Immigration Poll

[Gharib]

I agree with much of what you say. But I have a question. In the type of government you want back. How would the Islamic lands under the new Caliph coexist with non Muslim nations of the world? Respectfully.

A Khilafah (Islamic State) is different yet similar to Democracy.

A Khilafah is founded on belief. So anyone who is a Muslim would be considered a citizen in this case, while anyone who is not a Muslim but lives under this Khilafah as a society they live autonomously. There are some restriction or rules that apply to them but most do not because Islamic law only applies to Muslims.

Just as I live in a non-Muslim country, any wage that I earn I must pay tax, so too would a non-Muslim have to pay a form of tax and in return they receive protection from the State. But within this Khilafah it is an open border policy, no one is refused entry so long as they abide by the law. And especially refugees would never be turned away. In Islamic countries, which was once one land with one leader, we had centres for travelers. Anyone who was passing by to go somewhere they could go to this centre for a maximum period of three days, where they would have free food, a place to sleep in for free and free access to medicine/doctor.

Some parts of southern Europe which were under Ottoman rule to this day have those buildings standing. They are used for other purposes now, but that's that they once served for.

As for how it could coexist with non-Muslim nations around it, we are encouraged to make peace with them. There is special emphasis in the Qur'an to first seek peace with others even at times of war. I can post those verses if you wish.

 

[David1967]

A Khilafah (Islamic State) is different yet similar to Democracy.

A Khilafah is founded on belief. So anyone who is a Muslim would be considered a citizen in this case, while anyone who is not a Muslim but lives under this Khilafah as a society they live autonomously. There are some restriction or rules that apply to them but most do not because Islamic law only applies to Muslims.

Just as I live in a non-Muslim country, any wage that I earn I must pay tax, so too would a non-Muslim have to pay a form of tax and in return they receive protection from the State. But within this Khilafah it is an open border policy, no one is refused entry so long as they abide by the law. And especially refugees would never be turned away. In Islamic countries, which was once one land with one leader, we had centres for travelers. Anyone who was passing by to go somewhere they could go to this centre for a maximum period of three days, where they would have free food, a place to sleep in for free and free access to medicine/doctor.

Some parts of southern Europe which were under Ottoman rule to this day have those buildings standing. They are used for other purposes now, but that's that they once served for.

As for how it could coexist with non-Muslim nations around it, we are encouraged to make peace with them. There is special emphasis in the Qur'an to first seek peace with others even at times of war. I can post those verses if you wish.

Yes please. I have a copy of the Quran and can read them if you give me the verses. I appreciate you taking the time to answer my question in depth.

 

[Gharib]

Yes please. I have a copy of the Quran and can read them if you give me the verses. I appreciate you taking the time to answer my question in depth.

From the Sahih International translation:

The verses that say to seek peace even in time of war:
They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah . But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.
Except for those who take refuge with a people between yourselves and whom is a treaty or those who come to you, their hearts strained at [the prospect of] fighting you or fighting their own people. And if Allah had willed, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So if they remove themselves from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not made for you a cause [for fighting] against them.
Chapter 4 verses 89-90

And this one about choosing peace when offered instead of war/hostility;
If you [have reason to] fear from a people betrayal, throw [their treaty] back to them, [putting you] on equal terms. Indeed, Allah does not like traitors.
And let not those who disbelieve think they will escape. Indeed, they will not cause failure [to Allah ].
And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows. And whatever you spend in the cause of Allah will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged.
And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah . Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.
Chapter 8 verses 58-61

There are other verses too but I think they address the point.

 

[David1967]

From the Sahih International translation:

The verses that say to seek peace even in time of war:
They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah . But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.
Except for those who take refuge with a people between yourselves and whom is a treaty or those who come to you, their hearts strained at [the prospect of] fighting you or fighting their own people. And if Allah had willed, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So if they remove themselves from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not made for you a cause [for fighting] against them.
Chapter 4 verses 89-90

And this one about choosing peace when offered instead of war/hostility;
If you [have reason to] fear from a people betrayal, throw [their treaty] back to them, [putting you] on equal terms. Indeed, Allah does not like traitors.
And let not those who disbelieve think they will escape. Indeed, they will not cause failure [to Allah ].
And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows. And whatever you spend in the cause of Allah will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged.
And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah . Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.
Chapter 8 verses 58-61

There are other verses too but I think they address the point.

