Islam vs. the Western World: off-topic posts from a Religion thread
- Thread starter kks
- Start date
Why not?
Only in your dreams were you not defeated.
Your OWN people wanted you out? What does that tell you? And somehow this is worse than the constant fighting that is happening now?
But at least they will be alive to be beaten and denied school, eh?
What a load of crock you spew. You have NO idea of the reality do you?
Lets just put it down to experience.
I thought you were going to say that theists aren't able to comprehend the concept of atheism, hence aren't in the position to offer advice.
DiamondHearts
Registered Senior Member
So you are implying that God's laws can not be uniform for all people? Then what is the point of following even one letter of God's law, if it it isn't applicable to your daily life or your society at large?
If God created mankind, and sent His messengers to guide man, then why did God not provide us with an equitable and just law to rule ourselves?
Furthermore, God's laws should be free of errors of misinterpretation. What I mean is that, either a person is following God's law or not.
Though I doubt we agree, Islamic Sharia is relatively absolute concerning basic injustices (no corruption, no perversion of gender roles, no alcohol, no drugs, no injustice, no tyranny, etc.). These are the realm of God's laws, which are absolute. In other matters (such as taxation, some aspects of rule, and foreign policy), humankind can judge within the confines of God's law as to what is beneficial for them and thus these issues are not absolute. That is why the Majlis e Shura (Council of Consultation) exists in an ideal Islamic state.
He has no relevance either to this topic or Islamic society. He never had much influence over the Muslim world anyway. What he thinks, or thought, does not matter.
You statement implies that God's laws cannot be uniform. Thus if this is true, such a God is not worshiping or following. Do you see the paradox? Furthermore, you imply that with following God's laws, that chaos and tyranny will become rampant. Do you lack confidence in God and His law?
Irrelevant. The Taliban's laws were a mixture of Islamic Sharia and tribal Pukhtoonwalli laws. This movement was borne out of the aftermath of decades of occupation and civil war, thus with its main emphasis of maintaining order in a chaotic country. Most Muslims have issues with this form of government. Furthermore, before the invasion by American occupying troops, they were modernizing to a large degree and returning to normalcy with the help of aid from UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, as the US simply abandoned Afghanistan to tear itself apart after the Soviet invasion. There are 50 Muslim countries, you cannot isolate this conversation to Afghanistan, or Saudi Arabia. Neither represent proper Islamic law.
To you, secularism is a proper interpretation of God's laws? To me, I believe secularism is the marginalization of God's laws.
You suppose that God's law can be easily interpreted to imply and further any one individual's or group's aim. Coming from an Islamic standpoint, this does not apply. Please look at this link to a short essay on Islamic law written by Maulana Maududi: http://ayesha.wordpress.com/2006/04/17/maududi-the-islamic-state-and-jamaat-i-islami-part-i/
"This belief in the unity of the sovereignty of God implies the following (Maududi, 49 - 57):
1. The “right to rule” belongs to God and God alone. He is the master of all the worlds and he alone should have the right to dictate the workings of the universe. Maududi states that there is only one way to carry out God’s “right to rule” on earth and that is through a “khalifa”, which will be a vicegerent of God on earth. It should be emphasized that the “khalifa” is merely an agency through which God executes his will and does not vest any political power in itself.
2. On the basis of the above argument, the right to legislate has been taken away from man and accorded to God alone. Moreover, man has been allowed to interpret the ideas presented in the Quran through mutual consultation and the practice of ijtehad. The condition is that it must be done within the purview of the Islamic law. The essential point here is that if man believes in the sovereignty of God, then he is not allowed to hold any other set of laws paramount to the laws laid down by God.
3. True justice and equality can only be established, if it is established according to the laws God, revealed through his chosen men.
4. Maududi states that the law of God is not a de-jure piece of law. It is a de-facto entity and it must be followed in its entirety. Any government that does not follow the above stated norms and develops its own ideologies is to be declared as deviant and a rebel to the Islamic principles.
Maududi states that the purpose of the Quran is not just to have humanity obey its injunctions, but the objective is to reform it into a just and egalitarian society"
Irrelevant. See above.
What I want, or rather require, is a religious system which provides guidance in all areas of life, including the formation of government. If there is a God, which I believe 100% there is, then it is incumbent on Him to provide His followers with a system of government chosen by Him and blessed by Him.
