can learn to be tolerant then expect tolerance .