Would you support social engineering aimed at reforming Islam?

originally posted by: Gnosisisfaith
Mat Allah bless you all. Even if you have the wrong idea about Islam. Try not to be ignorant, the government wants you to hate Islam. Don't listen to the government. They bomb people.

So do jihadists.

originally posted by: Gnosisisfaith
Mat Allah bless you all. Even if you have the wrong idea about Islam. Try not to be ignorant, the government wants you to hate Islam. Don't listen to the government. They bomb people.

Amen.

But let me ask you, please realize that the government is a manifestation of the people that control it, there are specific people in government who want people to hate Islam, they represent the citizens who hold similar views.

If the people who do not suffer from fear and loathing are elected to government, there can be a change.

The way you see it is very important or you gloss over the mechanism that keeps the hate in government, conservative xenophobes in the case of America.

a reply to: yesyesyes

And that is the problem with the conservative imams who would rather see an entire generation of the faithful die than relinquish their grip on power.

a reply to: DJW001

I know what you mean. Jihad actually means inner struggle but I'm just saying Islam is not the problem

a reply to: DJW001

Saudi Arabia and America get along just fine. Money has that effect on people

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: yesyesyes

And that is the problem with the conservative imams who would rather see an entire generation of the faithful die than relinquish their grip on power.

Very true too imo

a reply to: tadaman

No. I don't agree with that.

Because once we allow that, (social engineering of a religion) then who'd be next on the list?

ISeparation of church and state is violated by allowing anyone the right to legislate any religion.EEven if its nnot a government agency doing it. Religion has the right to be autonomous. And how would you enforce this proposed social engineering? Laws? This sounds like spiritual eugenics to me.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: tadaman

The general difference between Islam and other religions is that Islam rejects secular law as irrelevant or even blasphemous compared to the laws of God. The laws of God are subject to interpretation, and are essentially as indistinct as God itself is. The laws of man can be reformed and augmented according the the dictates of men, while the laws of God, cannot.

Islam will not reform until it can allow itself to be superseded by the laws of men.

Ewww. Think that through for a second. Everybody here complains about how much our politicians suck. So why would I, a Muslim, place Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump's policies above my religious beliefs? Think about what you're asking us to do. You're literally saying we should either water down our religious beliefs or devote ourselves more to the laws of our lawmakers than to our faith. Who does that?

Republican lawmakers stand against nearly every one of my political and social priorities. Why would I put their crappy laws above my religious beliefs? Even at the local level, Republicans in my own district have tried to stop us from building mosques. Do you really think I'd let their laws supersede my religious beliefs? I'm anti-war largely because of my faith. So the next time our leaders decide to launch another for-profit war, should I throw my religious objections aside & support the war? Nope, not gonna do it.

originally posted by: Stormdancer777

Some Islamic countries haven't always been this way, I mean they were moving forward, then something happened..

As with everything... Follow the money. The House of Saud had their "Reformation" back in 1979, nobody paid attention in the West. Between the encouraging radical jihadis to battle the Soviets in Afghanistan and the spreading of Wahabbi madresses and Mosques around the Globe you have the mess Islam is in. Khomeini in Iran just was more of the same on the Shia side. Women in most of the Arab world were more free pre-1979. The West went along with those wacky jihadis as long as they were proxies for us against the USSR. Within 2 generations the Wahabbis and the House of Saud have turned Islam back two to three hundred years. Want to change Islam? The house of Saud must be destroyed and something a little more acceptable to the rest of the world must take its place. Hard if not impossible to do when there is no Moderate Muslims ready to fill the void the of the eventual collapse of the House of Saud.

Hopefully the petro dollars will dry up and then the Middle East can just wither and rot before it takes the rest of the world down with it.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Hey,

First I wish you no disrespect. Thank you for listening. Thank you for your consideration.

you say:Why would I put their crappy laws above my religious beliefs?

Well what about laws that are not crappy. Laws that are not made by a single Donald trump or a Hillary. Laws that we as a people came to after much trial and error, that were chosen and made into law by a democratic consensus and found to be GOOD. Do those laws not have a supremacy in certain matters?

In Christianity we have the old adage, give unto Cesar what is Cesar's and to God what is Gods. Does Islam hold a similar belief?

Do you not see a single instance where the laws of the land are supreme over Gods laws as laid out in Islam?

That is an important distinction to make.

No one would dare ask anyone to make our politicians into an example to be followed. I could recommend the ethos of our people under certain circumstances though. A town sheriff might be better elected by a vote rather than by a religious authority choosing the most observant of the religious rules....You see what I am getting at?

