Forum Index            

Cookies Consent Information
SelectSmart.com®
Before you decide
Over 20,000 selectors

Join to post comments.
Share
Try These Selectors:
Best college values

Good jobs in gig economy

Right religion for you

Presidential candidates

Best US city for you

Know your philosophy

Landmark decisions
Is your name welcomed below? Then you can post here. Otherwise, click "Log In" to post!
Welcome! » Log In » Create A New Profile

It’s Not Good (Moderate) Islam/Christianity Versus Bad Islam/Christianity. It’s Theocracy Versus Secularism.

Posted by NahWeh 
[www.newamerica.org]

Quote

By Nadia Oweidat

NOV. 10, 2016

The next President of the United States may be dealing with a diminished ISIS (the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria). However, he will still have to think long and hard about how to approach the sensitive issue of Islam and its place in the public sphere. More often than not, this subject is simplified by putting Muslims into one of two camps: good Islam and bad Islam. Violent extremism, we’re told, drives the latter while “moderate” attitudes supposedly define the former. But such framing misses the point, especially when the conversation turns to violence in many Middle Eastern Muslim-majority countries. There is, in fact, a war that goes above and beyond various sects and interpretations of Islam. This war is between two paradigms that are in an existential struggle to become the way of life. They each have their networks, which the West could support and amplify—or disrupt and destroy.

The old paradigm—represented in authoritarianism, theocracy and patriarchy—stands in contrast to the new, whose leaders and activists are essentially working to birth the secular age in Muslim-majority countries and communities. A generation eager to unleash its creativity to tackle regional and global challenges champions the new paradigm. By contrast, the partisans of the old system want to stop change at all costs, leading with violence and intimidation. The guardians of the old paradigm claim to want to dictate Allah’s will on people. They pretend to be altruistic, sacrificing themselves for Allah. They shout Allahu Akbar (God is the greatest) as they kill, maim, and violate the rights of other people. They are the guardians of hierarchy, and they use religion as an excuse to control and silence dissent.

The new paradigm, by contrast, aims to separate religion from politics. Its partisans place the rights and freedoms of humans, not of God, at the center. They work to redraw the map according to relationships among families and citizens alike, moving from a vertical model to a horizontal one, thereby ensuring more equality and accountability. A generation of Arabs and Muslims are attempting to build this paradigm on the very foundations that have helped create liberal democracies in the West. When Wael Ghunaim, the Egyptian Google executive, started the Facebook page that ignited the Egyptian revolution, “We Are All Khaled Said,” it was not in defense of good Islam against bad Islam. It was a call to privilege citizenship, human rights, accountability, and the rule of law—values that were not nearly as prominent before the rise of modernity. He is a Muslim—and perhaps by some people’s standards a “good” Muslim—but that is not the point. His page, which got over 4 million followers, was about having different way of being a modern citizen. Likewise, when Bassem Yousef, Egypt’s celebrated Jon Stewart, created his satire and equally mocked the army and the Muslim brotherhood, it was not about good versus bad Islam, it was about creating different values to govern people and governments alike.

In all of the Muslim-majority countries in the Arab world, except for Tunisia, the old order still prevails. For example, Sharia law governs what is called personal status law or family law. Practically speaking, this means that nearly every aspect of an individual’s life is governed by the standards of seventh-century-Arabia. Sharia law from ancient times still structures marriage, inheritance, divorce, family norms, obedience to elders, women’s agency, and so on. Religion is an important part of the old paradigm because it is a readily available tool to silence political dissenters and others pushing for reform. Many reformers have been jailed in the name of “insulting Islam,” even if they are pious Muslims. In fact, you are not likely to meet any reformer or a creative person who is not haunted by this charge. While the list is too long, one latest example of such accusation is Islam al-Beheiry, a young Egyptian scholar who called for reforming Islamic thought to remove violence from religious curricula all over the country. One may think that attempts to end calls for violence are a good thing, but in a country that does not welcome critical thought or reform at any level, they can be punishable.

The West should revisit its history to remember its own decades of religious wars prior to birthing its secular age. We should not be asking what constitutes “good” Islam and what constitutes “bad” Islam. Nor are we in a position to decide for people what is good Islam, let alone to choose which sides to empower. Let people decide their individual faiths, because faith is innately individual. We can, however, strive to help people freely choose their version of faith and hold those in power accountable, while protecting their rights to think and speak without restriction. Such values can never exist under an extremist or authoritarian regime.

We have a great example in the U.S. Secularism does not mean that that people are not allowed to be religious. Quite the opposite. The U.S. is a rather conservative and religious place. What secularism does mean is that no one can force his or her interpretation of Christianity on another. Moreover, it also means that no poet is imprisoned or executed by the state for the spoken word. The majority of Muslims do not have that right. They are at the mercy of someone’s interpretation of the word of God.

