samcdkey on Islam

superluminal

superluminal

I am MalcomR
Valued Senior Member
Hi Sam! Here's your very own thread.

This is for a real discussion of how we (The western world, including Aussies) got it so wrong. In so many discussions posters from around the world have this impression that Islam is quite the restrictive religion as apparently evidenced by it's practitioners in many middle eastern countries. Mainly a restrictive set of moral rules regarding male/female relations and freedom of expression in general. You sam, seem to be asserting (based on an informal review of your posts) that Islam provides a model of tolerance, forward thinking, and moral freedom. So why is the western world so misled? Apparently the quran does not advocate this restrictiveness, right? So basically my question is, why do we have this impression? Are we really off the mark? Why?
 
Mostly because everyone equates the ME with Islam and thinks everyone should have Western values?
 
Of course it is.

Islam is a secular religion.

Kings and dictators are taboo.
 
samcdkey said:
Of course it is.

Islam is a secular religion.

Kings and dictators are taboo.
Click to expand...

What's a secular religion? I thought all religions were sacred? As in the sacred seperate from the secular. I'm confused.
 
If you remember, Mohammed had established a Caliphate.

The Caliphate is a unique political system from the ideology of Islam that bears no resemblance to any of the Muslim Governments today. It is a government built upon a concept of citizenship regardless of ethnicity, gender or creed and is totally opposed to the oppression of any religious or ethnic grouping.


The structure of an Islamic Caliphate
orgchart_caliphate.gif
 
samcdkey said:
If you remember, Mohammed had established a Caliphate.

The Caliphate is a unique political system from the ideology of Islam that bears no resemblance to any of the Muslim Governments today. It is a government built upon a concept of citizenship regardless of ethnicity, gender or creed and is totally opposed to the oppression of any religious or ethnic grouping.
Click to expand...
Interesting. What rights do the people have under this system?
 
The highest executive post is the post of khalifah who appoints ministers without portfolio to assist in ruling, and governors for the various regions. The legislative sources are the Quran and sayings of the prophet Muhammad. While differences of interpretation of these sources can occur, as with any legislative sources, the particular interpretation adopted by the Khalifah must be justified before an independent judiciary, which has the power to remove him from his post should he flagrantly deviate from the boundaries of credible legal interpretation ( ijtihad). The khalifah is appointed by the people, and hereditary rule by supposed divine right is forbidden. Consultation is one of the pillars of ruling and is best served by the establishment of representative councils composed of men and women from all religions and ethnic groupings within the state.
 
Last edited:
Frankly the way that the Quran and Hadith is interpreted now, I would not trust an Islamic form of government myself. But it is supposed to be the best form of government (in theory) for the world.
 
samcdkey said:
Frankly the way that the Quran and Hadith is interpreted now, I would not trust an Islamic form of government myself. But it is supposed to be the best form of government (in theory) for the world.
Click to expand...
After reading that, on the surface, it seems like it would be in the islamic world's best interest (by far). It sounds like a very fair and just form if you don't mind deriving your rule-set from the quran.

So, are there any nations currently practicing even an approximation of this? And how has this system fared in the past?
 
Sorry to butt in! :rolleyes:

superluminal said:
So, is the ME's implementation of Islam flawed?
Click to expand...

There is no 1 Middle-Eastern implementation of Islam, the Mid-East is made up of various sects and they all have their own interpretations. There is nothing wrong with this, however certain countries are very stringent and oppress of those that don't follow their school of thought (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Iran etc).

Saudi Arabia follows the Wahabi/Salafi school of thought. They are the literalist type (don’t believe in taking interpretations), they are very harsh on Muslims that don't follow their line of thinking e.g. they arrest them, ban their gatherings - drive them underground! :( Iran reportedly has no Sunni Mosques in the whole of Tehran! they oppress their own Sunni minorities.

All this is wrong.
 
superluminal said:
It appears to have some features of a western democracy, as the article stated. Is this what you mean?
Click to expand...

Yes that is exactly what it is- a secular government with representatives from all religions.

Now do you see why I get so frustrated when people malign Islam or Mohammed ? This is the system of government set up 1400 years ago.

The only thing wrong with Islam is the people who practise it. :(
 
Last edited:
samcdkey said:
Yes that is exactly what it is- a secular government with representatives from all religions.

