Alms; wa ma adraka mal alms

Are we going further in the well of the Islamic state? What is the meaning of imposing alms on merchants? Who are they to assign themselves as guardians on the public? And why bound more laws of state to religion? Don’t we have enough of those suffocating laws? And where does this money go to anyway?
First of all; alms mechanism differ from one sect to another, does this mean that Shiites have to pay khums to mullahs on top of zakat? Second there are Christian merchants as well, so what is the purpose of imposing one’s ideology on others? Is this fair? And how can we be sure that this money is not used to support terrorism and more killing of the innocent? Or how can we be sure that this money is not going to support one ideology over another?
Wahabism that Kuwait fought in years back is right here in the heart on the country, all I can say is: mabrook to Kuwait its great accomplishments.

Wi 7asafa 3alaik

Advertisements

21 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. kasik ya watan
    Nov 14, 2006 @ 00:18:38

    وحشتينا يا آيا

    جمعتني جلسة مع النائب الإسلامي أحمد باقر ناقشنا خلالها قانون الزكاة … وقد وضح باقر بعض البنود كالتالي:

    سيتم تحصيل 1% من صافي ربح الشركات المساهمة الكويتية لصالح وزارة المالية
    ستقرر الشركة إذا كان المبلغ جزء من زكاتها أو دعم للمجتمع (إذا ماتبي تدفع زكاة) … وعليه ستقوم الوزارة بتقرير طريقة صرف المبلغ

    سألت باقر … لماذا 1% علماً بأن الزكاة 2.5% فقال … علشان نخلي الشركة تتصرف على كيفها بإخراج فرق الزكاة

    سألت باقر … ليش معطين الناس حرية الإختيار فقال … لان في خلافات مش بس بين الشيعة والسنة … بل حتى بين السنة نفسهم ومذاهبهم المختلفة

    سألت باقر … لماذا تسمونها زكاة إذا وهي لا تمت للزكاة بصلة … فسكت وسكت وسكت

    المشكلة إن كان في واحد إخونجي قاعد وزعلااااااااان على الآخر … الأخ يقول … ما يصير تتلاعبون بالدين بهالشكل تفصلونه على كيفكم … أخينا شكله ما يدري إن ربع الأخوان المسلمين هم أحسن خياطين يفصلون الدين على كيفهم

    أتمنى يطلع واحد شجاع في المجلس ويرفض مسمى زكاة ويسمي الأشياء بمسمياتها ويقول ضريبة

    كل يوم يثبتون لنا انهم حدهم خواره وراح يخورونا معاهم إذا خليناهم على كيفهم

    … وكاسك

    Reply

  2. kasik ya watan
    Nov 14, 2006 @ 00:23:01

    الله يخليكي لا تسأليني شمقعدك في هالمكان إللي فيه باقر (حارق ويه مرته) والأخونجي

    Reply

  3. ummel3yal
    Nov 14, 2006 @ 14:39:52

    There is no legal or Islamic or social foundation for that. It is just another attempt to make the people pay for the Goverment losses with an Islamic coverage to please el 7bayib. It’s a shame!

    Reply

  4. AyyA
    Nov 14, 2006 @ 16:55:43

    Kasik ya Watan
    Then the issue here is more political than religious. A step toward an Islamic state. Soon you’ll see other angry faces (more ikhwanjiya) in the parliament demanding to change that to the 2.5%, that’s why it should not be left as it is. Taxation is different and it does not comply with the same rule. And getting gradually what they want is not new to Islamist, look around.

    Ummel3yal
    Why should the government please these 7abayib and not others? I’m not trying to raise prejudices here, but can’t you see that the government is doing precisely that?

    Reply

  5. ummel3yal
    Nov 14, 2006 @ 22:36:24

    Sure they are dear. This has been the history. Because the Sunni Benuins have more loyality to the “tribe” head than others who are still considered foreigner. Any attempts to please the others will upset our big mother KSA 😉 It is unfortunate but it is the “Gulf” tradition 😦

    Reply

  6. kila_ma6goog
    Nov 14, 2006 @ 22:46:24

    الديرة ما فيها ريال

    هذي الخلاصة

    Reply

  7. neelaah
    Nov 15, 2006 @ 08:53:37

    تعبنا و الله تعبنا

    Reply

  8. AyyA
    Nov 15, 2006 @ 10:20:08

    Ummel3yal
    F&*^&% the guardianship of KSA, we’re old enough to be independent. Our constitution grants us this right, and no one has the right to deprive the minorities of their rights. This is discrimination, and more importantly; it’s against international human rights.