Thank you.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It depends on the scale, the reasons, and many other variables. Massive waves of immigrants such as we seeing from Syria will inevitably come with some crime and bad apples, as will even a smaller scale that we see coming from Mexico to America, but it does tend to have economic benefits for the locals in various ways, such as how Americans get lower food prices due the labor of legal and illegal immigrant agriculture workers. There is also the reasons behind it, such as Syrians fleeing from a violent group of fanatic lunatics or Mexicans leaving behind poverty and cartel rule, but it also can be a cover to carry out various illegal activities.
But regardless of the discussions of if it's good or not, which is a rather complicated subject to begin with, we do need to prepare for a future that involves people moving around further and more frequently due to the nature of global everything. It would be a service to future generations to streamline immigration laws and prepare them for people who are going to be coming and going and moving from one nation to another like people today move from one town to another.

 

[esmith]

Depends on what one considers immigration and how the immigrants assimilate into the country they are immigrating to. The majority of immigrants leave their country of birth to find a better life and are willing to and desire to assimilate into the culture of their new country. Now this is not saying that they should cast off the heritage of their country of birth but they should put the customs and language of their new country foremost. It seems that Europe has a major problem in this regard, whether by choice or acceptance.

 

[suncowiam]

It depends on the scale, the reasons, and many other variables. Massive waves of immigrants such as we seeing from Syria will inevitably come with some crime and bad apples, as will even a smaller scale that we see coming from Mexico to America, but it does tend to have economic benefits for the locals in various ways, such as how Americans get lower food prices due the labor of legal and illegal immigrant agriculture workers. There is also the reasons behind it, such as Syrians fleeing from a violent group of fanatic lunatics or Mexicans leaving behind poverty and cartel rule, but it also can be a cover to carry out various illegal activities.
But regardless of the discussions of if it's good or not, which is a rather complicated subject to begin with, we do need to prepare for a future that involves people moving around further and more frequently due to the nature of global everything. It would be a service to future generations to streamline immigration laws and prepare them for people who are going to be coming and going and moving from one nation to another like people today move from one town to another.

Depends on what one considers immigration and how the immigrants assimilate into the country they are immigrating to. The majority of immigrants leave their country of birth to find a better life and are willing to and desire to assimilate into the culture of their new country. Now this is not saying that they should cast off the heritage of their country of birth but they should put the customs and language of their new country foremost. It seems that Europe has a major problem in this regard, whether by choice or acceptance.

Agree with all these statements.

I'm an immigrant who has assimilated much of the US. My primary language is English.

The only distinction I like to add which others have mentioned is the issue on illegal immigrants. If they bring benefits (which I don't know for certain, but on paper it makes sense) then we can allow a change to legally bring a specific number in. This shouldn't be hard to do but it should be done from due process.

 

[YmirGF]

As a Canadian, I voted, "Immigration is a good thing and we should have more immigration"

That does not mean that we should take waves of people from any one region and it does not mean that we should be lax about illegal "immigrants".

 

[icehorse]

That wasn't immigration, it was colonialism, terrorism, indiscriminate killing, racism you name it. A country that was built on racism will always be just that. And it reject anyone who's different.

Who's got a clean history? Who isn't living on stolen land? Gharib, is it your contention that Islam wasn't spread by the sword?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

As a Canadian, I voted, "Immigration is a good thing and we should have more immigration"

Cool! I'm hoping it won't be too hard for me to move there, especially since I'll be enrolled in school and I'm employable in a range of different professions, and since I'll be moving to a bigger city hopefully it won't be too hard for me to find work.

 

[Gharib]

Who's got a clean history? Who isn't living on stolen land? Gharib, is it your contention that Islam wasn't spread by the sword?

Um..... I don't see how my coming down to your level will be beneficial in any way.
You don't know jack rabbit about Islam.