I believe secularism is an attack on religion, and by extension God, as it ignores the rule of God in formulation its laws. God's laws should encompass all things, including human government. This is what i believe.
I never stated such. If you wish to further this view, provide evidence from my posts.
Secularism is not a proper form of governance to God, because it replaces and marginalizes God's laws to private affairs. To claim that this does not limit the influence of God's laws is preposterous.
It is important to note, God can never be limited by anything, it is His decision that He allows people to live the way they live and commit their actions in the world, but we should have full knowledge that God will inevitably judge us regarding this after we die and are raised up again.
But they do. You have kids? There is law that you must follow that has restrictions. You have a business? There is a law that you must follow that has restrictions. You want to sell food? There is a law that you must follow that has restrictions. You want to eat food? There is a law that puts restrictions on vendors to help you. You want to build something? There is a law that you must follow that has restrictions. You want to hang a satellite dish in your own backyard? There is a law that you must follow that has restrictions. You want to change the layout of your house? There is a law that you must follow that has restrictions. You want to travel? There is a law that you must follow that has restrictions. You want to go and watch a movie? There is a law that you must follow that has restrictions. You want to go to school? There is a law that you must follow that has restrictions. And so we can go on and on. Fact of the matter is that while those religious pillars only deal with how you think about religion internally/personally, the non-religious laws deal with every aspect of society. If you live in a city like London for example, you do come into contact with all those acts and statutes. And theres CCTV on every street corner to ensure that you dont break the law.
See this. I wouldnt have expected you or Q to acknowledge it. Instead of acknowledging that there are laws that we must follow, 100s of them every single day that guide our lives, that put restrictions on what we can and cannot do, on where we can and cannot do those things, and when, you put the pillars of religion, that have no conditioning effect whatsoever, at the top of the list. Never mind the fact that from an early childhood it is stamped int our minds that "you have to follow the rules, break the rules and you will be punished" by society and the non-religious laws. School plays a great part in that if you want to believe Marx. According to him the strict schedules, the work, the power figures, all condition us to accept that we are workers and we need to keep our head and do our work.
Thats because there is no need to delete anything from the Quran. It is open to interpretation, as it acknowledges itself and has been acknowledged from the time of the Prophet with the office of the Mujaddids.
Times change. God's laws didn't cover all of the things that man has invented and changed over the years. New laws and rules, still based on god's laws, had to be added as civilizations grew and progressed.
I think perhaps he did ...but man has been skirting such rules and laws for eons, and man had to add new laws for new, different situations. It's interesting that a simple law like "Do unto others as you have them do unto you" covers almost everything that could possibly happen, yet we add new laws everyday just to clarify that one rule.
I don't disagree. But as you know, there are many people who do not follow those rules. So man has attempted to clarify those rules, and add enforcement laws. God's punishment is after one dies, man wanted it a little more immediate.
But those laws only cover Muslims, not non-Muslims. Surely you're not suggesting that Sharia be forced upon all people of the Earth, are you? What does Allah say about forcing other people, non-Muslims, to conform to sharia law?
For somene who you claim has no relevance, he's sure as hell stirred up a huge hornets nest of trouble and problems! Ditto for any and all other Muslim terrorists of the world. In fact, I'd suggest that Muslim terrorists have had a larger impact on the Muslim world than all the peaceful, obedient Muslims ever had.
Do the laws of Allah agree with the laws of Christianity? If they do, then what of all the other various religions of the world?
Fine. But what about the wants of other people? What of the wants of non-Muslims?
Does Allah's laws cover such things as the Internet? Copyright laws? Or are those "interpretations" of Allah's laws? And if they're interpretations, then I'd suggest that secular laws are pretty much the same thing.
Curious, ....what's Allah's laws concerning the dealings with non-Muslims?
Baron Max
I wouldnt expect you to acknowledge that the non-religious laws make us "robots" as well as you claim. But this is a funny reply nonetheless
The fact you expect the Quran to be just like the US Constitution shows that you are stuck in thinking in black and white.
If you're answer is the one above to iceaura, then you're totally confused, as I suspected and don't know the difference between them.
It may be perfectly understandable to you, but it's nonsense, nonetheless.
