-
Posts
-
Ok at least we can tolerate our coexistence! Like we do “tolerate” the fact that Hijab is banned in some European countries and now Muslims are banned from entering the USA land, if they come from countries of conflict (Syria, Irak, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, Lybia).
I support face covering burqas being banned but I don’t really see any reason to ban hijabs.
Regarding the ‘muslim ban’, I will mention one thing about it that isn’t being accurately reported on by the media here, I don’t know if it is in Morocco. This was already part of US law, Obama created the Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015, all Trump has really done is applied the restrictions that already existed in law. Even prior to this Obama placed a ban on people from Iraq in 2011, so this isn’t really something new.
I would also point to the list of islamic countries that ban people from Israel (Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Kuwait, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Yemen,
Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Algeria, Indonesia, and UAE).As for ISIS or any extremist groups who kill in the name of a religion (Islam or whatever other religion) to justify their barbaric behavior, well I’m not concerned by them. They don’t represent me and I don’t acknowledge them. For me and the most majority of Muslims those are criminals, who present a danger for the whole world, Muslims first since they use our young people (18-24) who represent the future of our countries, and my own country was a victim of them more than once, they didn’t even respect the place where the Prophet (PBUH) is buried and they made an attack, they didn’t respect dead people and they attacked Jewish cemetery, so they represent themselves, criminals who have to be put in jail and punished for their crimes the way they deserve.
ISIS mostly follows the same Salafist / Wahabi version of Islam as Saudi Arabia, do you also refuse to acknowlage them?
Again I will tell you that the Sharia has not to be applied in the Non-Muslim countries, since it concerns the way Muslims have to rule their countries and societies, unless the laws of other religions are taken into account in these countries, in this case Muslims’ rights have to be respected as well since they are a part of the society. If the other religious people can practice their religions freely, why Muslims cannot?
That isn’t what the people who want to implement Sharia in western countries think. In some (very small) areas we have self proclaimed ‘Sharia Police’ who will harass or even assault people for drinking alcohol, it doesn’t matter if they are Muslim or not.
Free practice of religious does not allow the practice of things that would violate the law, the same applies to Christians who would want to stone gay people to death or any other religious practice.
Financial laws, the distribution of legacy between the hires, etc… you have to look above punishments which are the only thing that most people criticizing Islam are focusing on. We, as Muslims, do not live with a knives in our hands, and you have just to look in History books to see how Muslims were in the past, when they were really appliying the laws as they have to be applied.
I don’t know what history books you have in Morocco. Every time Islamic law has been applied in the west it has been oppressive to non-muslims, I will name the Cordoba Caliphate as one example of this, in which most of the Christian population in Iberia was either killed or fled north to escape Cordoba.
Before punishing them, they talk to them, or at least they have to talk to them, and try to understand why they change their mind, and they give them a period to think about their decision.
This is an attempt to force them to pretend to be Muslim by threatening them with punishment, nothing more.
Well rewards are basically related to God’s satisfaction. If you pray, fast, do good deeds to other people (Muslims or not), being good and respectful to your parents, work hard (whether in a Muslim country or not), doing your obligations as they have to be done and other things, then your reward will be the satisfaction of God, and you’ll enter the Paradise (yes we believe in the life of hereafter).
I’m familiar with Islamic views of afterlife. I wouldn’t consider this to be a reward though.
Just for the Quran if you find its explanation (the explanation of Ibn Kathir (the name of the author) is the most used among Muslims) they would help you to understand it more. As for Sharia, I think books of Imam Malik, especially Al mouwatae (if you can find its translation), are more suitable for you, he’s known to be very moderate, and here in morocco our laws are basically based on his knowledge.
I will look into these.
And if you’re in England you can see Professors (again Muslims or not) at Universities, of course if you’re very interested in good discussions with people with good background about Islam.
I would not trust university professors at all with something like this, universities in the UK and the US are heavily politicised.
I said choice because there are some psychologists who said that it can be “cured”, so I don’t know either!!!
Yes it’s theoretically possible to change a person’s sexuality, this is something I had arguments with people over in the chat rooms here a few weeks ago actually.
