Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Lots of talk on another religion in this forum.
It turns out that Muslims apparently want a different kind of democracy, one which avoids moral and other kinds of risks. For example, although they would like freedom of speech, they would not like it to be unlimited, such that it might permit speech offensive to religious sensibilities. In other words, blasphemy laws should limit it.
As for other freedoms, the authors provide no information. In particular, we do not know whether Muslims accept freedom of religion. This is a most peculiar omission since it is essential to a clear understanding of contemporary Muslim views of democracy.
But perhaps all of this is to be understood in light of the finding that Muslims women as well as men want to ground their democracy partly or entirely in Sharia or Islamic law. The authors hasten to assure the readers that this does not mean that Muslim democracy would actually be a theocracy, since their respondents largely reject the prospective rule of Muslim jurists.
But this leaves the matter totally confused. If Sharia is to be the partial or entire base of future democratic governments, who is constituted to decide what Sharia prescribes, other than the jurists to whom its interpretation has always been and is still entrusted? We are left totally in doubt as to whether the poll asked this kind of question. We are also left in doubt about a whole set of issues, including and especially whether or not Muslim democracy would permit religious freedom of the sort characteristic of American and other liberal democracies. Would the status of non-Muslims especially Christians be governed by traditional Sharia prescriptions for non-Muslim or dhimmi minorities, which involve various legal disabilities and inequities? Or would they be fully equal? Would non-Muslims be permitted to run for and hold public office?
- See more at: Who speaks for Islam? Good question
It thus turns out that Muslims apparently want a different kind of democracy, one which avoids moral and other kinds of risks. For example, although they would like freedom of speech, they would not like it to be unlimited, such that it might permit speech offensive to religious sensibilities. In other words, blasphemy laws should limit it.
As for other freedoms, the authors provide no information. In particular, we do not know whether Muslims accept freedom of religion. This is a most peculiar omission since it is essential to a clear understanding of contemporary Muslim views of democracy.
But perhaps all of this is to be understood in light of the finding that Muslimswomen as well as menwant to ground their democracy partly or entirely in Sharia or Islamic law. The authors hasten to assure the readers that this does not mean that Muslim democracy would actually be a theocracy, since their respondents largely reject the prospective rule of Muslim jurists.
But this leaves the matter totally confused. If Sharia is to be the partial or entire base of future democratic governments, who is constituted to decide what Sharia prescribes, other than the jurists to whom its interpretation has always been and is still entrusted? We are left totally in doubt as to whether the poll asked this kind of question. We are also left in doubt about a whole set of issues, including and especially whether or not Muslim democracy would permit religious freedom of the sort characteristic of American and other liberal democracies. Would the status of non-Muslimsespecially Christiansbe governed by traditional Sharia prescriptions for non-Muslim or dhimmi minorities, which involve various legal disabilities and inequities? Or would they be fully equal? Would non-Muslims be permitted to run for and hold public office?
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mesh/2008/04/who_does_speak_for_islam/
The dhimmi communities had their own chiefs and judges, with their own family, personal and religious laws,[49] and "generally speaking, Muslim tolerance of unbelievers was far better than anything available in Christendom, until the rise of secularism in the 17th century".[50] "Muslims guaranteed freedom of worship and livelihood, provided that they remained loyal to the Muslim state and paid a poll tax".[51] "Muslim governments appointed Christian and Jewish professionals to their bureaucracies",[51] and thus, Christians and Jews "contributed to the making of the Islamic civilization".[51]
The Arab conquerors included Christian as well as Muslim tribes. The Christian Arabs were regarded as fellow Arabs rather than dhimmis.
Local Christians in Syria, Iraq, and Egypt were non-Chalcedonians and many may have felt better off under early Muslim rule than under that of the orthodox Greeks of Constantinople.[59]
Dhimmi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What about the reputation of Islamic Baghdad and Spain being a place of learning and tolerance? Is the "golden age of Islam" a Western myth?
