Egypt

abuayisha wrote: Caringheart wrote: Denying a service to someone because of their different belief's... that is not the same.  That is a different matter.  Especially when it is the government legislating that free choice.   With respect to the Egyptian government they have not made the opinion of one individual policy.  In other words, it is not a law that cabbies are not allowed to transport cab customers to church.   http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/should-following-your-god-mean-losing-your-job

Is the government of Egypt not governed by the Fatwa's?  I have a great deal of difficulty understanding the governments of the mid-east.


Regarding the article you linked to it raises the question...
So how do people with different beliefs share and live in a country together?

Regarding the pharmacist... I can see why they would object to assisting with abortion.  So I don't know the answer there either.  If they refer the matter to another worker they are helping another to sin(both the worker and the one receiving the drug), and is this what God would want?  God does give free will to all, to make their own choices, even if those choices will send them to hell.  The pharmacist must do what his employer requires.  We can hope that employers can be sensitive to the needs of their employees.

Regarding the cab drivers I think it should be their choice, but only if they own their own cab and are not running the cabs owned by another who has the right to tell them what is expected.  In that case they must find an employer they can work for.  Again we can hope for sensitivity on the part of the employer.  The problem is that some people will use a religious claim to hide real prejudice, but then again aren't they entitled to have their prejudice according to free will?  They are however not entitled to inflict their prejudice on others, which means, if they are prejudiced, they need to find some other work or find a way to change themselves. 

What I fail to see is what is the real danger to the cab driver?  What is his objection?  Is his soul in danger simply for transporting someone to their place of destination?  Same rule as above applies... Does not God give each free will to follow their own vices even if it is to their destruction?

So what is the answer?  I don't know.  This is the world we live in.

abuayisha wrote: Critical thinking at best is a loose translation of ijtihad.  Khan's article is indeed critical thinking, but far from ijtihad, and he isn't a mujtahid.  There is a big difference between a blog entitled "Ijtihad" and ijtihad in Islamic jurisprudence.

Did you bother to read anything I shared?
anything about the Golden Age of enlightenment?

mujtahid - was one of the very things addressed in my reading today.

" Critical thinking at best is a loose translation of ijtihad. "

What is your translation?

Every reference I researched gave this as the definition of ijtihad.


Edited by Caringheart - 01 August 2012 at 6:43pm

abuayisha wrote: He mentioned the Somali cab drivers at the airport in Minnesota refuse to allow passengers who carry alcohol or have dogs into their cabs.

Greetings Abuayisha,

Here is a great article for you to read, written by:  Mugtedar Khan
http://www.ijtihad.org/Impose-Islam.htm

I also recommend this:
http://reformjudaismmag.org/Articles/index.cfm?id=1052

It is about ijtihad  - Islam's tradition of critical thinking

Salaam



Edited by Caringheart - 01 August 2012 at 2:48pm