Dear brothers!
Real road block is our Awami mindset of Razakar phobia. They smell jamaat every where. Justice Ruhul Amin a muslim by religion may utter few words from his own religion. For that we can not term him Razakar. So
Syed Aslam <Syed.Aslam3@gmail.com> wrote:
Syed Aslam <Syed.Aslam3@gmail.com> wrote:
Chief Justice Ruhul Amin - A Jamaati ideolog?A roadblock to the fair trials in Bangladesh !WRT:Above all, Justice Ruhul Amin, a politically and ideologically motivated Supreme CourtChief Justice has proven himself to be a roadblock to the fair trials in Bangladesh.Syed AslamWRT: http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/mukto- mona/message/ 46341
Anyone who believes that religiosity improves morals lives in a fools
paradise.AudreyM. Wrote:Re: [mukto-mona] Re: Fwd: Chief Justice Ruhul Amin - A Jamaati ideolog?
WRT: http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/mukto- mona/message/ 46112
The problem with religion and its laws is very simple.
1. Believers have not made a choice to believe unless
they have converted in adulthood.
2. Religion would impose its laws on unbelievers.
AudreyM.
"Arshad Khan" wrote:Re: Fwd: Chief Justice Ruhul Amin - A Jamaati ideolog?
WRT: http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/mukto- mona/message/ 46088
Mr. Hannan,
If you say that minorities should not have any problem with Islamic
law as long as "there is no problem of non-Muslims in any fundamental
or essential matter.", then why would muslims have any issue living
under secluar law as long their human rights are not violated? That
way no religion has upper hand over the other. If it is injustice to
ninety percent muslims (a laughable number, since there are lot of us
who want secular law) to live under secular law, then it equally
unjustified to the 10% people of other religion.
Does it even matter to you if the minorities in Bangladesh or any
other muslim majority country don't feel that their human rights are
upheld under Islamic law? Look at the human rights record of all the
countries you have mentioned - minority groups in all of these
countries are suffering.
Given your track record though, I would not expect you to see things
logically."S A Hannan" Wrote:Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: Chief Justice Ruhul Amin - A Jamaati ideolog?
WRT: http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/mukto- mona/message/ 46076
Dear members,
Assalamu Alaikum.I do not see anything wrong in the statement of the Chief
Justice.Present consttution says that faith in Allah is the basis of all actions
of the state.This means that all laws should be based on Islam.However Islam
says that no religious, human rights will be violated and civil and rights
will be same.(Please see the constitution of Bangladesh, Pakistan aand Iran and
also OIC declaration of human rights).So there is no problem of non-Muslims in
any fundamental or essential matter.
It will be injustice to ninety percent Muslims if they are denied to live under
Islamic public law and forced to live by American nor English or French code for
all times.
Shah Abdul HannanSend instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com __._,_.___
[* Moderator's Note - CHOTTALA is a non-profit, non-religious, non-political and non-discriminatory organization.
* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