I am asking a tongue in cheek question, really trying to just bring this important issue to light. Integration depends on it.

And that is what is necessary. Integration. Part of our ethos in the west is a SUPREMACY of the law of the land by virtue of its consensus through democratic vote with respect and only respect for religion. Not authority granted.

That is a big one. A middle point must be the goal of all and some compromise must be made. I am sorry, but EVERY GROUP IN HISTORY has either molded itself to another or the two fight over the one way. There is no one way and that is the point. In the west we have discovered that there SHOULD be a supremacy given to the law of man. So far, democracy is GREAT. Just saying, its the main spirit of our laws....

1. Who are all of you to say Islam needs to be reformed? If you haven't read the Qur'an in its entirety, you literally don't know what Islam is, much less if it needs reformation. And if you have read it, you'd already know which parts are being exaggerated, ignored, added to, or misrepresented by some people and sects. So those specific people & sects' interpretations (or excuses) are what need reformation, not the religion.

2. Islamic communities grow & change all the time. That's literally the point of new rulings & interpretations. New things can be & are accepted all the time (look at the technology & medical fields, for example). The ones who refuse to accept most changes are the extreme conservatives. It's not a coincidence that the secular Islamic governments are the ones the West attacks while the ultra conservative, anti-reformists are the ones the West backs. Ever since the Cold War began, the West has backed right wing factions all over the world, from Africa & Latin America (School of the Americas, cough cough) to the South Pacific & the Middle East. Right wing conservatives by definition are against reformation. The correlation should be obvious.

3. There are a lot of different Islamic denominations, sects, & schools of thought. They don't interpret things the same way. So how would Islam as a whole accept the same "reformation" anyway? Are you suggesting that all Islamic sects & denominations should adopt the same "approved" interpretations? How would that work? Wouldn't that require a united Islamic world that strictly follows these new "approved" interpretations? How's that any different from a worldwide Caliphate that Islamophobes keep fearmongering about?

4. Believe it or not, there are plenty of progressive Islamic movements and groups. There are even Islamic feminist groups. But how can you expect any of them to gain any large scale political or social traction when the world's most powerful countries keep backing their oppressors?

Bahrain & its grassroots protests have a been getting stomped by the "reformed" Western backed rulers since the Arab Spring began (and before that). The "reformed" West backs, arms, and protects the hardcore rightwing Wahhabis & their allied kingdoms in the Arabian Peninsula. The "reformed" West took out the democratically elected Iranian leader Mossadeq, and installed an oppressive tyrant, the Shah, as their leader. The "reformed" West backed Saddam for most of his time in power, even when he was crushing the Kurdish people. Pakistan had a democratically elected female leader & the West backed General Musharraf's coup against her. There are women's rights movements in Saudi Arabia right now & the "reformed" West is still backing the oppressive misogynists instead of the gender-equality reformers. Even Qaddafi's Libya was vastly more prosperous & successful than the Western "reformed" version.

If you really want to see a "reformation" in policies in many Islamic countries, there's a simple answer. Stop invading them, stop attacking them, stop arming their backwards Wahhabi-Kharijite & misogynist factions, and stop helping them crush local dissent. It's hard to "reform" an infrastructure or school system when it's constantly being blown up. And it's hard to reject vengeance when your countries are constantly being attacked by the "reformers".

Or to put it another way, why would you expect a population to accept your way of thinking when you're constantly bullying them? If you want people to accept your world view, be a good example of them. Otherwise, we'll see the hypocrisy and point out that you're an example of what not to be.

a reply to: tadaman

Thanks for the response. I'll be blunt. I don't place any of Man's laws above God's laws in the Qur'an. I do place many individual laws as being great though; but that's because they either go along with my beliefs or they have no effect on my beliefs at all. Remember, the Qur'an is much shorter than the Bible. There are many things in the Bible that simply aren't even mentioned in the Qur'an (I was going to list some, but the list is really long. That's one reason so many denominations seem to focus more on Hadith & Sunna than the Qur'an. Because they contain far more rules & regulations, though they're not always accepted by different denominations & sects).

As for assimilation, dude, I'm a progressive socialist. lol I want to create socialist utopias where no one has to work to survive but can instead work towards their dreams, personal goals, community advancement, or just chill and do nothing. I believe in most tenets of the US Constitution, but that's because they go along with my religious beliefs, not in spite of them. The problem is the millions of Muslims who "assimilate" or have been a part of Western cultures for generations are largely ignored. People act as if we don't count & usually focus on the negative ultra-conservative & extremist Muslims. I think that's because a lot of people only see one brand of Islam on tv (the ultra conservatives in Iran & the Wahhabi conservatives in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, etc).

