Most Muslims are aware of their roles within the Ummah. I would say it is inappropriate to call this person a traitor. He needs to be educated and convinced.
At least he voiced his thoughts out. Some are silent and leaving Islam silently to avoid 'noise'.
It is unfortunate that this is the reality of many Muslims in the West.
They need moral support, and encouragement.
Those who are lucky to be living where Islam is easily a way of life may not understand what it means to live in Islamically hostile environments.
And this article has pointed out succinctly what is needed if Muslims in other places.
If secularism can be imposed on Muslim majority countries, there's no sin for Muslims to convince citizens of secular countries of the potence of Islam in their lives.
If shaytan is not ashame of spreading his evil, why should any Muslim be ashame of spreading his virtue?
You're mistaken. I'm meant the opposite. If you want a completely different legal system like Shariah you're violating the social contract of your nation. That's why I called Muslims traitors. In many secular countries you're supposed to pledge allegiance to a constitution.
Based on your past comments and this one, am I to understand that you’re an apostate? Or just an anti-traditionalist person who believes he’s a Muslim? Asking out of curiosity.
I see. Like I said before, I think you're falling short in understanding certain things, like what a social contract actually demands from a citizen or the differences between Western colonialism vs. other forms of territorial conquests.
I unfortunately do not have the time for lengthy textual back and forths. My offer still stands to telegramming and exchanging voice notes (you can type, while I send a voice note).
This isn't being a traitor unless you directly attack the constitution or the government and its people but if I tell people about Islam and convince them with the truth alone, then this means even the people want the Shariah
Well, I never said Muslims should impose the Shariah on others. That is not Islam. That is what the west does to the world anyway - impose, blackmail, sanction economically and coerce others to accept its ways.
I said Muslim should convince others. Unless there's no freedom of expression or freedom of religion in those countries.
Are Muslims not allowed to express their faith in the West?
Muslim should contribute to the west through their faith.
How about the people who leave Islam but were born into the faith? Even in "liberal" Muslim countries like Malaysia it's illegal for Muslims to leave the religion.
Traitors
Most Muslims are aware of their roles within the Ummah. I would say it is inappropriate to call this person a traitor. He needs to be educated and convinced.
At least he voiced his thoughts out. Some are silent and leaving Islam silently to avoid 'noise'.
It is unfortunate that this is the reality of many Muslims in the West.
They need moral support, and encouragement.
Those who are lucky to be living where Islam is easily a way of life may not understand what it means to live in Islamically hostile environments.
And this article has pointed out succinctly what is needed if Muslims in other places.
If secularism can be imposed on Muslim majority countries, there's no sin for Muslims to convince citizens of secular countries of the potence of Islam in their lives.
If shaytan is not ashame of spreading his evil, why should any Muslim be ashame of spreading his virtue?
You're mistaken. I'm meant the opposite. If you want a completely different legal system like Shariah you're violating the social contract of your nation. That's why I called Muslims traitors. In many secular countries you're supposed to pledge allegiance to a constitution.
Based on your past comments and this one, am I to understand that you’re an apostate? Or just an anti-traditionalist person who believes he’s a Muslim? Asking out of curiosity.
Former. I'm agnostic.
I see. Like I said before, I think you're falling short in understanding certain things, like what a social contract actually demands from a citizen or the differences between Western colonialism vs. other forms of territorial conquests.
I unfortunately do not have the time for lengthy textual back and forths. My offer still stands to telegramming and exchanging voice notes (you can type, while I send a voice note).
Oh, I see.
This isn't being a traitor unless you directly attack the constitution or the government and its people but if I tell people about Islam and convince them with the truth alone, then this means even the people want the Shariah
Well, I never said Muslims should impose the Shariah on others. That is not Islam. That is what the west does to the world anyway - impose, blackmail, sanction economically and coerce others to accept its ways.
I said Muslim should convince others. Unless there's no freedom of expression or freedom of religion in those countries.
Are Muslims not allowed to express their faith in the West?
Muslim should contribute to the west through their faith.
Colonisation wasn't unique to the West. Muslims invaded and imposed their legal systems and taxes on non Muslims as well.
Colonisation happens when you take a foreign land and replace the indigenous people with your own.
Colonialism is the domination of a foreign land to steal resources and exploit the natives for the benefit of your own mother land.
These are never what the Caliphate was
https://muslimskeptic.com/2024/01/10/islam-arab-colonialism/
Yeah. Muslim empires just stole people's land and taxed for their ruler's benefit. That's so much better right?
That's not colonisation. That's imperialism.
Except if you were born in said country. You don’t sign anything. Therefore, SHARIA FTW.
;)
How about the people who leave Islam but were born into the faith? Even in "liberal" Muslim countries like Malaysia it's illegal for Muslims to leave the religion.
What about them?
Anyways, my point stands. No agreement made when being born in a land. Reee all you want, doesn't change that fact.