--
~NAAHHHH-wehwehwehhhh!!!



There is difference between a Socialistic Democracy (which believes in a balance between satisfying capitalistic greed with the people's socialistic needs) and a Socialist Dictatorship.

In a socialistic democracy, the government doesn't "take over" private companies and privatize them, but believe that essential public services should still be run by the state elected governments rather than for-profit companies. Socialistic democracies are not against capitalistic but do not treat it as an absolute in itself, but rather, a tool to enable social-programs that is operated purely for the interest and demands and needs of the people. Socialistic democracies believes socialistic concerns of the people takes priority over an absolutely free market. In a totally free market that is unregulated, those with the most resources can eventually rig the system such that it is no longer really a free market anymore, and workers and the environment gets exploited for maximum profit at any cost.

The problem with some of these so-called "socialist states" is with it being a Dictatorship. Taxation to maintain the state run fire departments, police, public infrastructures such as electricity, water and roads, social security, single payer option health care, regulation of companies from polluting our drinking water, and so on, are what socialistic democracy is about. The fight for minimum wage and implementing policies for the interest of the people and workers rather than those of mega banks and corporations is democratic socialism.

As for China, they are not a communist country anymore, but have devolved into a capitalistic fascist dictatorship pretending to be working for the people (i.e. socialism) so that the politicians at the very top can hold on to their absolute power with the people supporting their tyrannical masters/emperor-Xi.

=====



"SJW
Social Justice Warrior. A pejorative term for an individual who repeatedly and vehemently engages in arguments on social justice on the Internet, often in a shallow or not well-thought-out way, for the purpose of raising their own personal reputation. A social justice warrior, or SJW, does not necessarily strongly believe all that they say, or even care about the groups they are fighting on behalf of. They typically repeat points from whoever is the most popular blogger or commenter of the moment, hoping that they will "get SJ points" and become popular in return. They are very sure to adopt stances that are "correct" in their social circle.

The SJW's favorite activity of all is to dogpile. Their favorite websites to frequent are Livejournal and Tumblr. They do not have relevant favorite real-world places, because SJWs are primarily civil rights activists only online."

SJW Ben Affleck shows why it is pointless arguing with a virtue signaling radical Social Justice Warrior.
[www.youtube.com]
Sam Harris breaks it down..
[www.youtube.com]
Sam Harris: Winning the War of Ideas | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)
[www.youtube.com]

Young babies can be raped legally according to Imam Khomeini (highest ranking supreme leader of Iran's Islamic revolution) and the one who issued the death Fatwa against Salman Rushdie -- Reformist Muslim Imam Tawhidi explains..
[www.facebook.com]

Conservative Islam: 'Sharia Patrols' Harassing Citizens in London, Belgium, Sweden.
[www.youtube.com]
Secular Talk: Bar Owners In Denmark Harassed By 'Sharia Patrols'
[www.youtube.com]
Secular Talk: UK 'Sharia Courts' Lock Women In 'Marital Captivity' -- Being intolerant of the intolerance of conservative Islam. >> The need to protect moderate Muslims from the Sharia laws of Conservative Islam.
[www.youtube.com]


True, all that. The commentary doesn't mention Israel, but that countries problems are largely because they are a democracy with a strong theocratic-bent.
Good idea to add Christianity to thread topic to avoid being called a xenophobic monster
Not really. Its just that it holds true of the growing Christian KKK Alt-right movement today in the US too, trying to regress and pollute secular democracy with dark-age Christian Theocracy.
Quote
NahWeh
Not really. Its just that it holds true of the growing Christian KKK Alt-right movement today in the US too, trying to regress and pollute secular democracy with dark-age Christian Theocracy.

I'm curious. What evidence do you have that that is happening?
I'm going to point out we are not actually a conservative nation. Our ideals are quite liberal in terms of world
history & politics. If our 2 major political parties were in Europe, they would be called right wing liberals &
left wing liberals. (I learnt that from Walter Dean Burham, Democracy in the Making: American Government and Politics.)

Liberal means believing in freedom & change for the better.This is why I always will consider myself a Liberal.
Even if I've supported Republicans as of late.

KKK is not actually alt right. It started as a terrorist faction of the democratic party.
(See: [realdemocrathistory.wordpress.com])

Being pro freedom, I respect everyone's right to their belief, but after having read the Quaran, & learning it's origins,
I can honestly say it is not a good religion. People who follow this need to be observed.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login


This forum powered by Phorum

Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!