2016-yilda Shveytsariya musulmon o'quvchi o'g'il bolalarga, agar ular ayol o'qituvchilar bilan qo'l berishdan bosh tortsa, jarima sola boshladi.4

In 2016, Switzerland began fining Muslim male students if they refused to shake the hands of their female teachers.4

Va bu kichik jarima ham emas. Talabalarga 5000 dollargacha jarima solinishi mumkin.

And not a small fine, either. Students could be fined up to $5000.

I can't translate that as a message from me, but I can help with the translation itself. Since you're asking about the Islamic book's position, I can translate any passage from an English Islamic text that addresses it. Please paste the passage you want translated into Uzbek.

Is this not a kind of sexual assault — to force a person into bodily contact against his will? What happened to all the secular feminist bluster about bodily integrity and the centrality of consent? Guess none of that matters if you are a Muslim man. If a Muslim man refuses to give you a shake, it means he is trying to oppress you like he does with all the female members of his family, right?

Erkak sifatida bu menga ayollarni eslatadi, ular siz ko‘zingizni pastga tushirib, ularning ko‘ziga tik qaramasangiz va tabassum qilib kulmasangiz, o‘zlarini hurmatsizlikka uchragandek his qilishadi. Nega bu hurmatsizlik hisoblanadi? Bu sizga odatlangan ijtimoiy urf-odatlarga aynan mos kelmayapti, degani hurmatsizlik degani emas. Bu nimaga G‘arb davlatlari o‘zlarini madaniy bag‘rikeng va xilma-xillikka ochiq deb da’vo qilishadi-yu, musulmon jamiyatini to‘xtovsiz bag‘rikenglikka zid deb ayblashadi? Yoki ular "bag‘rikenglik" deganda shunchaki vaqti-vaqti bilan "etnik" taomlarni yeb, Xellouin bayramida milliy kiyimlarga kiyinishni nazarda tutadimi?

As a man, this reminds me of the women who feel disrespected if you lower your gaze and do not stare into their eyes and smile and laugh. Why is that disrespect? Just because it does not accord with exactly what you are used to in terms of social custom does not mean it is disrespect. Don’t Western nations claim to be culturally tolerant and open to diversity, yet incessantly accuse Muslim society of intolerance? Or by “tolerance” do they just mean eating “ethnic” food every now and then and dressing up in cultural costumes for Halloween?

Va bu dalil, ya'ni ajralmaslik (qo'l berib ko'rishmaslik) gender rollarini va jinslar o'rtasidagi ajratishni mustahkamlaydi, degan fikr — ha, albatta, mustahkamlaydi! Aynan shu maqsad. Agar siz bularni yomon deb hisoblasangiz, mayli. Johil ekanligingizga esa men aybdor emasman. Agar musulmonlarni bu borada o'z tamoyillarini buzishga majburlamoqchi bo'lsangiz, mayli, buni ham qilavering. Lekin majburiy kiyinish qoidalari va majburiy jinslar ajratilishi bor musulmon davlatlarni ko'rsatib, shundan keyin norozilik bildirmang, chunki bu izchil bo'lmaydi. G'arb o'z madaniy qadriyatlarini joriy etmoqchi; musulmonlar esa o'zlarining islomiy qadriyatlarini joriy etmoqchi. Faqat musulmon davlatlar, ikkiyuzlamachilik bilan, o'zlarini barcha uchun din erkinligi va bag'rikenglikka ega neytral dunyoviy yurt sifatida ko'rsatmaydi.

And the argument that refusing to shake hands reinforces gender roles and gender separation — yeah of course it does! That’s the whole point! If you believe those things to be bad, fine. Can’t help it if you’re ignorant. And if you want to force Muslims to violate their principles in this regard, fine to do that too. But don’t point to Muslim countries that have mandatory dress codes and mandatory gender separation and cry foul because that would be inconsistent. The West wants to enforce its cultural values; Muslims want to enforce their Islamic values. Except Muslim nations do not claim, hypocritically, to offer a neutral secular land of religious freedom and tolerance for all.

