With the latest in-your-face act of the Facebook, the issue is once again attracting headlines. Should Muslims react? How should they react? Where do they stand on the philosophical issue underlying all this?
In the media the issue has been framed as a clash between two camps. One camp stands for freedom of expression. The other wants to curtail it. Needless to say the first camp is enlightened and virtuous. The other is a relic of the dark ages. The clash in other words is between a civilized and civilizing West and Islam that just refuses to be civilized.
Once you accept this framing of the whole issue, the outcome is already decided. Are you for freedom of expression or not? It is a loaded question, and just like the yes/no question, “Have you stopped beating your wife?” no matter how you answer it, you remain guilty.
Look at the typical Muslim response which begins, “We also believe in freedom of expression but…” It matters little what you say after that. It is obvious that you are trying to add exclusions and limitations to a basic moral value while the other side is asking for no such limits. It is not difficult to see which side will come out ahead.
|
Christian Democrats Party’s bill to ban burqa is quashed in upper house, Greens parties condemn it as racist. SYDNEY - Lawmakers in Australia's most populous state voted against banning the burqa Thursday, with one accusing the Christian MP who moved the bill of stigmatising Muslims. Fred Nile, of the right-wing Christian Democrats Party, urged the New South Wales parliament to vote in favour of banning the full Islamic veil for security reasons and to "set women free from domination of males". But his bill was quashed in the state's upper house by 26 to three votes, with the centre-left Labor and more radical Greens parties condemning it as racist. "There is no urgency in spreading further fear and hatred in our community," said Islamic Labor MP Shaoquett Moselmane. Nile's real intent was "stigmatising an entire community", added Greens MP John Kaye. It follows heated public debate sparked earlier this month by calls from conservative national Senator Cory Bernardi for a ban on the burqa, which he claimed was "emerging as the preferred disguise of bandits and ne'er-do-wells". Bernardi's comments, prompted by the use of the Islamic veil in an armed robbery in Sydney, led both Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and his opposition counterpart Tony Abbott to declare that such a ban was not current policy. Muslims make up about 1.7 percent of Australia's heavily Christian population of 22 million, and religious tensions have run high in recent years. Anti-Muslim sentiment flared on Sydney's southern Cronulla Beach in December 2005 when mobs of whites attacked Lebanese Australians there in a bid to "reclaim the beach". The race riots, the country's worst of modern times, sparked a retaliatory campaign in which churches, shops and cars were attacked. The French cabinet on Wednesday approved a draft law to ban the Muslim full-face veil from public spaces, paving the way for a parliamentary vote in July. Belgium last month became the first country to pass such a national ban. The United Ulama Council of South Africa (UUCSA) unequivocally condemns the publication of the caricature depicting the Prophet Muhammad (May Peace be upon him) and portraying Muslims as vile sadists preoccupied with causing mayhem and murder. These crude caricatures, intended to insult and incite Muslim sensibilities, are a deliberate act of provocation. Such bigoted filth makes a mockery of the very values they ostensibly purport to uphold. Freedom of speech comes with concomitant responsibilities. It is neither an absolute nor an unqualified right which permits demonizing beliefs held sacrosanct by the ‘other’. Freedom of speech has to be weighed against other important values such as justice, security, dignity and social cohesion. Unfettered freedom of expression is a license to insult, humiliate, and denigrate. It leads to a free-for-all. Civilized society will collapse, indecency will become the norm, offensive language would be ubiquitous, respect would vanish and community cohesion would be eroded. Those who defend the publication of the cartoons claim they are no more than examples of satire, as though crude appeals to the basest and most bigoted impulses can be equated with genuine social or cultural criticism. Each faith community feels a deep-rooted passion and strong emotional attachment to the symbols and personalities it reveres. Courteous people of all civilizations are sensitive to these feelings, even when they disagree with the substance these symbols represent. The cartoon stereotypes Muslims as a people prone to violence. It reinforces the erroneous equation of the religion with terror. It is an act of sacrilege; it is like trampling on the crucifix or spitting on the Torah. This is not a contribution to free speech but an obstacle to it! Yusuf Patel Secretary General 24 May 2010 This morning Muslims