Fathwa, - How to deal with one's mother

Share

Question
I currently live in theUnited Statesand I m a Arab American Muslim who is devoted totally to Islam spiritually and politically. I am the few who desires the political and “struggles” that the Muslims face today. My anger fuels off the occupation and torture of Muslims around the world especially the mistreatment of Muslim women. With today’s current issues of Americas so called “war on terror” and the confusion events in the Middle East, there is a big gap within my family that has distinguish "who supports what and who". My brother who in the high ranks in theU.S.military and who proudly and knowingly continues to participate in the war against Islam has made me to cause separation amongst the family. I have a cousin on my mother’s side of the family who has proudly participated in theIraqwar, but he is not Muslim. With the two actively in the military the family supports their causes. As a young college student I have my views and I try actively in spreading the concept of Muslims needing protection and the need for security in this Ummah. I fight and defend not only for Muslims rights throughout the whole would but anyone who is being oppressed or who is weak. And as for this, I'm rejected from the family and tag as a "terrorist". But my worry is my mother who has openly chosen to side with my brother and my cousin only because of ignorance and afraid of being disowned and left out by her side family. Plus also her pride in being a American. I also have an older sister who openly converted to Christianity and has married to a Christian man with the help of my mother's sister )the gay between my sister and brother is 19 years(. As for my father, I have successfully changed his view about Islam and the way it should be and Al-Hamdu Lillaah, he is my closes companion. I always gave Da'wa to my brother and especially to my mother. But none seem to accept the principles of Islam. They are the types who are only Muslims during the two Muslims holidays and the rest of the days it seems as if they are Christians. The weird thing is that they know Islam but they just don’t want to adopt it. Currently my father and I don’t speak to my brother and as for my mother, I only make some effort in talking to her but I don’t disregard her, only because she is my mother. As for my father and mother, they are separated. My question is with this situation as a Muslim how should I approach my mother and my brother?
Answer
All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammadis His slave and Messenger.
Dear brother, We supplicate Allaah to pour His blessings upon you, us and all Muslims and make us steadfast on His true religion. We advise you to be in the company of religious scholars to get more knowledge and to increase your adherence to Islam.
Parents have great rights on their children, especially the mother. So, you have to be obedient and compliant with them asking Allaah to show you the right path and bless you to follow it. Allaah knows best.

Share

Fathwa, - Her husband prevents her from seeing her non-practicing family

Share

Question
Salam Alaykom. My husband is preventing me from seeing my family. The reason why is because my dad and others do not pray but alhamdouillah they fast. Also the reason he is preventing me from seeing them is because no ladies wears the hijab- I am the only one that wears hijab alhamdouillah and they don't wear decent clothes; sometimes they wear shorts and other short clothes. My dad invited us for the 1st day of Ramadan to eat there and my husband refused. Also some of the food is not always halal, sometimes they buy the meat from american store. Also, I am trying to tell my dad about praying but he is still not praying. I miss my dad very much. And I only want to go there to see my dad so he doesn't get mad. I am not going there to be like them. Please advise as I really want to see my father- I really miss him. My husband doesn't want me to invite them for iftar because of the clothes they wear. Jazakallah Khayran.
Answer
All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammadis His slave and Messenger.
We have already clarified in Fatwa 82969that the husband has the right to prevent his wife from seeing her parents and relatives if he has a sound religious reason for that, such as fearing that they will corrupt her. In this case she would be obliged to obey him.
Therefore, you are obliged to obey your husband and you may keep ties with your family by calling them on the telephone and the like.
However, if you think that your visit may have some positive effects and influence on them, then you may suggest that your husband accompanies you when you visit them.
May Allaah make you a cause for their guidance.
Allaah Knows best.

Share

Darwinism, - The invalidity of the claim that ''the fossils known as transitional forms have been retracted because better ones have been found''