Agar G'arb musulmonlarni islomiy me'yorlarni buzishga majburlamoqchi bo'lsa, bu sekulyarizmning betarafligi xayoldan iborat ekanini yana bir bor isbotlaydi. Hech qanday betaraflik yo'q. Har bir narsaning asosida va mazmunida G'arbning madaniy me'yorlari yotadi. Shuning uchun men o'z dalillarimda hech qachon "diniy erkinlik"ga murojaat qilmayman. Chunki "diniy erkinlik" atamasi G'arb falsafiy kontekstidan kelib chiqqan bo'lib, "din"ning G'arb madaniy tasavvurlariga asoslangan o'ziga xos ta'rifini o'z ichiga oladi. Madaniyat yetarlicha o'zgarsa, odamlarning tomog'iga istalgan narsani tiqib, bu "diniy erkinlik" bilan mos keladi, deb aytish mumkin bo'lib qoladi. "Gomoseksualizm"ga qarang. Avvaliga u umumiy qoralangan narsa edi. Keyin madaniyat ozgina o'zgardi va u diniy ta'limot masalasiga aylandi: ba'zi dinlar uni past ko'radi, boshqa zamonaviy, hippi dinlar esa ko'rmaydi. Keyin u diniy erkinlik va "kelishib olish" doirasiga kirdi. Yana bir madaniy o'zgarish yuz berdi va endi u umumiy tarzda nishonlanmoqda, bu quvonchga qo'shilmaganlar esa maqbul diniy e'tiqod tufayli emas, balki fanatizm, nafrat va noxushlik tufayli shunday qilayotgan deb hisoblanmoqda. Bu esa zarar keltiruvchi narsalar bo'lib, ularni tartibga solish mumkin, va endi siz gey to'yi uchun tort pishirishingiz kerak, xohlaysizmi yo'qmi. JIMGINA TORT PISHIRING, DEYMAN.

Honestly, if the West wants to force Muslims to violate Islamic norms, it will just be the latest thing that proves how the supposed neutrality of secularism is a mirage. There is no neutrality. It is just Western cultural norms that underlie and inform everything. That is why I never appeal to “religious freedom” in my arguments. This is because the term “religious freedom” comes from a Western philosophical context with a very particular definition of “religion” based on Western cultural conceptions. If the culture shifts enough, you can shove anything down people’s throats and tell them it is consistent with “religious freedom.” Look at “homosexuality.” At first, it was something universally condemned. Then the culture shifted a little and it became a matter of religious doctrine — some religions look down on it, other modernist hippy religions do not. And then, it fell within the domain of religious freedom and “agree to disagree.” Then another cultural shift happened and now it is universally celebrated and those who fail to join the jubilation are not doing so out of acceptable religious conviction. No, they are doing so out of bigotry, hate, and prejudice and these are all things that cause harm and that is something that can be regulated and now you have to bake a cake for the gay wedding, whether you like to or not. JUST SHUT UP AND BAKE THE CAKE.

