Equality in Islam

[trippymonkey]

Yes Agreed.
What I meant by 'perfect' is, where it matters, it can't misinterpreted.
A mere book cannot control ANYTHING by itself. It has to be used for & against people, as we've recently seen happening.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

What in your opinion is "where it matters"?

Also, I have asked you this before - how do you prevent something from being misinterpreted? How do you or I go about proving that anyone's interpretation of any belief, philosophy, political or moral idea is false, if the other person keeps insisting that they are right and that we are the ones who have got it wrong?

Presumably the important stuff, or where it matters as you put it, are moral issues? How do you prevent someone from holding a different opinion on a particular moral value?

For example - based on the premise in the Quran that people have the right to defend themselves against oppressors but should act in a just manner when doing so and not transgress limits, people will interpret words such as "just" and "oppressor" in different ways. Most times in international politics most countries and groups within countries do not trust each other because most countries will behave in a way that serves their national interests even if it damages the national interests of other countries. Most internal factions will also protect their own interests even if it damages the interests of a rival group or minority, and this is all done to control national resources and gain power partly out of greed and self-interest, partly out of fear of being disadvantaged by a rival group, and partly in order to impose particular moral values on the rest of society in order to protect your own way of life .

What usually happens in these situations is that societies set up an institution to investigate and come to a decision on the stuff that really matters and decide which moral value or policy that society is going to follow. And they also have institutions to enforce these decisions.

The UN was supposed to be a way of negotiating these international conflicts out, but it doesn't work as countries and factions do not want to share power or territory even in the interests of peace, hence the number of violent conflicts all over the world despite the UN and its predecessor, the League of Nations.

[trippymonkey]

OK
If I say Do NOT kill another human UNLESS your very life is threatened, what does that mean in YOUR opinion?
Maybe this child me grow up to threaten me later so I'll kill them NOW

Maybe the 'problem' with, say, The Quran, other books are available ?!?!? , is that it's not really in a language if not all but most cannot really understand. Bit like Sanskrit although both book(s) have lingual links to their more modern counterparts.

A much older volume of a different language WILL be open to alternative options & those doing the interpreting will have their own slant on things according to their own education & characters.
Maybe this will always be a problem as we're taking new views on very old written works.
We COULD discard them but much would be lost too, baby & bathwater ?!!??!

As you say about institutions but who do they REALLY represent - ie are they as neutral as they could or should be???
What agendas have they got?

As you concluded, we BOTH know total giving over to ANY older religion will not work as the mentality, attitudes & behaviours have changed dramatically since then.
We only need look at those mindless lunatics, IS, to see this.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

IMO I would think that statement means you can't kill people except in self-defence.

But presumably many people will think that statement does not apply in wars or conflicts, where missiles are fired from long distance so there is no threat to the life of the person firing the missile, and people are killed by the missiles. Such action would be considered justified by some but not by others.

And how does your statement apply to people killed as collateral damage? Or in situations where people are killed if the person killing them believes they are preventing even greater numbers of dead in the process?

And how do you stop someone from interpreting that statement in a way that justifies pre-emptive force, because that person perceives an immediate threat and believes that using pre-emptive force was the best way to save the lives of that person's loved ones, even if it means the death of someone else's loved ones?

I don't think the age of the written work or idea is the issue. In the case of pre-emptive attack by the US against Iraq in 2003, Bush's justification based on an interpretation of the words "imminent threat" was that even though Iraq had not attacked the US, it might be a threat in the future.

So it doesn't matter if the written work or idea is old or new - they are all open to interpretation by anyone.

[trippymonkey]

G
WELLL
That's all exactly my point. You cannot use any book to define a whole way of life for just the very reasons you state. That's one of many reasons I could never fully subscribe to any one faith as all offer many things others don't.

My second line says much as you've said re Iraq etc.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Not sure what you mean by define a whole way of life? The book contains a message or guidance but it is not detailed enough to define a whole way of life.

There are many aspects of being a Muslim today that are not covered in the Quran and were developed by different scholars in different cultures long after the Quran was revealed. Which is why there are contradictory interpretations of the ideas in the Quran. Whether some people choose to go to war or kill each other, either to enforce their particular interpretation or to use an interpretation to gain power or control, is one particularly ugly aspect of human nature that surfaces in political/ sectarian conflicts.

[trippymonkey]

Last bits so true unfortunately.

What punishments are defined for disagreement or defiance of The Quran for Muslim AND non-Muslim?