But if you give people the right drugs and psychological conditioning you can make them do or believe pretty much anything.
I know that was very long, but I has to explain some points so that my conscience would be comfortable.
I don’t mind long posts, I like the discussion.
To answer your first question about feminism and Sharia, Yes you can be a Muslim woman and a feminist in the same time. Actually we took our rights as Muslim women to study, work, and take our decisions alone because of Islam, since there was a time when Muslim men tried to oppress women in the name of Islam too, using some Quran verses in the wrong time and place, but that was blocked by defending our rights using religious texts.
I know that you can be both a muslim and a femminist, although I strongly disagree with both ideologies.
My issue is more with the specific version of Islam that is promoted by the women’s march in the US. Linda Sarsour thinks that womens rights should be the same as in Saudi Arabia, which is very oppressive to women.
To clarify, I do not believe there are any parts of Sharia that are compatible with either our culture or legal systems. Well who asked you to apply the Sharia law in your country ? You’ve your own law, we have ours, and the important is to respect each other’s cultures, very simple, No?
Why did Prophet Muhammad not respect any different cultures when he was alive, instead calling on his followers to wage active warfare against them all until they submitted to his rule – from the Arabia Peninsula to beyond?
Another thing I want to tell you is that I was raised knowing that I have my religion and you’ve yours, and that none can be forced to believe on what I believe or vice versa, because this is what I learned from the Quran (translation): “Say [Prophet], “Disbelievers: I do not worship what you worship, you do not worship what I worship, I will never worship what you worship, you will never worship what I worship: you have your religion and I have mine.” (109:1-6)
Why have you omitted the fact that Prophet Muhammad revealed this verse in the context of conflict with his own tribe the Quraysh, particularly after he had been spewing hatred and aggression towards them for not submitting to his new religion? And that despite this, the Quraysh generously tried to make peace with him by offering various propositions – one of which was to take turns worshipping each others gods?
That verse that you’ve typed there is Prophet Muhammad’s reply to the Quraysh’s proposition of compromise to worship each others gods for a year at a time each way; it essentially amounts to him sticking his fingers up in disgust to the notion of worshipping alongside those who don’t subscribe to the supremacy of Allah and Islam. So it’s not the statement of tolerant coexistence as you try to make it out to be; given it’s proper context, it’s the complete opposite.
What’s also ironic is that Psycho Muhammad promised to bring the Quraysh slaughter just before revealing that verse, and he kept this promise too by doing so at a later date – which also coincides with the later verses he revealed that overrides this one (abrogation), commanding Muslims to fight all non-believers until the world is for Allah.
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/To_You_Your_Religion_and_To_Me_Mine
“There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path” (al-Baqrah 2:256), you have your will and I have mine, all I can do is to respect you as human being Who was created by the same God Who created me, and we can coexist and accept our mutual presence without killing or disrespecting each other, because surely God has created us different, and we can’t change that, that’s all.
Again here, this doesn’t mean what you’re implying it to mean.
There are three ways which this is generally interpreted: firstly is that it just simply means that true belief cannot be forced; that you cannot force someone to internally accept Islam (though this does not preclude giving them ultimatums to choose from). But most Islamic scholars interpret this to mean that either secondly: it’s specifically referring to Christians and Jews in asserting that they are not compelled to convert to Islam because they have the option to instead pay the jizya (a form of extortion tax for living as second-class citizens under Islamic rule), in comparison to non-Christians and Jews who aren’t given this option; and that thirdly: of it having the meaning you imply it to have, but of being abrogated altogether by later verses commanding Muslims to be harsh to non-believers, and to fight them all until they convert, pay the jizya, or are killed.So while there’s slight nuances in disagreement there between the scholars in regards to it’s meaning, it certainly isn’t understood in the way that you imply–that people of different faiths are able to hold hands and live together peacefully as equals–as this is unequivocally against Islam. All schools of Sunni jurisprudence are unanimous in agreement about the need to wage perpetual jihad in the world until global Islamic hegemony is achieved – until all non-Muslims are wiped out or feel themselves subdued.