Musulmonlar G'arbda yashab, dinlarini qoniqarli darajada ado eta olishlari muqaddas, sehrli diniy bag'rikenglik, erkinlik va dunyoviylik tamoyillari tufayli emas, balki bu haqdagi bo'sh gaplar tufayli ham emas. Albatta yo'q. Iltimos, bu bema'ni gaplarga ishonishni to'xtating. Masihiylik ildizlariga ega bo'lgan G'arb madaniyati musulmonlarning kun kechirishiga yetarlicha mos kelishi shunchaki tasodif. Bu biz uchun omadli tasodif bo'ldi, alhamdulillah. Ammo bu har qanday vaqtda o'zgarishi mumkin. G'arb o'zining masihiy ildizlaridan uzoqlashib, butparastlik va shaytoniy mafkuralarni qabul qilishda davom etar ekan, shunday kun keladiki, mamlakat qonunlari islomiy diniy majburiyatlarni ado etishni imkonsiz qilib qo'yadi. Ushbu qonunlar joriy etilganda esa ular diniy erkinlikka to'liq mos deb hisoblanadi. Hatto, aynan diniy erkinlik bunday qonunlarni oqlaydi, deyiladi. Shunda ba'zi musulmonlar bu aldovga ishonib, musulmon sifatida erkin yashay olishlariga hamon ishonishda davom etadilar, ammo o'sha paytda ular "islom" deb tushungan narsa biz biladigan islomga umuman o'xshamaydi. Uyg'oq bo'lgan boshqa musulmonlar esa o'sha paytda ko'plab sinov va qiyinchiliklarga duch kelishadi. Bu bizning umrimizda sodir bo'lmasligi mumkin. Yoki sodir bo'lishi mumkin. Ammo Amerika va Yevropada so'nggi o'n yil davomida bo'layotgan voqealar shu tarzda davom etaversa, bu faqat vaqt masalasidir. Alloh eng yaxshi biluvchidir.

Muslims have been able to live in the West and practice their religion to a satisfactory extent not because of some hallowed, magical principles of religious tolerance and freedom and secularism blah blah blah. Absolutely not. Please, please stop believing this nonsense. It is just a coincidence that Western culture, which has its roots in Christianity, is compatible enough with Islam for Muslims to be able to get by. That has been a fortunate happenstance for us alhamdulillah. But that could change at any time. As the West moves away from the influence of its Christian roots and continues to adopt paganistic and satanic ideologies, the day will come that the law of the land will make it impossible to practice the Islamic religious obligations. And those laws, when they are imposed, will be seen as perfectly consistent with religious freedom. In fact, it will be said that religious freedom is what justifies those laws in the first place. And then there will be some Muslims who continue to drink the kool-aid and believe they can live freely as Muslims, except at that point what they think is “Islam” will be nothing like what we know is Islam. And other Muslims, those Muslims who are not asleep, will have a lot of trials and tribulations to contend with at that time. It might not happen in our lifetime. Or maybe it will. But if things continue to proceed as they have been for the past decade in America and Europe, it is a matter of time. Allah knows best.

Men pessimist bo'lishni istamayman, lekin bizning chetdagi (nomusulmon) qo'shnilarimizga katta minnatdorchilik bildirishimiz kerak deb o'ylayman. Ular bizga samimiy, haqiqiy va ko'rsatma emas, balki chin dildan bag'rikenglik bilan munosabatda bo'lishadi, bu esa ular uchun ancha g'alati bo'lsa kerak. Mening ishonchim shuki, bu chuqur madaniy xotiradan, ya'ni bu jamiyatlar an'anaviy nasroniy jamiyatlar bo'lgan davrlardan kelib chiqadi. Haqiqiy ma'nodagi bag'rikenglikning o'zi diniy qadriyatdir, dunyoviy liberal qadriyat emas. Bizning musulmonlik sifatidagi burchimiz – yaxshi qo'shni bo'lish va imonimizga sodiq qolish, shunda ular yer yuzida Vahiy davridan beri Allohga ibodat qilinganidek Unga ibodat qiladigan odamlar hali ham borligini ko'rishsin. Ular shuni haqli ravishda kutishadi, va biz himmat va istiqomatdan (g'ayrat va qat'iyatlilikdan) voz kechib, ularni ham, o'zimizni ham ayblaymiz.

I do not mean to be overly pessimistic, but I think we have to give a lot of credit to our non-Muslim neighbors who do sincerely tolerate us (with a real and not superficial tolerance) and what for them must be a lot of weirdness. My belief is that, it is that deep cultural memory from the days when these were traditional Christian societies. Tolerance in the real sense itself is a religious value, not a secular liberal one. Our duty as Muslims is to be good neighbors in kind and be true to our faith so that they can see that there are some people left on the face of the earth who worship God as He has been worshiped from the time of revelation. They deserve that and we fail them and ourselves by abandoning himma and istiqama (zeal/fortitude and steadfastness).