You've provided nothing of substance yourself other than assertions based on confusion.
DiamondHearts
Registered Senior Member
The basic difference, I believe, between my view and yours is that I believe the laws of God are timeless and perfect as they are, by the law I refer to the scripture. Secularism by definition is the delegation of religious law to the personal sphere and to devoid it a place in government. Thus it is an affront to God, as the scripture is not recognized as having validity in the legislation of the country. This strongly implies that God's law is not fit for man's life.
The lack of God's law also produces several unfavorable outcomes. America being an excellent case study, being a clear example of a once religious country, now thoroughly secular with only superficial religious manifestations such as the swearing to honesty by the Bible. As we see, when religion becomes detached from people's lives or delegated to the personal sphere, moral laxity and outright rejection of God and His laws become rampant.
Need we look any further than the American Christian populace: [Gallup polls]
-69% of Americans believe in angels, which means 31% do not. Invariably this means there are Christians who do not believe in angels.
-7 out of 10 Christians believe you can be religious without going to church
-less than half could not name all four New Testament Gospels.
-6 out of 10 did not know Jesus delivered a sermon on the Mount
http://www.adherents.com/Na/Na_517.html
Christianity in America faces a moral crisis and its existence is in peril. Secularism and the lack of the practice of God's law are the major problems. Not to mention the fact that American Christian groups tend to attack other groups, Muslims in particular, and yet avoid the secularization and moral void facing America.
Is it no wonder why Muslims don't want to adopt Western secularism, seeing, through their eyes, the lack of morality and denial of God in the West?
In Islam, I would also like to note that there is room for human consensus only when it does not contradict the word of the scripture, or if it is allowed by the hadith. For example, addictive and hallucinogenic drugs are prohibited in normal use, but allowed when administered in medicine, provided there is no healthier alternative. Some laws, however, such as the prohibition of interest (riba) is illegal for Muslims no matter what. An Islamic state can never charge interest to its populace or others, it is against the clear injunction of the Quran.
Yet, this one law hasn't prevent injustice, corruption, nor the moral decay facing the West in particular, and other societies throughout the world in consequence. I believe we cannot pick one extremely vague moral law, and yet ignore the hundreds of injunctions found in the scripture. If it is indeed the word of God, it must live up to its task and provide mankind with guidance in governance, as well as other matters. Atheists use the prominence of secularism, acceptance of the evolution theory, and shallowness of religion today to gain converts. Don't you see that instead of bickering among ourselves, we should unite in the path to obeying God's law. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said, "Give to your brother, what you would give to yourself." Furthermore, he taught to help our fellow man, regardless of who he is, to uplift him out of bondage, clothe him, feed him, and provide any means for him to recover his honor and dignity.
If we invade and exact genocides on the poor people of Afghanistan and Iraq, are we truly following the golden rule. Would be live for our homes to be bombed and our children slaughtered? Would we allow others to dictate how we should rule our countries, without asking us? Therein lies the contradiction to American policy in the Middle East. Even if this minor moral quote cannot be followed, what hope is there of actual reverence to God and His law?
God rules both this life and the next. He cannot be pushed aside. God exists and is watching us now. His law is the law of the universe, manifest in nature and physics. God's law, as it would follow, must be perfect for God to be perfect, which we know He is. Therefore, to acknowledge God properly, we must submit to His law and His way of governance. If we do not, then we are living a life outside the complete Mercy of God, and as such society will continue to slide into moral collapse. God is the essence of all morality and the essence of all truth, those who reject God fall into immorality and live a life of falsehood.
We are discussing the ideal. Those who wish to be ruled by God's law, i.e. those who are believers in God according to the scripture. The rule of those who reject God or follow other scriptures is that of compromise and exception. Those laws which do not hinder their progress or moral standing, may exist in such a society. For example, starting from the early periods of Islam, Christians were allowed to eat pork, drink alcohol (in moderation, according to their scripture), and be ruled/judged by their respective clergy, if they so chose, instead of the Muslim courts (of the government). In regards to the laws of murder, kidnapping, and other universal vices, the sacred law of the land, in this case Muslim law, was used to exact a punishment on the perpetrators, regardless of the religion any parties involved, insuring equitable justice.