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Let_There_be_no_Compulsion_in_Religion
Well if you understand the core of Islam, you’ll understand why we’ve been asked to marry only Muslims (or woman from Ahl al kitab), and by the way this is not something exclusive to Islam, but in all other monotheistic religions (Islam, Christianity and Judaism). The concept of family is very important in Islam, so if both parts of the marriage have the same faith and the same principles, it would be more efficient to put the family together and have a strong bind between them, which will prevent their children to be divided between two faiths that can be extremely opposite to each, and you can imagine what kind of person you’ll give to the society in this case.
It’s moreso prohibited on the grounds that marrying a non-Muslim has the potential to give rise to disbelief. This is why Muslim men are permitted to marry non-Muslim women, but Muslim women are categorically forbidden from marrying non-Muslim men; men can dictate Islam to their new wife and get her to convert to it, whereas women (as per Islam) are stupid and emotionally weak and thus carry a greater risk of leaving Islam and taking on the religion of their husband.
If it does take place, the marriage is considered void and she’s punished for adultery – which according to sharia entails either lashings or being stoned to death.
Marriage should not be arranged, or permited for ‘minors’. In general, the forced marriage is not allowed in Islam without the contentment of both parts, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “A previously-married woman has more right concerning herself than her guardian, and the permission of a virgin should be sought (regarding marriage), and her permission is her silence.” Narrated by Muslim, 1421.
The need for consent for marriage applies only to adult Muslim women. What you’ve ironically quoted there is evidence for legally being able to marry underage prepubescent girls in Islam without needing their explicit consent. This comes from the paedophile Prophet Muhammad marrying a 6 year old girl and raping her when she was 9, justifying it to his demented Muslim followers that her consent was her silence, and of which is all that’s needed when dealing with minors
As for alcohol, God has made Humans special by giving us a brain and a will, consuming alcohol and drugs takes this from us because of its bad effects on brain, and you can see how much rapes and crimes were made by people who were under drugs or alcohol.
Look at how much crime and carnage Muslims cause around the world while intoxicated on nothing but the f’ked up ideology of Islam; thank god alcohol is forbidden for them is all I can say, imagine how much more trouble they would be making now if they were allowed a few pints a week.
What do you say about the Great betrayal? Has it to be illegal or not? Because apostasy is considered as a Great betrayal not only in islam but in the other monotheistic religions too, and again there are lot of conditions which has to be fulfilled before declaring a person as an apostate, and a danger for Muslims’ security.
This is revealing of the fact that Islam carries a fundamental us-vs-them mentality towards anything and everything non-Islamic, and that Muslims inherently feel that anyone who leaves Islam and sides with non-Muslims, then pose as much of a threat as they feel that standard non-Muslims already do. That apostates are punished harshly to the point of being jailed/killed for being traitors and siding with non-Muslims, just shows you how much hostility is automatically bestowed upon non-Muslims.
In morocco we have more liberal laws, which are made taking into account of the religious laws, and none is forced to what he doesn’t want to do. As far as I know we were living with Jews and there wasn’t any problem with that, and there was even some Muslim (Jews) women who breastfeed children of Jews (Muslim). Sorry if my English is bad, It’s my third language.
It might be liberal in comparison to certain other Islamic countries, but there’s still a lot of restrictions and discrimination against minorities – with minority religious groups in particular even being afraid to practice their faith in public.
https://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/religiousfreedom/index.htm?year=2015&dlid=256281
Concerning the application of Sharia in England and the other countries, well what is said in Islam is the Sharia law hasn’t to be applied on non-Muslims, and if there are non-muslims who live in Muslim countries, the only case when the Sharia (or Islamic law) is applied for them is in the case of legal disputes, since the law is based on Islam, other than that they have the freedom to exercise their religions as they want (I’m talking about what is stated in religious texts and what our Prophet (Peace be upon him) has done in his time, not about what people actually do these days, which can be, unfortunately, very far from what should be done).
