The Tolerance Of MDI

In a recent PRESS RELEASE, MDI (Muslim Debate Initiative) stated:

While it may be politically incorrect for Liberals to condone the preaching of discrimination against minorities, it is equally politically incorrect for Liberals to defend religions with law systems that pre-date Liberalism. Because of this, Hate mongers are regularly appearing in the media making uncontested fallacious statements about Islam and Islamic law. You’ll seldom hear a Liberal defence of either. When Nick Griffin (BNP) stated on BBC’s Question Time, that Islam is ‘wicked and vicious’ – no one challenged him on that, despite the fact that his fellow panellists challenged him incessantly on every other of his views.

Instead of providing a refutation to the fallacious attacks against Islam, mainstream politicians and Liberal thinkers will generally respond that they have faith that like the Catholics and Jews who immigrated to the UK before them, the majority of Muslims will also eventually cease being ‘strict’ followers of their faith, and will adopt Western values. This argument is dubious and dangerous, for it implies that the anti-Muslim groups actually have a legitimate intolerance, but that their only fault is rather their impatience, or lack of faith in the expected ’inevitability’ of Muslim assimilation and adoption mind, body and soul, of Western values. The assimulation and forced adoption of arbitrary values, is not an appealing prospect for many Muslims. Muslims justifiably do not see it as fair and just that they should have to change their beliefs in order to be tolerated. A society need only demand obedience to the law from its citizens. A society which demands more than the rule of law upon its minorities, upto the point where they are required to change their beliefs, or face threat of discrimination, and potentially, even outright persecution, is not a fair or just society. (source)

Al Andalusi (presumably the primary author of this press release) is making a valid legal point, no minority must assimilate and adopt Western Values, that it is indeed perfectly legally compatible and lawful to live a lifestyle within the West without embracing Western values. Mr Al Andalusi  has made one critical error, he candidly admits Islam is one of these religions that indeed has a Law system and while no minority must assimilate and adhere to Western values, Andalusi himself admits a society (including the West) must demand obedience to the Law, this essentially means Muslims are also bound by their Religious Law. Andalusi fails to mention that the Islamic sources refer to the Muslims as an "Ummah(community,society nation)", and therefore every Muslim and the Muslim society as a whole are also actually obligated to adhere to the Law of that society (in this case: Sharia Law). But how do Muslims manage to do that in the West?

Andalusi knows that adhering to the fully developed Islamic system in the West means Muslims must somehow manage and cope without being fully capable of surrendering and adhering to the Law of God as a Muslim which is why he objects to adopting Western Culture and insists on defending an ancient religious tale and it's binding code. Of course, this results in an internal Jihad for many Muslims, as they outwardly cannot adhere to every law they would like to see implemented.

How do Muslims where Andalusi lives (in England) handle this? They voluntarily submit to their own laws, their "Sharia Councils", effectively they have an Islamic sublaw operating and everything that is incompatible with their own nation's legally binding law must be voluntarily adhered to.

I would like to thank MDI for coming out of the closet and confessing it is Islamic Law they wish to see defended, that assimilation is out of the question for true adherents of Islamic values and practices. Adherence to Allah's eternal law is what Muslims truly desire, not the compatibility of the West and Islam, but the domination of Islamic Laws and the religious right of Muslims to fully practice Islam in the west.

MDI while ranting about incompetent Liberal folly also wish to express the desire to openly debate and challenge Islamic opponents in the spirit of fairness, tolerance and debate, and provide a great Mohammadan example for us all that I thought I would share with you:

"MDI takes guidance from the example provided by the noble Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him): this certainly does not involve covering the eyes, ears, and mouth when confronted by opposing views or opinions. The noble Prophet (pbuh) did not turn his back on the ignorant without dialogue or debate. One famous case was Muhammed’s debate with the Christian delegation of Najran."

I have left the web link to the article intact so everyone can go and read the great example of Mohammed's tolerance that MDI wish to obey and emulate. Here are a few quotations for yourself:

After returning from the expedition of Tabuk, the Prophet sent his closest companion, Abu Bakr, to lead the pilgrimage and his cousin, ‘Ali, to claim total and religious authority over Makkah so that no unbeliever was able to offer pilgrimage according to the old practices of ignorance.

The time had come for all Arabian tribes to realize that there was no longer any power in Arabia to challenge the authority of the Islamic state in Madinah with them now followers of the Prophet. Hence, it was only to be expected that the Arabian tribes should start to review their position.

Then we have more example of the Islamic peace and tolerance promoted by MDI:

"Later On ...

The story of the Najran people is not complete unless a later episode is mentioned; when the Prophet sent his military commander, Khalid ibn al-Walid, to the tribe of Al-Harith ibn Ka’b, in Najran. The Prophet ordered Khalid to call on those people to accept Islam and to give them a period of three days to make up their minds. If they accepted Islam, Khalid was to accept that from them. If they refused, he would fight them. When Khalid arrived there, he sent his emissaries all over the place, calling on the people to accept Islam. They did so without much hesitation."

I appreciate MDI's honesty about their willingness to adhere and fight the Christian disbelievers who do not submit to the Islamic State for the Prophet Mohammed and their agreement to ban the religious freedom of pagans.

So what have we discovered today with the help of MDI?

• Muslims truly in their hearts desire want to adhere to Allah's eternal law stipulated by the Islamic Sources and Scholars
• Muslims justifiably (through Islam) do not wish to assimilate into Western culture but to remain segregated and distant except when debating for purpose of introducing Islam and the Sharia
• Muslims wish to ban or limit religious freedom and fight for the prophet Mohammed when commanded.
• Muslims are their own society and must adhere to Islamic Law to the extent of which they possibly can.
• Like (many liberals), Muslims think freedom of speech should be limited presumably based on the teachings of the Qur'an and example of the prophet Mohammed prohibiting slander (of himself and others) under penalty of death in the Islamic nation.
• Western Values and Islamic Values are ultimately incompatible

In conclusion it is in fact MDI who help promote Islamophobia by advocating the prophet Mohammed as a perfect example of human conduct for all time for all people but especially for Muslims, what a disturbing thought.