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

What do you mean by defiance or disobedience? Are you talking about breaking laws or defiance in terms of belief? The punishments for breaking the laws in the Quran are not very detailed, hence the legal process and different punishments are interpreted and developed by each country and are different in different countries.

There are a number of potential punishments for defiance of belief described in the Quran following a Day of Judgement - some of them pretty gruesome - can't remember exact details but possibly drinking boiling water and burning in fire springs to mind.

My interpretation is that the whole judgement / punishment narrative for the Day of Judgement is part of the concept of accountability and being God-fearing, as the concept in the Quran is that defiance and disobedience in belief is something for God to judge - obviously I have no idea if the concept of the punishments after death is literal or metaphorical, since there is no evidence for any of it, so it would be a faith matter.

[trippymonkey]

Well... technically speaking ALL non-Muslims are defying and-or disobeying your god by not bowing to Islam, no?

The so-called punishments are just the same as in the other 2 Abrahamic faiths of Judaism & Christianity. In fact, worse in some ways...

As you rightly say - there's no evidence for punishments or, indeed, even for Allah Himself.
They're all as bad as each other IMO

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

i am assuming the issue of supernatural or divine judgement for rejection of a belief in Islam is a lot more complex than just whether you call yourself a Muslim or not. For example Islam could have been presented to someone in a way that causes them to hate it.

 I don't know the workings of someone else's mind to know what causes belief in Islam to exist when previously there was none. I can only be somewhat aware of my own mind and what led me to adopt a belief in Islam.

[trippymonkey]

TBH G I find it fascinating why people 'change'.
It seems to be more on a personal level rather than regards the 'truth' of anything and that's fine.

As long as those people don't start going round telling everyone else THEY'RE wrong because they disagree with them. THAT'S human ego & seems to be going against the main idea that religion is supposed to make one a 'better person'

Nick

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

TBH G I find it fascinating why people 'change'.
It seems to be more on a personal level rather than regards the 'truth' of anything and that's fine.

As long as those people don't start going round telling everyone else THEY'RE wrong because they disagree with them. THAT'S human ego & seems to be going against the main idea that religion is supposed to make one a 'better person'

Nick

That cuts both ways - atheists who tell theists they are wrong because they disagree with them is presumably also about human ego and goes against the idea that not being religious is supposed to make one a 'better person'.

On here it certainly seems possible for some theists and atheists to debate ideas and public policies encompassing both their shared and differing moral beliefs (i.e. religious and non-religious moral beliefs) without getting into something as subjective as who is the 'better person'.

I changed because it felt 'true' for me.

[john]

Gabriella

You accuse me of clinging to my own beliefs about Islam, as if this problem was one I had made up or exaggerated.

I accuse you in return of being ill informed.

Clearly you did not watch the programme linked in the op which shows specific examples of the real problems the treatment of apostates lead to.

Yes it also refers to one small Islamic sect who have no problems with apostasy but they are a very limited minority.

You also appear to be unaware that in 13 Islamic countries The penalty for apostasy is death.

I suppose you will say its only my opinion and therefore of no import!!!!!

I claim that persecuting people and threatening them with death because of their faith or lack of is obscene.

It is this view that allows Muslims in the UK to practice their faith unhindered.

It is greatly to be regretted that Muslims do not reciprocate my attitude.

But it isn't just me saying this, watch the programme. 

[Nearly Sane]

Stating that Muslims do not reciprocate is a lazy generalisation. Even if many, and indeed a majority (though you have not evidenced that) is true, the absolute of your statement is not justified.

[Udayana]

I'm guessing people turn to Islam either because they see those elements of the golden rule in it and it makes more sense to them or it appeals because it offers them equality in a way other things don't.

I'm thinking of untouchables in India who by becoming Muslim become equal in the community.

I was reading about how untouchables in India were converting to Islam, I suppose to them it looks fairer more equal it was interesting to read.

What I read was in a book but you can google it

http://www.csmonitor.com/1981/0730/073047.html

If Sriram sees it I shall never hear the end of it   

LOL, no doubt, but it is just blatant propaganda. There have been mass conversions, mainly to Buddhism, but untouchables and other "lower" castes are far more likely to be targeted by Christian missionaries than Muslim - especially in South India. Unfortunately the caste system is just as rife in Indian Muslim and Christian communities as it is in Hindu.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Gabriella

You accuse me of clinging to my own beliefs about Islam, as if this problem was one I had made up or exaggerated.

I accuse you in return of being ill informed.

Clearly you did not watch the programme linked in the op which shows specific examples of the real problems the treatment of apostates lead to.