The idea of Sharia law in regards to non-Muslims (Christians and Jews etc), is to make them feel subdued and humiliated as lesser status citizens than the Muslims. So any non-Muslims living under it certainly don’t have the freedom to exercise their religions as they want, as they must live and adhere to their faiths under severely restricted conditions that are imposed upon them as per the Sharia. All throughout history and to the modern day, non-Muslims living as dhimmis under Islam have always been held in a state of subjugation and humiliation.
Authoritative Islamic scholar lbn Kathir (who you even refer to for a better understanding of Islam) sums up the treatment of non-Muslims under Sharia:
“…Allah said, (until they pay the Jizyah), if they do not choose to embrace Islam, (with willing submission), in defeat and subservience, (and feel themselves subdued.), disgraced, humiliated and belittled. Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimmah or elevate them above Muslims, for they are miserable, disgraced and humiliated.
Muslim recorded from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet said, “Do not initiate the Salam (greeting) to the Jews and Christians, and if you meet any of them in a road, force them to its narrowest alley.” This is why the Leader of the faithful `Umar bin Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, demanded his well-known conditions be met by the Christians, these conditions that ensured their continued humiliation, degradation and disgrace.”
The “leader of the faithful” that he’s referring to there (Al-Khattab) was the second Muslim caliph (ruler of the Muslims from 634–644) and was perhaps the first person to properly articulate how Christians ought to be treated under Sharia. He gave rise to an important document now known as the “Pact of Umar” which laid out the conditions that the Christians (which he had conquered) had agreed to abide by under his Islamic rule, and which for centuries has served as the foundational “go to” text in Islamic teachings for how Christians ought to be treated under Sharia.
lbn Kathir goes on to print a version of this document, which is written from the perspective of the Christians (wall of text warning):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pact_of_Umar
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Analysis_of_the_Pact_of_UmarIf you look into the legal systems of Islamic countries today, you will see the comparisons between a lot of their laws and the conditions of Umar in regards to discriminating against their non-Muslim minorities – including Morocco.
And now I can recall that there was an Egyptian actress, who is Christian, who wants to get her divorce but she couldn’t do it religiously since there was some complications (I can’t remember what was exactly, but I think it’s banned in their sect to do so), so she did it in the Islamic way by asking for divorce in the court (which based on Islamic law), since Muslim women have the right to ask for divorce and they get it.
“Ask” being the key word there, because they’re certainly not entitled to one.
In Islam, men control women; women are viewed as men’s property.A Muslim man can divorce his wife by simply saying that’s he’s divorced her, and it’s over with there and then – rendering him free from all obligation to her.
Women on the other hand though, lol…
They don’t have the right to divorce their husbands, they only have the right to “ask” for a divorce. And by this I mean that they have to ask their husbands permission for divorce, and it’s up to him whether or not he grants it. If he doesn’t grant it but she still desperately wants one, then she can take it to the Sharia courts, but for the Sharia judges to rule in her favour is conditional upon whether or not she can prove that her husband isn’t meeting his religious obligations to Allah, and not just on the basis that she doesn’t like him anymore.
The problem with apostates is that they start trying to make the others leave their religion, and in history most cases when the punishment was applied was for political reasons to keep the Islamic countries bind together. That’s the danger disturbing from apostasy. And before declaring someone as an apostate there are lot of conditions that has to be fulfilled, and the punishment, if there is any, it has to be done by the assigned authorities who made their investigations and all, not by normal citizens, otherwise things will be more out of hands and anyone can point anyone as an apostate. As a personal opinion, I don’t have any problem with people who leave Islam, everyone has the right to do whatever he/she wants, as far as they don’t start describing us, Muslims, as stupid and retarded to follow this religion, a minimum respect has to be required from them.
Punishing apostates isn’t politically motivated; it’s religiously motivated.
Prophet Muhammad desired it.
You don’t dare go against the wishes of your prophet, do you?
Lot of modern things didn’t exist at that time, we are talking about more than 1400 years. But scholars made their decisions about these things based on religious texts, so for woman driving cars don’t present any problem in all the Muslim countries (except in Saudi Arabia), since women can go out alone.
Women are property of their husbands, they need to both ask for permission to leave the house, and be accompanied by a male (mahram) if they wish to travel anywhere – especially in non-Islamic lands or travelling long distances.
http://www.islamweb.net/en/article/158770/seeking-the-husbands-permission-before-going-out
https://islamqa.info/en/83360
https://islamqa.info/en/69937https://islamqa.info/en/101520
https://islamqa.info/en/122630
https://islamqa.info/en/47029
https://islamqa.info/en/4523
http://www.sunnah.org/msaec/articles/women_tr.htmThe rationale that Saudi Arabia uses to ban women drivers is based upon this.
Since you talked about the Jizya I will clarify some points about it: Jizya in Arabic means paying for a favor. In the Islamic law, we, Muslims, have financial responsibilities towards our society, which is given in form of charity (Sadaqa) or the obligated one which is Zakat (one the Islam five pillars). This money (or lands or whatever we give) is given to the financial house (Bayt mal al mouslimine) to be distributed on poor people (Muslims and non-Muslims, and again I’m talking about what it has to be done), and for the dispenses that the authorities has to spend for military purposes, what they have to fix for common benefits etc…Since non-Muslims are part of the Muslim country (if they are), they have to assume their responsibility as citizens, but they cannot be forced to pay in the same religious way as Muslims since it doesn’t fit with their religions, and this is why the Jizya was obligated on them, it’s a form of taxes that they have to pay. Jizya has to be paid by basically adult men, when women, children, priests who don’t have any economical activities, old men who can’t work, handicapped people who can’t work, and the transsexual who doesn’t determine his/her gender yet don’t have to pay it. Poor people (who don’t have money) from Non-Muslims don’t have to pay the Jizya, but instead they are helped by the financial house just like the other poor Muslims, without any difference. The amount of Jizya, which is in general less than what Muslims give in Zakat, depends on the economic situation of people, richer people pay more than poor people, and money can be divided in months.
That favour is not being killed by the Muslims.
Jizya is a tax levied on non-Muslims to allow them to exist within an Islamic state, but as being fully subjugated and humiliated people – not as equal citizens. As such it has always generally been at higher rate than what a Muslim would be paying in order to place a bigger burden on the non-Muslims compared to the Muslims.
Zakat would be the primary tax that Muslims are obligated to pay to the state (and is what will be distributed to the poor), but it’s not permissible to give this to non-Muslims or Dhimmi’s. And Sadaqa isn’t collected as tax as such, it’s more a voluntary deed left to the discretion of each individual Muslim – mainly for the purpose of softening hearts in order to get non-Muslims to embrace Islam.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Dhimmi#Taxation
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/257604/islamic-jizya-fact-and-fiction-raymond-ibrahimThose who pays al Jizya are called ahlo-dima (people under the protection of Muslims by a pact), they have to be treated with respect, and no one has the right to oppress them, or to force them to do something just because they have a different religion, as what the Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) has said: “Whoever kills a mu‘aahid (a non-Muslim living under Muslim rule) will not smell the fragrance of Paradise, although its fragrance may be detected from a distance of forty years.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2995, and also said: “If anyone wrongs a mu‘aahid, detracts from his rights, burdens him with more work than he is able to do or takes something from him without his consent, I will plead for him (the mu‘aahid) on the Day of Resurrection.” Narrated by Abu Dawood, 3052; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood,
They’re already in a state of humiliation and oppression by default, but yes they’re not suppose to be killed because the purpose of them paying the jizya in the first place is to ensure that they’re not. For the hadith about “if anyone wrongs a mu’aahid” though, well… mu’aahids hardly have any rights in the first place so that’s pretty moot; not burdening them with more work than they’re able to do just alludes to not overworking them to exhaustion, it doesn’t exclude demanding of them what they’re capable of, or subjugating and humiliating them; and not taking something from them without their consent just means that while they keep paying the extortion tax, their property will generally be protected (from theft) as set out in their agreed-upon pact with their Muslim rulers.
If they don’t pay the Jizya they will punished, not killed, just like any Muslim would be punished for not giving the Zakat, and like if you don’t pay your taxes there will be more to pay, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be protected etc, and when I say punishment it doesn’t mean physical, it means they will be forced to pay it, if they can to do so of course.