    KM
    Wi mafiha 7areem ba3ad liasaf

    Neelah
    Not only we got tiered, we are getting sick.

    Reply

  9. بالديسار
    Nov 15, 2006 @ 17:34:25

    سيدتي
    تكلمت في أكثر من مدونة بنفس الموضوع

    المشكلة أننا ببطئ نتجه بأيدينا نحو السعودة
    وأقصد بذلك توجيه القوانين لتكون ذات صبغة دينية بحته كما في المملكة
    مشكلة التجربة السعودية أنها مسحت الرأي الآخر من الخارطة فليس هناك حقوق للأقليات وأكبر دليل مواطنين المنطقة الشرقية
    وبينما تتجه السعودية نحو تسهيل تلك القوانين ولو ببطئ شديد أجد أننا نتجه بالإتجاه المعاكس
    والله يستر من القادم

    بس السؤال كاسك شعنده قاعد ويا باقر!!!

    Reply

  10. NewMe
    Nov 15, 2006 @ 19:28:49

    عزيزتي
    هؤلاء يمشون الى الخلف
    يعتقدون انهم بسلك الاتجاه المعاكس
    سيستعيدوا عصر الاسلام الذهبي
    “عندما كانت الدولة الاسلامية رائدة في صناعة الحضارة”
    لا اعرف اي حقبة يقصدون
    فتاريخنا بشع ومليئ بالمؤامرات والانتصارات السياسية الكذابة
    على جثث الابرياء كما هو حال القبائل منذ القدم
    ولست في ذلك ارى تاريخ الغرب اخضر
    فهو مرير وبه من بطش القوي بالضعيف الكثير
    ليغرب التاريخ الاسود ولكن لنتعلم منه
    ان نحب بعض
    ان نبني حياة افضل لنا ولاولادنا
    ليس بالرجوع الى الخلف
    بل بالتقدم الى الامام
    لنتخلى عن عقلية رجل الغاب ونبتعد عنه قدر الامكان
    لنقترب من الحضارة من المدنية من الرقي بانسانية
    تتجاوز الاختلاف وتبحث عن محاور تلاقي
    لنحقق ذلك لابد من ان يتوقف اللهث وراء ماض أغبر
    وإلى الامام در
    معتدل سر
    دومي بحب
    تحياتي

    Reply

  11. kasik ya watan
    Nov 15, 2006 @ 22:01:24

    بالديسار

    كنت في ديوانية فيها وايد من هالأشكال

    يعني آنا مو من ربع الدواوين … والله قاردني لما أروح تطلع دوانية ملغومة فيهم

    … وكاسك

    Reply

  12. AyyA
    Nov 16, 2006 @ 10:34:24

    Baldi
    And our problem is that we don’t give attention to these things thinking it’s trivial and harmless laman elfas yi6ee7 bilras.

    NewMe
    Kalamich dorrar, but who listens 😦

    Kasik
    Gal3itik, laish tro7 ediwaween wi had Luloo ibroo7ha bilbait :p
    Now seriously; it’s good to sit with all and know their direction and give your point of view, this is the only way we can reach a middle point.

    Reply

  13. bosale7
    Nov 16, 2006 @ 13:17:30

    الموضوع ولد مشوها وانا شايف انه ماراح يستمر ….مثله مثل قانون منع التدخين في الاماكن العامة

    الا اذا سنو قانون لفرض الصلاة …لانها من الاركان الخمس حالها حال الزكاة …ولا ناس وناس !