Yes it also refers to one small Islamic sect who have no problems with apostasy but they are a very limited minority.

You also appear to be unaware that in 13 Islamic countries The penalty for apostasy is death.

I suppose you will say its only my opinion and therefore of no import!!!!!

I claim that persecuting people and threatening them with death because of their faith or lack of is obscene.

It is this view that allows Muslims in the UK to practice their faith unhindered.

It is greatly to be regretted that Muslims do not reciprocate my attitude.

But it isn't just me saying this, watch the programme.

Another person on here who has trouble comprehending what they read. Must be some negative correlation between prejudice and ability to read on here.

I did not say that you had made up the problem - in fact what I actually said was that some individuals' or legal systems' interpretations of Islam advocate the death penalty for apostasy, and some don't.

It is not just members of one sect that advocate not imposing the death penalty or any other legal punishment for apostasy - there are scholars from various backgrounds who also advocate that position and I have linked t them before the last time this was brought up. There is no single Islam that universally advocates the death penalty for apostasy.

And no, I didn't watch the programme but yes I am aware that some Muslims face threats to their life if they leave Islam - it is fairly well publicised on the internet and in the media.

[letstryagain]

I read recently of a Muslim family who converted to Christianity and have had to move twice because of intimidation and abuse from their Muslim neighbours. They now live in a non muslim community. One assumes that these were not barking mad jihadists carrying out the abuse but regular moderate muslims. It is extremely disturbing that this is happening in the UK and like Rochdale the police are reluctant to treat as a faith hate crime, presumably concerned about upsetting the muslim community. It is difficult not to conclude that even ordinary muslims to not recognise equality of religions

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Link to the story? To try and see why you assume the neighbours were moderate Muslims? That's a big assumption for you to make and would also depend on if your definition of "moderate" is someone who breaks the law by abusing and intimidating people.

[trippymonkey]

I read recently of a Muslim family who converted to Christianity and have had to move twice because of intimidation and abuse from their Muslim neighbours. They now live in a non muslim community. One assumes that these were not barking mad jihadists carrying out the abuse but regular moderate muslims. It is extremely disturbing that this is happening in the UK and like Rochdale the police are reluctant to treat as a faith hate crime, presumably concerned about upsetting the muslim community. It is difficult not to conclude that even ordinary muslims to not recognise equality of religions

Islam most certainly doesn't recognise equality of religions so why should Muslims? It tends to say 'keep quiet if you're in a powerless minority' !!

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Not sure what you mean by keep quiet - I haven't been told that by any Muslims and it isn't my understanding of Islam.

As for equality of religion - a religious label is meaningless IMO, it's the belief and actions that are judged if you believe in the concept of a day of judgement.

Islam means submission in Arabic - from my understanding whether someone feels in submission to something they view as their creator can't be determined externally by other people though each person may well hold an opinion on it based on the behaviour of others.

My understanding of Islam is that submission is an internal act - an act of faith, a belief in submission to something supernatural i.e. something other than what science can test and verify, that manifests itself in a sense of thankfulness, if you have a belief in the concept of a supernatural creator. Therefore presumably people can call themselves Muslims and outwardly act like Muslims in some cultural aspects but not be considered to be in submission. Or people can call themselves something else and still be in submission more than many Muslims - IMO the belief is that the degree of submission is judged by god.

[trippymonkey]

Salaam G
You know as well as I do there's so much more in the Quran than 'simple' submission, whatever THAT means ?!!??
You'll know about those parts that suggest behaviours when a Muslim(s) are in a minority in another faith society? No?

Nick

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Salaam G
You know as well as I do there's so much more in the Quran than 'simple' submission, whatever THAT means ?!!??
You'll know about those parts that suggest behaviours when a Muslim(s) are in a minority in another faith society? No?

Nick

Which chapter and verse are you referring to? I can't answer such vague questions - I need details.

[trippymonkey]

No you don't, you know very well what I'm on about.
Anyway, no doubt you'd say 'well, it actually means this or that in MY interpretation of Islam'

Wonder what those loony preachers would think of your 'middle-of-the-road stance on all things Islamic !?!?
MMM
I cannot tell a lie - it was HIM !!!!

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

If I knew what you were on about, I wouldn't ask you for references.

There are lots of non-loony preachers who could probably explain it better than I could to the loony ones.

[trippymonkey]

I DO respect your decision to be a Muslim but I so often feel you landed yourself in something you didn't realise would be like this. 

This would explain all the 'I've no idea what you're on about' we constantly get on here,. despite references.

Nick