For example: The Qur'an directly states that there is no compulsion in religion & tells us to say "unto you your beliefs & unto me my beliefs" to non-believers. That goes perfectly with my "live & let live" policy, which goes along with our 1st Amendment's right to freedom of religion. But this same country also racially segregated against my bloodline until my parents were kids. Those laws aren't just cliff notes to me; they'd still be law now if not for the Civil Rights Movement. And I follow speed laws & voting laws because they don't conflict with my religion. However, if we had a new law that required being drunk while driving, I'd be against it since I don't drink.

note: There's actually a passage in the Qur'an that means something similar to the "unto Caesar his" quote you labeled. But I can't remember what it is (facepalm).

a reply to: enlightenedservant

I can not speak to allot of what you say as there are several topics to cover in that. I will concede that there is much truth to what you say, though I think you make a generalization by thinking that these things are representative of western thought and not the actions of a run away elite. It seems the radicals and those that back them both LEFT and right are not helping the situation and are not representative of all.

To counter that inherent nature in humans, that is the ability to corrupt and use noble intentions for evil ends, there should be a CLEAR and laid out CONSENSUS.

Are you suggesting that all Islamic sects & denominations should adopt the same "approved" interpretations? How would that work?

The Catholic church has had MANY REFORMATIONS, as have other faiths. How ever they did it or in fact HOW the various sects of the ME came under Islam....if its a good idea and you are patient enough to see it through.

If you dont think its a good idea to clear up some of the less adequate tenets in a modern world and just RISK that wealthy foreigners can cause such trouble with only money.....then fine.

If this is a growing discussion, then lets look to square some things away.

The point is we are all constantly reforming, or resisting change.

As far as not invading, no invasion starts without first a betrayal. There would be no foreigners in the ME if the ME was not already so conducive to their presence. That is just true.

A UNITED ME must not be seen as a threat or it will NEVER be allowed to form. That is just true too.

It must unite to survive and not be such a tempting target for the whole world, not just the west. What do you think China is looking for in the ME, they lose something there? Oil. The world lost its oil there.

The idea of a united ME only scares bankers and the elite as far as a shift of power. A united ISLAMIC world is scary as hell to be honest. History is there man. Thats why the rest of us want to see some distance between the whole religion and the world that Muslims are sharing with us.

I want to see Muslims identify as people first and foremost who happen to be Muslims, not Muslims who happen to be American, or German, or what ever. I dont think that is absurd.

I am tired of all this God crap. To be honest. Its such a waste of time if it makes you stand opposed to another. If its a force of unity then cool. Then I can dig it all day.

EDIT TO ADD:
let me put it this way,

If it meant that the Catholic church had to take a huge risk that could destroy it by reforming and declaring that all sorts of things like gay marriage and condoms were OK, I would want them to risk it. Because as humans we WILL ask ourselves if all this is even worth it and if things dont pan out, they WILL NOT make into the future. That simple. The world is bigger than any one religion.

We cant afford all this discord as time runs out and the world gets smaller with less room for big ideas in contradiction. Either we all agree to continue to meet halfway, BRAVELY and with the intent of building trust and understanding, or we risk losing much more out of fear. The fear of compromise.



In any event, have a good one sir.
Thank you for your thoughts and I hope I have not offended you or others as that was not my intention.

Hold it down.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

I think the main changes that needs to occur are these two: Modern Islam needs to respect Women more, they are treated more often than not as chattel of Men. When that occurs, it will be a turning point.

Second, Modern Islam need to be tolerant. Yes, simply tolerant of others who aren't Muslim or are "different". It would go a long way towards joining the rest of the world in that respect.
Let others simply be who they are without being threatened. I know Islam doesn't seem to like transgressions against the faith but guess what? They happen all the time. If Islam can't learn to be tolerant, then don't be surprised when the rest of the globe simply has enough of their behavior.

a reply to: pavil

If Islam can't learn to be tolerant, then don't be surprised when the rest of the globe simply has enough of their behavior.

Accepting would be even better than tolerant. Of course that applies to everyone in general. Soo... there's that.

Islam is very and more tolerant than christianity

a reply to: enlightenedservant
I already tried that, im Muslim, and no one listened

a reply to: pavildon't be surprised when the world gets sick of christanity and does the same. Islam is superior to Christianity in every way.

a reply to: GnosisisfaithAmerica's the only country with an Islam bias and leads the way along with christianity in ignorance. Any one suggesting Islam needs reform... needs reform.