No, no, no... i said the Arabs were both well educated and decent.
I was talking about the Ottomans not Muslims in general.
Are you saying that the actions of the Ottomans were more of a racial and cultural issue than the fault of Islam as a religion?
PS; I am not an Islamophobe, nor an Islamophile. I just don't like to condemn things and people without putting a lot of thought into it. That would make me look like these 16 year old atheists that blame religion as the root of all evil.
Arab-speaking Christians praise Allah in the liturgy and read of Him in their Bibles, since it is nothing more than the Arabic word for God.Two traditions, one space; Orthodox Christians and Muslims in dialogue.
Ed. by George C. Papademetriou.
Somerset Hall Press, ©2011 339 p. $34.95 BP172
978-1-935244-06-6
Scholars of Orthodox Christianity and of Islam explore the hundreds of years of encounters and dialogues between the two religions in the Byzantine and Ottoman Empires and currently in the Middle East and Turkey. Their topics include Jesus as a prophet of Islam, Islamic Aristotelian philosophy, Byzantine and contemporary Greek Orthodox approaches to Islam, the Jesus prayer and Dhikr as a potential contribution to Christian-Muslim dialogue, and how an Orthodox Christian monk saved the life of a Muslim king. (Annotation ©2012 Book News Inc. Portland, OR)
http://booknews.com/ref_issues/ref_feb2012/somhall1.html
Yes, it is, in my honest opinion, a myth.What about the reputation of Islamic Baghdad and Spain being a place of learning and tolerance? Is the "golden age of Islam" a Western myth?
The only areas of the Arab world where there were large numbers of Christians for a long time, until the early 20th century, were Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Jordan.It's a fact that Muslims and Christians have a shared history, especially in Eastern Orthodox lands. The only way we can heal from past hurts and resentments is if we discuss them in as far a manner as possible.
I think that the opposite is truer mostly because the Greeks had a large network of trade in the Mediterranean during the Ottoman times.Does Greek culture have more in common with Middle Eastern civilization than it does with Western European civilization, especially due to its close proximity to the Middle East?
Does Greek culture have more in common with Middle Eastern civilization than it does with Western European civilization, especially due to its close proximity to the Middle East?
But in general, our Christian faith and our admiration for the Ancient Greek and Roman spirit prevented us from inheriting any major Middle Easter habits or traits that would drastically change our culture.
Yes, it is, in my honest opinion, a myth.
In terms of skin color, ways of thinking, music, art, religion, etc. Greece seems to have more in common with the Middle East than with Westerm Europe, which isn't a bad thing.
Two traditions, one space; Orthodox Christians and Muslims in dialogue.
Ed. by George C. Papademetriou.
Somerset Hall Press, ©2011 339 p. $34.95 BP172
978-1-935244-06-6
Scholars of Orthodox Christianity and of Islam explore the hundreds of years of encounters and dialogues between the two religions in the Byzantine and Ottoman Empires and currently in the Middle East and Turkey. Their topics include Jesus as a prophet of Islam, Islamic Aristotelian philosophy, Byzantine and contemporary Greek Orthodox approaches to Islam, the Jesus prayer and Dhikr as a potential contribution to Christian-Muslim dialogue, and how an Orthodox Christian monk saved the life of a Muslim king. (Annotation ©2012 Book News Inc. Portland, OR)
Reference & Research Book News, February 2012: Somerset Hall Press
I wonder if this means that a majority of Muslims support the rights of Christians in Islamic lands.
Something that many Westeners don't realize is that a major reason why there are extremist, despotic governments in the Middle East is either because they were created by Western colonialism or were formed in reaction against Western colonialism. An obvious example is how Iran's government was formed as a revolution against the American-installed Shah.
The Ethiopian and I believe Coptic Orthodox Churches' folks remove their shoes as well. It has to do with entering holy ground as God said to Moses on the Mt.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?