Share

Darwinists admit that the fossils portrayed supposed transitional forms are eventually taken back and removed from the literature, but they justify this by claiming that “a better one has been found.” The fossils brought to public view to great Darwinist fanfare in the last few years in particular show how comic this evolutionist claim really is .
- The evolution deception involves a process that has constantly been repeated in its 150-year history. First, a fossil is produced. An amazing scenario is dreamed up on the basis of that fossil, which is then claimed to be the ancestor of man. This is all set out with much decorative scientific terminology and illustrations in the Darwinist press. Finally, it transpires that the fossil actually comes from an orangutan or a pig, at which IT IS HASTILY REMOVED FROM THE MUSEUM THAT HAS BEEN EXHIBITING IT.
- Piltdown Man, made by adding an orangutan jaw to a human skull, and Nebraska Man, depicted living in wild surroundings together with his family on the basis of a single pig tooth, are the best known examples of this. Darwinists have had to retract all their countless such claims regarding fictitious ancestors. A huge number of supposed “ancestors” have had to be removed from the scientific literature.
- ALL OF THE SKULLS so far acclaimed as ancestors of man by Darwinists have transpired to belong wither to an extinct type of orangutan or else to a human race. The reason why none of the fossils in question can be brought up any more is that they have all turned out to be invalid.
- Unable to bear this major defeat, Darwinists claim that the fossils in question have been removed from the literature because “a better one has been found.” But these fossils they describe as “better” are made up of such infamous examples of fraud as Ida, Ardi and Australopithecus sediba that have also been retracted soon after.
- Ida, a lemur fossil heralded as the ancestor of man, was a fraud on the same sort of scale as Piltdown Man. All the fuss made about Ida, which even embarrassed some Darwinists, quickly turned into a profound silence and Darwinist publications soon had to admit that the fossil was nothing more than a lemur. Darwinists had no qualms about admitting the embarrassment they felt at all the fuss over Ida in their own Darwinist scientific journals. (You can find more detailed information on the subject from here .)
- Ardi, the next to be brought up, was also subjected to Darwinist speculation and an obvious monkey fossil was made to walk upright using computer software. Following that latest embarrassment, Darwinists again had to retract their claims. (See here for more detail)
- Darwinists next produced a little finger fossil and shamelessly used this in reconstructions of a “third species.” This strange-looking human figure, illustrated in full, appeared under captions suggesting it would “rewrite the history of man,” just as in the case of Nebraska Man, the product of a single tooth. The only evidence, however, is a little finger fossil belonging to a human race. (See here for more detail)
- The Australopithecus sediba deception , the latest in the line, will go down in history as one of the worst embarrassments for Darwinists. This fraud, that even the eminent evolutionist Carl Zimmer greeted with suspicion, saying, “Not another Ida?” against inflicted terrible humiliation on Darwinists. (See here for more detail)
- That is the humiliating picture painted by Darwinists in recent years. It is clear therefore, just how invalid the claim that “the others have been removed because better transitional forms have been found” really is.
- Darwinists are in a hopeless position. They are in a defeatist state of mind because no transitional forms have been found. So they engage in demagoguery and make illogical claims in order to avoid the truth revealed by science that is so troubling to them. But that demagoguery has now become too ludicrous to deceive anyone any more. Even world-renowned Darwinists are ashamed of it.
- The fact that Darwinists now have to accept – and that the whole world already knows – is that not a single transitional fossil exists. So long as they refuse to admit that, they will have to keep making nonsensical claims to keep their ideology propped up and will keep on being humiliated.

Share

Darwinism, - The invalidity of the claim that ''transitional forms do not mean deformed living things''

Share

After the fact that 99% of mutations are harmful, one of the most difficult and problematic subjects for Darwinists is the total absence of the fictitious fossils known as transitional forms.
Darwinists have sought to explain the absence of transitional forms in other ways, in order to neutralize this fact that is so embarrassing for them, and say instead that “transitional fossils are different to what you imagine.”
First and foremost, this needs to be made crystal clear: the concept of the “transitional form” is one produced by Darwinists themselves. It was Darwinists who came up with the idea that countless transitional forms must have resulted from unsuccessful mutations between two life forms, and that the majority of these fictitious life forms would have been eliminated while only a very few survived. According to this tale, there must have been a time when a fish would supposedly grow feet or when reptiles’ arms would be wings. But this mythical period DOES NOT EXIST in the fossil record.
There is therefore no question of “a concept that we think of as transitional forms.” All descriptions of the entities referred to as transitional forms come from Darwinists. For years, paleontologists have sought but failed to find the transitional form described by Darwin himself. According to that description, transitional forms are DEFORMED AND MONSTROUS living things. It is impossible, according to that description, for them to be anything else.
Were the theory of evolution true, there is no doubt that traces of these fictitious intermediate periods should be found in the fossil record. Fish spending millions of years as its fins supposedly turned into legs, as evolutionists maintain, should exist in this alleged “intermediate state” in the fossil record.
And that is not all. Bearing that 99% of mutations are harmful, there should also be many more examples of all the failed stages pertinent to a life form. There should be millions or even billions of odd-looking life forms that emerged as a result of failed mutations everywhere on Earth.
Bearing in mind that mutations are blind and random processes and are inevitably harmful, then, no matter how unwilling Darwinists may be to admit the fact, all these supposedly successful or supposedly unsuccessful transitional forms would all have been deformed and twisted, with legs coming out of ears, half-fins and half-legs, with three ears instead of two...
Yet not one such deformed living things, nor any transitional form of the kind imagined by evolutionists, has ever been found among the more than 300 million fossils that have so far been unearthed. Indeed, what troubles Darwinists most is that all fossils are completely regularly, symmetrical and fully formed; in other words, that FOSSILS REFUTE EVOLUTION.
As readers will recall, Darwin’s greatest worry was that transitional forms would not be “IN A STATE OF CONFUSION” and that everything in nature HAS A PERFECT REGULARITY AND SYMMETRY:
HY, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, DO WE NOT EVERYWHERE SEE INNUMERABLE TRANSITIONAL FORMS? WHY IS NOT ALL NATURE IN CONFUSION INSTEAD OF THE SPECIES BEING, AS WE SEE THEM, WELL DEFINED? . . 1
MUTATIONS DO NOT PRODUCE SYMMETRY.. THEY KNOW NOTHING OF HARMONY, ORDER OR THE GOLDEN MEAN. THEY DO NOT CALCULATE WHAT WILL BENEFIT A LIVING THING. Mutations are unconscious processes. They cannot lead to two symmetrical eyes and ears, symmetrical heart valves or two legs of the same length.
That is why one Turkish Darwinist, well aware of this fact and that transitional fossils do not exist, despairingly DESCRIBED HIMSELF AS A TRANSITIONAL FORM on a television program.
This is really a desperate state of affairs for Darwinists. Darwinists have no hesitations over rejecting the scientific facts and humiliating themselves for the sake of their ideology.
People need to be reminded that demagoguery no longer has any effect on people, since it has become a laughing stock. Darwin’s nightmare has come true, the fossil record refutes evolution.

Share