|
|
Posted on 09/23/2003 11:15:21 PM PDT by dennisw
|
|
|
Ask-Imam.com > Islamic Politics > Question 8471 from United States |
|
To become a citizen of US one has to take an oath of allegiance. is it ok to take the oath.
The oath of allegiance is as follows: I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God. They also ask on the citizenship form the following questions: If the law requires it, are you willing to bear arms on behalf of US? If the law requires it, are you willing to perform noncombatant service in the US Armed Forces? If the law requires it, are you willing to perform work of national importance under civilian direction? My question is can we answer yes to these questions? is there anything wrong in doing that. what should the answer be: yes or no? could you please kindly give an urgent answer. jazakallah.
| Answer 8471 |
2003-04-25 |
As Muslims, we are duty bound to follow our lives strictly according to Shari’ah. Whatever Shari’ah allows us to do, we will abide by that and whatever Shari’ah has restricted us from, we will refrain from it. Hence, we are not allowed to obey anybody if it is resulting in the disobedience of the Creator, Allah. Nabi (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, ‘There is no obedience for the creation by disobeying the Creator.’ (Mirqaat vol.7 pg.217; Imdadiyyah).
Hence, keeping this in mind if one is forced to sign the above in order to become a citizen or the only way of attaining citizenship is by acknowledging the above, then one may sign it with the intention that Shari’ah and Deen will always be his yardstick and that he will never sacrifice any of the teachings of Deen.
and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best
Mufti Ebrahim Desai
On the other hand, we Christians are called to follow God first, not the state. So the potential for a conflict of interests exists for us as well, even if it is vastly less than that of the Muslim.
Good argument for paying my taxes. Thanks. ;P I had Acts 4:19,20 in mind more than anything. In the New Living Translation, it runs something like this "Do you think that God wants us to obey you rather than him?"
None of my Jewish ancestors had any reservations taking that oath. Nor anyone I know about.
I find it rather difficult to believe that Matthew 22:21's original Greek translates into "Do you think that God wants us to obey you rather than him?" This actually seems to be nothing more than a paraphrasing of Acts 4:19.
So profound.
True, although Christians follow the natural law which is universal and intuitive to all people, as opposed to Sharia law. The larger problem that I see, from what little I know of Mohammedanism, is that the religion demands the unity of state and religion. That is, it is the obligation of every Mohammedan to bring about a Mohammedan state until the entire world is Mohammedan.
The old Catholic Encyclopedia summarizes the situation nicely:
In matters political Islam is a system of despotism at home and aggression abroad. The Prophet commanded absolute submission to the imâm. In no case was the sword to be raised against him. The rights of non-Moslem subjects are of the vaguest and most limited kind, and a religious war is a sacred duty whenever there is a chance of success against the "Infidel". Medieval and modern Mohammedan, especially Turkish, persecutions of both Jews and Christians are perhaps the best illustration of this fanatical religious and political spirit.
Has anything changed since this was written in 1911, except for the rise of even more fanatical Mohammedan sects like Wahabism?
I'm not sure I agree. As a Christian, I honestly believe I could answer yes to all those questions (Born in the USA so not a personal issue). However, I also understand there may be circumstances where I may receive a lawful order which I belive G-d commands me to violate. Just, for example, if I were told to go into a peaceful house full of peaceful people and remove a six-year-old child at gunpoint. I might never have thought I would be asked to do such a thing when swearing an oath. But I would not consider myself in violation of that oath when such an unusual order came in and I could not, in good conscience, comply.
Now if Sharia specifically requires that Muslims maintain allegiance to Arab princes, then it is an outright lie.
Shalom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