have been offended by the publishing in the Mail & Guardian newspaper of a cartoon considered blasphemous. For a nation like ours, cartoons that perpetuate stereotypes and promote prejudice are unacceptable as they malign sections of the community, cultivating animosity instead of building bridges. Furthermore, it is the nature of cartoonists to ‘push boundaries’ of what is sometimes generally and socially acceptable. Islam does not condone ridicule, crudity and indecency in any form regardless of the intention. Jamiatul Ulama Fordsburg Q: Please advise on Ocean Basket Durban which is under non-Muslim ownership but certified Halaal by SANHA. Is it not against the Shariah to certify non-Muslim restaurants? Answer Our ref: hl/273/03.10/m Every time you wrap your lips around a cigarette and inhale its noxious fumes, you are playing the hazardous game of Russian roulette with no return with that which is viewed as sacred and inviolable, i.e. your life given to you by Allah Almighty. With a lit up cigarette burning up to 700 degrees at the tip and 60 degrees centigrade at the butt, you inhale up to 4000 different chemicals containing at least 50 known cancer-causing carcinogens. These chemicals when heated to this extent breaks down the tobacco stuffed inside to produce various toxins causing irreparable damage to your body. Tobacco smoke contains a substance called nicotine, a poisonous algoid. It also has substances such as carbon monoxide, acrolein, ammonia, prussic acid, aldehydes and tar that seriously affect the heart, lungs, blood circulation, bones, stomach, mouth, throat, eyes, skin, reproduction and fertility, making it the number one legal killer of our times. The World Health Organization estimates that tobacco caused 100 million deaths over the course of the 20th century. There could be up to one billion deaths in the 21st century. And by the end of today, another 1000 people will die as they do daily from tobacco use and abuse. Why is it that today’s man with this knowledge at his disposal, continues on this path of destruction of himself and others affected through his passive smoking? Are we any less intelligent or have we not learnt from this danger since discovery of tobacco used as medicine by native Americans in the 14th century? The answer lies in the fact that the pharmacologic and behavioural processes that determine tobacco addiction are similar to those that determine addiction to drugs such as heroin and cocaine coupled with the most powerful marketing campaigns mounted by companies whose only mantra is profit at the cost of fellow man. Does Islam permit smoking? There is no Divine explicit text on the subject because cigarettes did not exist at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an in the 7th century CE. Therefore, one cannot find a verse of Qur'an, or narration of the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, saying clearly that "cigarette smoking is forbidden. Muslim Jurists have however, based on various factors listed below, condemned smoking and ruled it to be either Makruh (detested and undesirable) or Haraam (forbidden): Danger to one’s health - "...let not your own hands contribute to your destruction..." (Qur'an 2:195); "...nor kill yourselves..." (Qur'an 4:29). Danger To Your Family's Health and the Environment - "Those who annoy believing men and women undeservedly bear on themselves a glaring sin" (Qur'an 33:58). And the Prophet peace be upon him said: "Anyone who believes in Allah and the Last Day should not hurt his neighbour." (HADITH) Inconvenience, harm and discomfort to others - "A Muslim is he who safeguards fellow Muslims from the evil of his tongue and hands." (ie causing verbal or physical harm) (HADITH) Waste of Money – “..But spend not wastefully (your wealth) in the manner of a spendthrift. Verily spendthrifts are brothers of the devils...” (Qur'an 17:26-27) Haraam Ingredients – “He (the Apostle) forbids (those who follow him) from what is bad and impure” (Quran 7:157). According to Dr Yussuf Saloojee of the National Council Against Smoking who has confirmed the research of Sydney University, "that cigarettes may contain traces of pig's blood. The hemoglobin from pig’s blood may be used in the manufacture of some types of cigarette filters. Alcohol can also be added but tobacco companies are not always open about these claiming that some of the added ingredients are “trade secrets”. We ask Allah to give courage, perseverance and steadfastness to all who endeavour to stub out the habit and guide family members to support those affected, Aameen. Kick out the butt or kick the bucket! SANHA |
- The Value of a Woman in Islam
- French Catholics Warn Against Muslim Veil Ban
- The Warm Heart of Africa hosts the 5th Southern African Ulama Conference
- Salaah Facilities at PE Airport
- Grains of Truth for the Cereal Consumer
- South Sudan: A pre-failed state?
- US Soldiers Killing Iraqi Civilians
- For every Pharaoh, there is a Moses
- Al Lajnah Issue 2
- How Far will you Go?