 

[YmirGF]

Cool! I'm hoping it won't be too hard for me to move there, especially since I'll be enrolled in school and I'm employable in a range of different professions, and since I'll be moving to a bigger city hopefully it won't be too hard for me to find work.

Hehe. Well, we only have something like 36 million people in a space larger than the continental US, so we have lots of room still. Bring a sweater, just in case though. The worst you should expect here is that the Banana belt on the southern west coast is prone to prodigious amounts of rainfall, as it is a rain forest area. Sometimes, it even snows in the winter... sometimes... Not so elsewhere in Canada though, the winters can be dreadful with mounds of that white stuff all over the place. Sometimes it even goes down to zero Celsius here!

 

[YmirGF]

Um..... I don't see how my coming down to your level will be beneficial in any way.
You don't know jack rabbit about Islam.

That is a tad unfair, Gharib. That said though, Islam does promote a rather fanciful notion about lands that are occupied by Muslims. Definitely a sense of entitlement at play there.

 

[icehorse]

Um..... I don't see how my coming down to your level will be beneficial in any way.
You don't know jack rabbit about Islam.

The claims are either true or they're not. My general sense is that personal attacks are a sign of a weak argument.

 

[icehorse]

Immigration IS complex. Here's a summary list of just *some* of the immigration restrictions the US has on the books:

- carriers of communicable diseases
- people with dangerous mental conditions
- the unvaccinated
- criminals
- sex workers

- spies
- revolutionaries
- conspirators
- terrorists
- totalitarians
- war criminals
- welfare candidates
- religious freedom deniers
- polygamists
- tax dodgers

For the most part, this list is not new.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The worst you should expect here is that the Banana belt on the southern west coast is prone to prodigious amounts of rainfall, as it is a rain forest area.

That's where I'm going for. For me, it's warmer winters (our highs are the lows over there), cooler summers (our low is the high over there), and the benefits of being in Canada. The rain I don't mind so much.

 

[Gharib]

That is a tad unfair, Gharib. That said though, Islam does promote a rather fanciful notion about lands that are occupied by Muslims. Definitely a sense of entitlement at play there.

Why should a country or land whose majority of inhabitants are Muslims be ruled by other than Islamic law?

 

[Gharib]

The claims are either true or they're not. My general sense is that personal attacks are a sign of a weak argument.

Yes weak argument indeed. You had nothing better, or rather intelligent, to say other than make a childish claim that Islam was spread by the sword.

You made a cheap shot seeking to provoke a reaction. But like I said, I don't feel like coming down to your level at the moment.

In the mean time, dwell on this:
"It is sometimes said that the Islamic religion was spread by conquest. The statement is misleading, though the spread of Islam was to a large extent made possible by the parallel processes of conquest and colonization. The primary war aim of the conquerors was not to impose the Islamic faith by force. The Qur'ân is explicit on this point: 'There is no compulsion in religion' (2:256). This was usually interpreted to mean that those who profess a monotheist religion and revere scriptures recognized by Islam as earlier stages of divine revelation may be permitted to practice their religions under the conditions imposed by the Islamic state and law. For those who were not monotheists and possessed no recognized scriptures, the alternatives were harsher, but there were few if any such in the regions ruled by the early Arab conquerors. The conquered peoples were given various inducements, such as lower rates of taxation, to adopt Islam, but they were not compelled to do so."

Prof. Bernard Lewis, The Middle East

 

[Aquitaine]

In my opinion mass immigration only works if the host nation has an absolute separation of Church/State and a clearly defined Constitution guaranteeing individual rights and especially rights protecting minorities from the majority.

The people most worried about immigration (those in the west) are the ones who have populated entire continents with their own race at the expense of indigenous people. I really believe they are in no position to complain.

*whose imperial ancestors* populated entire continents with their own race at the expense of indigenous people.
Do you happen to believe in retroactive race-based collective punishment by any chance?

 

[Aquitaine]

Why should a country or land whose majority of inhabitants are Muslims be ruled by other than Islamic law?

You say that, yet moan about living under the "oppression" of a western government in your cozy first world kuffar country.