He has little relevance to the Muslim world. Perhaps he has had more influence on Western perceptions, than any supposed influence on us. Whether he exists, or doesn't, he has little influence on the Muslim world. There is a trend in the West to magnify this man's influence, and it is simply preposterous. We only are informed of his supposed threat to us in Western media, supposedly he has had a major effect on us, but as of yet I have not seen any. The only effect I see is of the Western foreign policy actions, those are what have truly affected Muslims in the world.
We have existed as a highly cultured civilization for nearly 1400 years. To use, what you see as, criminals in your judgment of our civilization is an attack on our way of life. The real threat has always been towards Islamic civilization, the West was never threatened. This knowledge forces us to research whether this event in New York truly took place as we are informed, or if it was just another one of the long list of conspiracies to deprive us of our freedom and independence.
Our civilization has been under constant attack for the last 200 years. The British, French, Russians,and other European pioneered the initial invasions and occupations of our homelands. Under their rule they abolished our laws and sovereignty. America is relatively recent to our world, but seemed to wish to succeed the Europeans in controlling us. The Muslim world is attempting to recover its own independence, and any entity which gets in the way of self-determination, shall be pushed aside. It has been our culture, for 200 years, constantly under attack and on the defensive, and America's leaders have the audacity to claim that we are somehow attacking America's way of life. Beating the slave, and then blaming him for his injuries. This is American foreign policy.
Islam's laws are those of the Abrahamic tradition, thus they have many similarities, especially in the law of the eye for an eye. The foundation of human justice and law as we know it. You can study Islam's laws, I have provided a link in my previous post, feel free to review it and ask for more and I will provide some.
Universal justice can only be achieved under the true laws of God. Statutes are provided in Islam for maintaining the respect and dignity of all the citizens of the state. God developed His laws for all mankind, thus it would follow, that these laws would be just to all. Though Muslims have a special requirement, to uphold the laws of God in the state, Non-Muslims citizens function to hold up the state and ensure the interest of their respected communities.
God's laws cover all things. The basic injunctions found in the Quran and sunnah are guidelines, thus it is called al Shariah (the path), from which all fatwa (injunctions) and fiqh (jurisprudence) can be reached with daleel (evidence) from the above mentioned sources, and that of qiyas (logical conclusion). This has lead to the formation of four tradition schools (madhab) in Islamic law, with differing main arguments being the backbones of these various system, usually derived from the Prophet's life. The differences, however, are minor, as in placing of hands in prayer, zabiha (animal slaughtering), seafood, etc. God's laws do apply to the internet, for example, as this allows which websites Muslims can view, which they cannot, and how they should behave in forums or chat forums. Islam is a way of live, with rules for every aspect of a human's life.
Respect and honor. Treat others as you wish to be treated.
I don't actually find myself curbed in any onerous or even visible way by these secular laws. I break many of them all the time, for example, without a care. I do not obey them from fear of punishment and the residue of childhood conditioning - they came up even less often when I was a child.arsalan said:
When I was a child, most of the conditioning I experienced revolved around behaving at school and other people's houses, and religious belief. The myriad secular laws had almost no personal influence - I did not even know what they were.
Much less the Constitution, which would be the more relevant comparison with the Pillars of Islam.
I assure you that the conditioning effects of fundie religious belief are visible to those outside the particular faith - including, for example, noticing how odd it is that someone would think of the body of secular and civil regulations as conditioning children through threat of punishment.
Maybe if you reconsider my observation: it's not the guide wires in the floor that make the robot a robot.
That is not the foundation of human justice as I know it, or as a country like the United States has established it.diamond said:
And its the same with religious laws. People dont know most of them, people break them all the time, but because they are mostly personal beliefs, no one notices or even cares. Same thing with children, too young to understand whats going on. I myself dont believe in applying Pavlovs Dogs to humans, but then again I dont believe humans can become robots just like that. It takes severe training and punishment, degradation and demoralization to become a robot. Thats why soldiers become robots and can commit the greatest of horrors, murder, just like that.
Not really. Its not odd. Its something thats been noted by various sociologists. But then again, sociology is an odd subject at times, as I often had to tell myself at school.
And to protect this perspective, you will happily execute apostates.
To be fair, they probably didn't mention that subtle element.