Now do you see why I get so frustrated when people malign Islam or Mohammed ? This is the system of government he set up 1400 years ago. With representatives of both genders (his wife Ayesha was a part of it).

The only thing wrong with Islam is the people who practise it. :(
Click to expand...
Yes. Unfortunately, the mass impression (of which I have been guilty also) is not a happy one. Most people can't or don't visit forums such as this or even care to learn more. This is what I technically call a "bummer".

Gotta go soon. Talk later.
 
samcdkey said:
The only thing wrong with Islam is the people who practise it. :(
Click to expand...
I would say this hit the nail on the head.

What about Communism?

On paper it works great. If followed correctly, within a generation, everyone will live in a paradise. But.... in the real world, it does not work - in a generation everyone lives in a hell.

Do we blame the system or do we blame the people?

Which is at fault?

If the governmental system doesn’t work with real people living real lives then it simply is flawed and doesn’t work. There is really little point putting the blame on human nature. People are people. We evolved to have the traits we have and so we need a system flexible enough to accommodate these traits.

In the 2500 years of monotheist-government (Jewish, Xian or Islamic) none of them have produced much when compared with their polytheistic counterparts (Greece, Rome, Persia and Egypt). If anything, those societies digressed. In Europe, the Renaissance could only occurre after the demise of Xiandom.

I was talking with an Iranian friend about history and religion, atheism and Buddhism. He was raised Muslim and I Xian and so it is always a good laugh at some of the Bull @%$# we were taught to believe while growing up :) He said he never felt any privacy growing up in Iran. He always thought there were two angles, one on each of his shoulders, writing down everything he did each day of his life. It reminded me of Gods ever watchful eye or maybe even Santa Clause's! Before I left he said that there is no way he could have had such a conversation with his family in Iran - they’d simply hate him and think he was under the influence of the devil or a demon or a bad spirit. They may even go as far as to ostracize him from the family, to protect themselves from his evil – that is if they ever found out years ago he had become Atheist.

While I would not say his family's thinking wrong (well it is for me) I do wonder: Why do they think like that?
Thinking back to Communism and its inherent failure as a Government System - is his families thinking a result of their religion and is it a fault of the religion itself that such an interpretation can even be made to occur?




Where a Buddhist is taught to remain sceptical - a Monotheist is condemned.

Michael II
 
Michael said:
I would say this hit the nail on the head.

What about Communism?

On paper it works great. If followed correctly, within a generation, everyone will live in a paradise. But.... in the real world, it does not work - in a generation everyone lives in a hell.

Do we blame the system or do we blame the people?

Which is at fault?

If the governmental system doesn’t work with real people living real lives then it simply is flawed and doesn’t work. There is really little point putting the blame on human nature. People are people. We evolved to have the traits we have and so we need a system flexible enough to accommodate these traits.

In the 2500 years of monotheist-government (Jewish, Xian or Islamic) none of them have produced much when compared with their polytheistic counterparts (Greece, Rome, Persia and Egypt). If anything, those societies digressed. In Europe, the Renaissance could only occurre after the demise of Xiandom.

I was talking with an Iranian friend about history and religion, atheism and Buddhism. He was raised Muslim and I Xian and so it is always a good laugh at some of the Bull @%$# we were taught to believe while growing up :) He said he never felt any privacy growing up in Iran. He always thought there were two angles, one on each of his shoulders, writing down everything he did each day of his life. It reminded me of Gods ever watchful eye or maybe even Santa Clause's! Before I left he said that there is no way he could have had such a conversation with his family in Iran - they’d simply hate him and think he was under the influence of the devil or a demon or a bad spirit. They may even go as far as to ostracize him from the family, to protect themselves from his evil – that is if they ever found out years ago he had become Atheist.

While I would not say his family's thinking wrong (well it is for me) I do wonder: Why do they think like that?
Thinking back to Communism and its inherent failure as a Government System - is his families thinking a result of their religion and is it a fault of the religion itself that such an interpretation can even be made to occur?




Where a Buddhist is taught to remain sceptical - a Monotheist is condemned.

Michael II
Click to expand...


Yes but it seems to me that all political systems run out of steam after a while. Even with the capitalist system seemingly working so well, is there really a free market? There is still control of resources by the relative few and oppression of the relatively more.

The problem is that human beings are basically autocratic. No matter what, everything eventually degenerates into a power game.

I can understand about your friend; perhaps I was saved by the fact that my family was never religious.

Sam
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top