    Reply

  14. AyyA
    Nov 16, 2006 @ 13:31:03

    I don’t think so Bosale7, this is different, and for the Islamists this is the whole issue, gradually changing the laws of State. If there is no one to stop them now, they will never stop. Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile

    Reply

  15. white wings
    Nov 16, 2006 @ 15:26:30

    very sad situation. i think we contributed to this, oranges supported people like Tabtabaie and Mislim and this is where it got us..i wonder if we created a huge problem trying to solve another
    and how are you doing? 🙂

    Reply

  16. AyyA
    Nov 16, 2006 @ 15:52:12

    WW
    The problem is not supporting those radicals; the problem is that we lost our grip on them as soon as they became MP’s. There is no means of interaction between them and at least three fourth of the public, considering half of the population is women. And when the minority groups protest; it’s called sectarian. But this is not the issue; the issue is Islamization of the state.
    And I’m well, thanks sweetie, been busy a bit lately, all good and you’ll hear about it soon I hope. 😉

    Reply

  17. mozart
    Nov 17, 2006 @ 09:44:10

    couldnt agree more with this article

    secularism is the solution

    thank you

    Reply

  18. AyyA
    Nov 17, 2006 @ 16:34:32

    Mozart
    I agree with you absolutely that secularism is the solution. Yet, for the mentalities that been molded in years, there is a high misconception about secularism. We need first to raise consciousness about secularism to raise public support. Human right concept is also twisted to the degree that defies logic. This misconception is based on continuously correlating secularism with atheism, and human rights to sinicism, an act that is initiated by Islamist and highly supported by them. Secularism is an enemy to Islamists, like it was to Christians years back, but since the west has taken their time to reach secular states, they gradually got adapted to it. But, the case is different in Islamic or Simi Islamic states, we are just in the beginning. Look at Moslems in secular societies of the west, you see them clinging more to tribalism, striving to apply their own laws on the laws of state, on the account of minority rights. I ask myself time and again; why can’t they blend? And the closest answer is that this is not to the benefit of Islamists who believe the bases of all laws of state is Quran. But, regardless of all that; I think the time had come to think secularism. And I think it’s our duty to raise public conscienceness about it shedding any lies that were tied to it. Luloo had already suggested that on this post , and we have made a symbol (see that logo on the sidebar!), she will soon launch the campaign and we hope to see your support in that. The symbol is what we named the sacred triangle consisting of democracy, freedom, and secularism. You can add it to your blog as a start for this campaign.

    Reply

  19. wraithlike
    Nov 19, 2006 @ 05:38:45

    I don’t get your logic AyyA. You want Muslims in the west and in your country to be completely free of the Islamic sharia law and endorsing secular belief, but you don’t want them to freely choose Islamic sharia law if they want? You want to give them freedom in choosing secularism but not freedom of choosing Islam? Your style of freedom works only in one direction.

    Freedom means giving people freedom to choose any way of life. Forcing secular beliefs down the throat of people is not freedom. You are becoming just like the people you deplore. People in all corners of the world, Muslims or not, are consciously choosing religious codes and laws.

    Reply

  20. AyyA
    Nov 19, 2006 @ 12:29:57

    Wraithlike
    Sharee3a is part of Islam and it’s not the whole. It was meant to be applied to the time of the prophet, which was 14 centuries back. It is not applicable to our century or else Islamic countries wouldn’t have had their own constitutions, Sharee3a would have sufficed. Constitution belongs to countries; Sharee3a belongs to Alkhilafa, which are completely two different systems. Moreover; people are not homogeneous in their beliefs or in their backgrounds. Imagine a country like England trying to please each ethnic group by applying the laws of Moslems, Sikhs, Buddhist and Hindus, in addition to Christianity in its constitution. What will you have? A cocktail? State laws do not belong to any religion; it should give the freedom of practice to any religion without depriving minorities of their rights. And that is what secularism is all about. Take Islamic history and theology that is forced per Sunni practice and ideology in the curriculum of schools as an example. The kids of Shiite (one third of the population) have their different ideology and still are forced to these studies whether in public schools or private (except for on Ja3fariya school). Secularism demands that these practices should be hindered. And assigns Mosques and Husainiyas for these preaching and not the State.

    Reply

  21. AyyA
    Nov 19, 2006 @ 13:40:13

    Btw
    I just read Kasik’s new post, click this link please, it says much more than what I hoped to say.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: