Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 

Imams across UK to reassure worshippers about Covid vaccines

You have contributed 0.0% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
To appreciate this topic, click 'Appreciate Topic' on the right.
Rank Image
abu mohammed's avatar
London
23,466
Brother
9,091
abu mohammed's avatar
#1 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 02:15
www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/14/imams-mosques-uk-re...

Imams across UK to reassure worshippers about Covid vaccines
Sermons at Friday prayers will focus on issue in order to ease concerns of Muslim Britons about Covid jabs


Thu 14 Jan 2021

Imams in mosques across the UK will deliver sermons at Friday prayers this week seeking to reassure worshippers about the safety and legitimacy of Covid-19 vaccinations and reminding them of the Islamic injunction to save lives.

The coordinated move comes amid some scepticism and anxiety within Muslim communities about the vaccines, and concern about slow take-up in some parts of the country.

Imams will say that the vaccines are halal – permissible in Islam – and there should be no hesitation in taking them. They will urge worshippers to dismiss rumours, myths and “fake news” about the jabs and say: “It is our ethical duty to protect ourselves and others from harm.”

The initiative comes from the Mosques and Imams National Advisory Board (Minab), and the message will be delivered via more than 100 mosques, some of which are operating online because of the risk of infection.

“Scepticism is driven by two things,” said Qari Asim, the chair of Minab and an imam in Leeds. “First, there are legitimate questions about whether the vaccines are halal, which we have looked into and both vaccines in use in the UK are perfectly permissible.

“Second are the rumours, myths, conspiracy theories and fake news, which we have debunked. Misinformation could cost lives and must be challenged.”

Myths include suggestions that people could be “tagged” during the vaccination process. In an article on Imams Online, Asim points out that “there is already an unprecedented amount of scrutiny and intrusion into our private lives with our phones, CCTV, GPS, and other technological advancements”. Vaccination is not linked to surveillance or any other form of information-gathering, he says.

Another myth circulating is that Covid vaccinations could modify a person’s DNA; the mRNA technology used in the vaccines “does not lead to change in DNA or future genetic changes in the vaccinated person”, Asim writes.

“Those wary of the vaccine, your individual choice and feelings are respected, but we must all stop the spread of disinformation and conspiracy theories. A belief in these conspiracy theories can risk someone’s life.”

Minab has partnered with the British Islamic Medical Association (BIMA) in its campaign to convince Muslims of the safety and legitimacy of the vaccines, and is hosting a series of webinars to answer people’s questions. The Muslim Council of Britain has also circulated BIMA’s position statement on the Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccines, which states they contain no animal products or human embryo cells.

Muslim religious and community leaders are concerned about hostility if there is poor take-up of the vaccines. “We do not want to fan the flames of Islamophobia and give rise to scapegoating communities,” wrote Asim.

He said take-up among Muslims had initially been low in some parts of the country, such as Bradford, but the campaign was having an impact. “Some imams who are eligible for vaccination have been filmed while having the jab to give others confidence,” he said.

Many Muslims and others from black and minority ethnic backgrounds have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic, with significantly higher death rates.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
abu mohammed's avatar
London
23,466
Brother
9,091
abu mohammed's avatar
#2 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 02:48
Quote:
Imams will say that the vaccines are halal – permissible in Islam – and there should be no hesitation in taking them. They will urge worshippers to dismiss rumours, myths and “fake news” about the jabs and say: “It is our ethical duty to protect ourselves and others from harm.”


Halal and permissible if fine.

Quote:
There should be no hesitation in taking them?
This I have to disagree with strongly based on comments and facts put forward by doctors, doctors who have taken the jab, doctors who have not taken the jab, medical experts and members of BIMA!

As I mentioned, my wife was offered the vaccine a couple of weeks ago but she refused to take it at the time and wanted more time to think about it. In fact, she even considered having it tomorrow.

However, after speaking to many colleagues including doctors, nurses, managerial staff, Muslim doctors, and members of Muslim medical organisations, she concluded that she will not have it for now.

Here's what we gathered:

If you’re working anywhere near patients I would DEFINITELY recommend it.

IF you are wearing PPE all the time, then you have some protection inshaAllah. (I.e. you don't need it)

Depends on level of contact with others WITHOUT ppe (i.e. you don't need it depending on certain things)

Side effects are not known yet.

Wait till the second dose is administered, then keep an eye on us and note our health (so even the doctors uncertain)

It's been a very short time since it's been out. Not much data available. (So it's better to wait)

I (doctor working from home) have NO contact outside my home except in supermarkets etc so not for another month or two for further data to be released unless I was older or in the at-risk group. (i.e. at your age, you don't need to think about it unless you meet the criteria above)

If I was ANYWHERE near patients or regular contact with office staff I would have it now. (This response is based on working at a medical institute of some sort where one would be in contact with infected people)

I'll wait for more.data!


So this statement
Quote:
there should be no hesitation in taking them

Is misleading and putting people's lives at risk.

Will they or have they tackled the issue of Non immunity
Still be a carrier
Still responsible for spreading the virus
Still needing to adhere to all guidelines

Or are.they suggesting that all Muslims should not hesitate because they will be saved?

It's common sense. The vaccine is designed to help your body fight the virus. It's not an antidote!

The only half decent thing within the article, almost hidden away is:
Quote:
Those wary of the vaccine, your individual choice and feelings are respected
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
abu mohammed's avatar
London
23,466
Brother
9,091
abu mohammed's avatar
#3 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 03:09
Did the Imams consult Wifaqul Ulama?

Can or should Wifaqul Ulama UK intervene and make amendments.

Wifaqul Ulama UK and it's qualified experts have rightly stated:

It must be emphasised that the decision to inoculate against COVID-19 (or vaccinate in general) is personal and should be taken after considering the best possible professional medical advice weighed against personal health, medical history and relevant risk factors.

So how on earth are these imams going to tell the masses "There should be no hesitation in taking them"

What is this?
Hypocrisy? Politically correct statement? Lies? Misunderstood? Mistake? Misguidance? Confusion? Conspiracy? Taqleed? Unaware of facts? Chaos? Misinformation? Misunderstanding? Lack of knowledge? Abuse of authority? Abuse of power?

What should we do?
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
734
Brother
815
#4 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 05:20
It would ease the mind of people a lot more if ulema were more transparent about the kind of research they have done regarding the vaccines rather than just asking them to accept their words and assurances. And I am not talking about the kind of research where they supposedly consulted some very "reliable" doctor and believed his assurances.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Agree x 2Creative x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Rajab's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
1,292
Brother
846
Rajab's avatar
#5 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 09:01
This just makes us sound dumb. The article says more than 100 mosques however we have 2000 mosques in UK so this group seems to be in minority.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
-9,862
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#6 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 10:34
fod1083 wrote:
View original post


Patient should have the choice to choose to vaccinate or not based on their medical history weighed against risk, a vaccine is not a Candy.



Please post your qualifications, ability to do real research and the "real research" in response to this post.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Asaaghir's avatar
Spinistan Throne
678
Brother
438
Asaaghir's avatar
#7 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 16:59
fod1083 wrote:
View original post

I totally agree with you. Look at the difference between the two pieces of information.

On the one side, everyone should take it (less qualified opinion of ulema)
On the other side, perfect advise by WU.

So yeh, your posts makes perfect sense and there's absolutely no need to post your qualifications because you haven't said anything contrary.

Rajab wrote:
View original post

I'm glad you also sound as if you're in denial of the methods of these minors.

Over 100 can also be any number between 100 and infinity, so, what if it did get through to majority of mosques in your home town?

They might be a minority, but they hit the headlines and tabloids! I didn't see BIMA or WU hit any headlines for anything.

Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post

Why does every doctor, nurse, pro vaccinator easily come to the conclusion that they are being dismissed or challenged? Why do they all ask for qualifications and ability to deal with things immediately? I tell you why, that's their way of running away or shunning valid points.

I said it before, you said it before and I'll say it for you again, "This will cost lives"

I repeat my statement of earlier, "Lives will be lost when scholars from our own academia will mislead laypeople"

This page contains views of two sides. Only one is closer to the correct information, so when someone shares their opinion, why dismiss it instantly as if they are disagreeing with facts?

Is it a biased nature?
Have you penciled everyone down as opposers?

Grow up, no need to post your qualifications because we know them, but have the ability to read and then reply in response to this post. Please use your ability and qualifications to understand what is being said. Decipher that and you might have better opinions about others.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Yasin's avatar
UK
6,138
Brother
1,568
Yasin's avatar
#8 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 18:16
I wish everyone properly understood and respected opinions by not using the credential fallacy which has most definitely become an illness with many strong minded people in all subjects and disputes (not just here).

Quote:
The credentials fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone dismisses an argument simply because the person who made that argument doesn’t have formal credentials in the field being discussed, or doesn’t have credentials that are viewed as sufficient.

For example, if someone raises concerns about a certain social issue, someone using the credentials fallacy might dismiss those concerns without addressing them, by saying that the person who raised them isn’t an expert in the field, so their concerns aren’t important.

This fallacy is frequently used in discussions on various topics, so it’s important to understand it. As such, in the following article you will learn more about the credentials fallacy, see some examples of its use, and understand what you can do in order to counter people who use it.
Read more

I truly mean no disrespect but even here
Quote:
"Please post your qualifications, ability to do real research and the "real research" in response to this post."


What qualification does a person need to be permitted to do research? What is "real research"? Is real research what matches ones predisposition? Is it the source from where they gather arguments? I find this fallacy to be very unfair on the person raising an issue. It's also very disrespectful in my opinion to question a persons God-given intellect and critical thinking abilities. The Qur'aan says in many places "افلا تعقلون" (Then will you not reason?) would you answer "No I don't have the credentials"?

A few members have done this regularly in the past on many disputed subjects. Many do this on all platforms online and offline. So this is for general benefit and not for anyone directly.

In my opinion, "credentials" are simply modern validations and official bureaucratic requirements for a world where liabilities and lawyers have become a nuisance. Credentials can have many positives but it's not an absolute form of validity of knowledge.

Always address the issue, debunk the points and don't attack the questions or questioner as that is an immediate defeat. Another instant defeat is "I don't have time to waste on this" which is a way to belittle a topic and also to run from the subject. There are only two times when saying this is valid:

1. If a questioner addressed you directly, you gave absolutely no opinion from the start and you say "I don't have time to waste" then it's valid.
2. If you provided everything to your satisfaction and the questioner refuses to acknowledge the argument then you can say you've concluded and you don't have any more time to waste on this then it's also valid.

If the above two are not the case then saying you're wasting your time is just another form of sour grapes.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
734
Brother
815
#9 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 18:28
The main point here is my take on the vaccine is for my personal use. So if refuting the official narrative kills me, that's my own choice. It has nothing to do with what other people are being influenced to do because no one is obligated to follow my opinion. I am not liable to present any research by that logic. The opinion of the ulema, on the other hand, influences millions, if not billions. They need to present the absolute unbreakable facts.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
-9,862
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#10 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 18:47
Yasin wrote:
View original post


Fallacious analogy! A basic and simplistic functional argument is why do you seek the best "Consultant Surgeon" to
perform Surgery on you? Why do you seek a "Mufti" for credible Islamic opinions?

Credentials (or background knowledge) matter when it comes to technical discussions, nobody said that credentials are be all and end all of a discussion.

Now setting aside "functional needs" and discussing Academic matters.

What is important is the ability of the person to demonstrate sufficient technical knowledge to be able to understand complex technical topics. For example, the British Government issued ingredient list for this vaccine (1st item in Fatwa) has an error in the listing. Without the necessary technical knowledge of the compound, a laymen wouldn't spot it and if a laymen cannot understand the chemistry then how can they give an opinion of a compound on the human body?

www.wifaqululama.co.uk/wifaq-pfizer/

I asked for his credentials or to demonstrate his ability to synthesize concepts and explain in his words to put forth an argument.

You deliberately caught the first argument and twisted it but omitted the second because it doesn't fit into your narrative.

Asaaghir wrote:
View original post


More rants and moaning and nothing factual or substantial to discuss. I respect your democratic right to rant.

Science is based on challenge but challenge needs to be robustly put together, it is your right.

So go ahead, put together a technical challenge with irrefutable facts. Put together facts that this Vaccine is either HARAM or HARMFUL or both.

fod1083 wrote:
View original post


Present the facts OR present facts which contradict the Ulama which are irrefutable, it is your right. Demonstrate your technical ability to understand by displaying your argument.

Put together facts that this Vaccine is either HARAM or HARMFUL or both.

  • Do the Ulama present you with absolute unbreakable facts with every Fatwa? If not then why should they do so with Vaccines?
  • Which facts in the Fatwa are disputed? I am posting the Fatwa in full, please refute it with "unbreakable facts"


www.wifaqululama.co.uk/wifaq-pfizer/

Quote:
Thus in the light of the available data, official statement and clarification, we have concluded the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to be permissible for British Muslims.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Asaaghir's avatar
Spinistan Throne
678
Brother
438
Asaaghir's avatar
#11 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 19:09
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post

Lol. There you go.

You've pinned it on us that we've claimed the vaccine is either haram or harmful.

Why do I have to do that, we have credible people to do that for us. But no! You will now go on a rampage and say that we are promoting this false information.

Since you've done this, please show me where I've said anything contrary to that in my own words.

Stop being biased and labelling us with your assumptions man.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Yasin's avatar
UK
6,138
Brother
1,568
Yasin's avatar
#12 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 19:16
Quote:
Fallacious analogy! A basic and simplistic functional argument is why do you seek the best "Consultant Surgeon" to
perform Surgery on you? Why do you seek a "Mufti" for credible Islamic opinions?


Why is it a fallacious analogy?

Your question here is fine and not a disputed procedure. I said and I quote myself "Credentials can have many positives" and what you stated is exactly one of those positives. Nobody is disputing this so why is an argument to say my analogy is fallacious?

It's one thing to seek the best and strongest with credentials being one of the methods amongst other things. The other is to seek credentials itself to validate an argument. It's 2 completely different cases. I am only talking about the 2nd case.

I hope this adds clarity.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
-9,862
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#13 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 20:01
Asaaghir wrote:
View original post


You haven't said anything substantive at all. As I said, I respect your democratic right to rant...Good for your mental Health to get trash off your mind...makes you feel liberated

Yasin wrote:
View original post


Quote:
It's one thing to seek the best and strongest with credentials being one of the methods amongst other things. The other is to seek credentials itself to validate an argument. It's 2 completely different cases. I am only talking about the 2nd case.


That's exactly what your co-conspirators are doing, two examples:

Quote:
This is a letter from Dr. Shallenberger to his patients explaining why the vaccine is unsafe. Frank Shallenberger, MD has been practicing medicine since 1973 and has been a Pioneer in Integrative Medicine since 1978.


Quote:
This sit down interview with Sucharit Bhakdi about the current situation we find ourselves in. He is the most cited microbiologist in German academic history, an authority if there ever was one Shocked by the events of this year, he is speaking out about the scientific fallacies and human rights abuses at work now.


You and your your co-conspirators continue to skip the second part of my argument which is display in-depth technical knowledge of the subject or present irrefutable facts to back your "conspiracy theories".

One of your co-conspirators believes that Ulama should "unbreakable facts" so why don't you guys present "unbreakable facts" to make your point.

Whenever someone disagrees with your "conspiracy theories" they lack in-depth knowledge and we need to feel Sorry for them etc but whenever someone agrees with them, they are utmost authority and disbarred and disqualified out of malice.

So when will we discuss some facts instead of advising people to watch "YouTube Videos" from disbarred and disqualified Doctors?
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Yasin's avatar
UK
6,138
Brother
1,568
Yasin's avatar
#14 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 20:37
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post

Again, Providing credentials is different to requesting credentials to validate the information.

I'm only stating the problems with the second case. There's nothing wrong in the first case when you do it or anyone else. In the last reply you've provided examples from the first case to argue against the second case.

Do you really not see what you're doing here? Break my post down if it helps and use cases that match it to provide a valid rebuttal on why you felt it was a fallacious analogy. It's not difficult for me to agree if the example you provide matches and invalidates what I've actually said. Unfortunately in every reply you've used non-disputed arguments to create a disputed argument.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Asaaghir's avatar
Spinistan Throne
678
Brother
438
Asaaghir's avatar
#15 [Permalink] Posted on 15th January 2021 20:56
Deja vu!

He's at it again.

He will pin something onto you that you haven't said nor implied and everyone will be convinced that you've actually made an error because no one will bother to go back and understand the point.

I've written about this somewhere before lol.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top