For Non-Muslims/Dhimmis, not paying the jizya is punishable by death.
Remember the caliph guy from the Pact of Umar? He says:
As muslims we have to treat non-Muslims in a good manner, as long as they don’t fight us, God says in the Quran (translation): “Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against you on account of religion nor drove you out of your homes. Indeed, Allah loves those who deal with equity. 9. It is only as regards those who fought against you on account of religion and have driven you out of your homes and helped to drive you out that Allah forbids you to befriend them. And whoever will befriend them, then such are the wrong-doers.” (Al-mumtahana(chapter 60) 8-9)
The context for that verse is of a Muslim woman’s mother visiting her with a gift, but of her being a non-Muslim. The Muslim woman didn’t let her own mother in the house because of it, and then the Prophet Muhammad was asked about it and he said there’s nothing wrong with her (the Muslim woman) being civil to her non-Muslim mother (ie nothing wrong with being civil to weak non-Muslims–particularly family members–who have the potential to convert to Islam)
This does not mean though that Muslims are permitted to internally respect love or befriend non-Muslims – they’re not.
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Allah_Forbids_You_Not_(Qur'an_60:8)#Al-Munajid
Jizya is no more applicable now, since there are other financial systems which are applied, and unfortunately even some Muslims don’t assume their responsibilities towards their societies, so we can’t ask the others to do so!
Jizya still ‘sort of’ exists today in Islamic countries, just in more discrete forms, yeah.
The pure nature of it though will continue to gain prominence and will likely gradually be implemented more and more as the Islamic world shifts back to true Islam. As Drac said too, ISIS in particular are definitely implementing it because they’re the main people right now who are trying to re-establish original Islam.As for ISIS or any extremist groups who kill in the name of a religion (Islam or whatever other religion) to justify their barbaric behavior, well I’m not concerned by them. They don’t represent me and I don’t acknowledge them. For me and the most majority of Muslims those are criminals, who present a danger for the whole world, Muslims first since they use our young people (18-24) who represent the future of our countries, and my own country was a victim of them more than once, they didn’t even respect the place where the Prophet (PBUH) is buried and they made an attack, they didn’t respect dead people and they attacked Jewish cemetery, so they represent themselves, criminals who have to be put in jail and punished for their crimes the way they deserve.
Lol you know full well they’re Islamic, that’s why you’ve likely deliberately been typing misleading things here despite apparently being knowledgable in Islam. I notice too that you’ve completely skipped rudeboy’s post which touches on jihad, pretty convenient…
ISIS are only doing what Psycho Muhammad and his early companions did, and carrying out what they wanted of their fellow Muslims; they’re following Islam properly. There’s pretty much no difference between how the Prophet Muhammad was, and of the things that he did, to that of the current leader of ISIS, Al-Baghdadi. Al-Baghdadi is just the modern-day caliph, the current one in a long line back from when Muhammad was the caliph.
We, as Muslims, do not live with a knives in our hands, and you have just to look in History books to see how Muslims were in the past, when they were really appliying the laws as they have to be applied.
I’m so tempted to post the widely available picture of Theo Van Gogh here, laying in the street, dead, with a knife stuck in him. I won’t in case it gets me banned, but it’s fitting to this thread because all he did was make a film highlighting the abhorrent treatment of women in Islam. It enraged the Dutch Muslim community and obviously lead to a Muslim man killing him in a particularly violent manner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_(film_director)
To answer your first question about feminism and Sharia, Yes you can be a Muslim woman and a feminist in the same time. Actually we took our rights as Muslim women to study, work, and take our decisions alone because of Islam, since there was a time when Muslim men tried to oppress women in the name of Islam too, using some Quran verses in the wrong time and place, but that was blocked by defending our rights using religious texts.
Muslim women are as if they’ve been locked in a basement their whole lives against their will by a captor, and who then burst into joy at the moments that he lets them out briefly to take a piss, celebrating it as an indication of how much their rights and dignity are respected by him. It’s hilariously sad.
A Muslim or a feminist. Pick one.
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Women
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Women_in_Islam_-_From_Islam's_Sources
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Women
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!