Egypt moves to ban Elton John

[Kilgore Trout]

If it was a fair battle, I won't complain because I believe the clash between the now West and Islam (or Muslims) is inevitable. The Western ideologies and values conflict much with Islam, two opposites. This thought is manifested clearly in these threads:
modernism-scent-gunpowder.html
islam-story-3.html
has-western-civilization-brought-any-comfort.html
From the age of colonization, our societies went into a process of westernization. Imagine you import ideas and laws that aimed to solve problems and run lives of certain people to another people who face different problems and situations.
Imagine if you run your country (US?) by the Islamic laws and ideas...

We are used to the lies of the orientalists and many Muslims scholars replied to them but there is a new trend in some Western countries which is banning of the freedom of practice the religion, this is another level. We are not talking about Muslim countries that occupy yours, that impose sanctions on some Western countries or that put pressure on them to change the school curriculum...etc. You are talking about a world where there is no power balance and power is the only language that this world understands. Many Muslim counties are colonized economically and politically even after the end of military occupation.

It's all a matter of perspective I guess. I just think people should be consistent in their views. If predominantly muslim countries want to enforce the rules of their religion on the populace, that's their business - particularly if it's what the people want. If I moved to one of these muslim countries, I would do so knowing that I would be subject to these rules, and would act accordingly, and not assume they should change for me.

Conversely, when muslim people move to western countries, they should understand and expect the same. If western countries want to encourage people to adopt western values in their countries, it is the same as muslim people wanting to encourage people to adopt muslim values in their countries.

If we do not protect our own values and ways-of-life, then who is going to? However, it is arrogant to expect countries that hold different values than yours to adopt yours.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

But what do indecent men cause then?

Wars in Iraq?

 

[MSizer]

It is not a matter of religion or religious practice itself, rather it is how people utilize their religion and practices.

So believing that gay people are sinners and that they could potentially bring upon us a destructive wrath from god is not a potential problem? Tell that to a gay teen who is contemplating suicide over continued social stigmatization.

 

[xkatz]

If it was a fair battle, I won't complain because I believe the clash between the now West and Islam (or Muslims) is inevitable. The Western ideologies and values conflict much with Islam, two opposites.

As I have said before...

Is their ANY reason for why a violent conflict is needed between two imaginary, man-made things? Isn't it silly to fight what our own minds have created? Can't we just see beyond our imaginations?

 

[xkatz]

So believing that gay people are sinners and that they could potentially bring upon us a destructive wrath from god is not a potential problem? Tell that to a gay teen who is contemplating suicide over continued social stigmatization.

What I am trying to say is that, we can have religion. It's just that people should know how to use religion in a wise, humane, and thoughtful manner. None of that "your going to hell" stuff.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Who told you exactly that I believe in absolute freedom without restrictions? When needed, corruption should be fought and restricted. Who told you exactly I believe in liberal art or in any art that oppose the Islamic values? I believe art should be inside the frame of moral values, of course not every thing should be censored but I don't believe to allow a sex scene in a movie for example, etc.

I strongly oppose westernization of our societies and the mentalities of our youth. The amount of the imported ideas and values from the West is amazing, and these imported ideas are the bad corrupting ones and which gradually erase our uniqueness as Muslims, Arabs and Egyptians. True that this is mainly an ideological battle.

Good point, Not4Me.

You might want to warn your government of the influence that Negro music has on youth. After the 1950's and 1960's, America has never been the same.

If only we had listened to Ed Meese and Tipper Gore ...

 

[Sahar]

As I have said before...

Is their ANY reason for why a violent conflict is needed between two imaginary, man-made things? Isn't it silly to fight what our own minds have created? Can't we just see beyond our imaginations?

When it comes to ideas, I mentioned nothing about the need for violence. Violence will be needed in cases of military occupation.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

How can you compare a sex scene with the fact Sir Elton John is gay?

Silly you. Gay people cause sex scenes in movies.

 

[MSizer]

Good point, Not4Me.

You might want to warn your government of the influence that Negro music has on youth. After the 1950's and 1960's, America has never been the same.

If only we had listened to Ed Meese and Tipper Gore ...

Very true indeed. You allow negros to play their music near caucasian young people, and then you have the homosexuals expecting to be allowed to get married. The west can't turn back from their descent into moral emptiness, but some countries who have been strong enough to resist change for 1400 years still have a chance to preserve the good old ways of human history past.

 

[xkatz]

When it comes to ideas, I mentioned nothing about the need for violence. Violence will be needed in cases of military occupation.

If it was a fair battle, I won't complain because I believe the clash between the now West and Islam (or Muslims) is inevitable

:sarcastic

But why should Muslims and other people have to use violence? Doesn't that make them just as bad as the occupiers or "the West"? I mean, just look at what people like MLK and Gandhi achieved. They never hurt anybody or recommended violence and they got a lot done.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

We are used to the lies of the orientalists ...

Well, I have to say that this is a side of Not4Me that I've seen before.

Quite revealing.

 

[MSizer]

:sarcastic

But why should Muslims and other people have to use violence? Doesn't that make them just as bad as the occupiers or "the West"? ...

Nope, there are clear distinctions according to the Koran as to when violence is appropriate.

Of course, it's a religious matter xkatz, so I'm afraid in the interest of religious tolerance, I'm going to have to ask you to back down.

 

[Walkntune]

What I am trying to say is that, we can have religion. It's just that people should know how to use religion in a wise, humane, and thoughtful manner. None of that "your going to hell" stuff.

I agree with this whole heartedly!

 

[xkatz]

Nope, there are clear distinctions according to the Koran as to when violence is appropriate.

Of course, it's a religious matter xkatz, so I'm afraid in the interest of religious tolerance, I'm going to have to ask you to back down.

Since when do you know that every single Muslim or every Muslim group believes in violent Jihad?

You are making a sweeping generalization.

 

[Sahar]

Right, but you're making it sound on the other end, that your ideological battle is reasonable. If the west were also waging an ideological battle, why is it any different for them than for you?

If it was a fair battle, I won't complain because I believe the clash between the now West and Islam (or Muslims) is inevitable. The Western ideologies and values conflict much with Islam, two opposites. This thought is manifested clearly in these threads:
modernism-scent-gunpowder.html
islam-story-3.html
has-western-civilization-brought-any-comfort.html

:sarcastic

The context of what I said is clear.

But why should Muslims and other people have to use violence? Doesn't that make them just as bad as the occupiers or "the West"? I mean, just look at what people like MLK and Gandhi achieved. They never hurt anybody or recommended violence and they got a lot done.

If you are a pacifist, it is another thing. I believe use of violence is justified when you resist occupation and defend your land and your people from attacks. And no the attacker and the attacked won't be the same. This is for another thread anyway.

 

[xkatz]

I think the problem is:

People in "the West" such as MSizer (no offense :sorry1 see religious people and associate them with people such as not4me (again, no offense :sorry1.

And people like not4me see people from "the West" and associate them with people like MSizer.

So basically, people from "both sides" are making sweeping generalizations and seem to think that their "opposite" is the enemy and that they need to fight (maybe).

Now how do we fix this?

 

[Sahar]

It's all a matter of perspective I guess. I just think people should be consistent in their views. If predominantly muslim countries want to enforce the rules of their religion on the populace, that's their business - particularly if it's what the people want. If I moved to one of these muslim countries, I would do so knowing that I would be subject to these rules, and would act accordingly, and not assume they should change for me.

Conversely, when muslim people move to western countries, they should understand and expect the same. If western countries want to encourage people to adopt western values in their countries, it is the same as muslim people wanting to encourage people to adopt muslim values in their countries.

The only objection is the hypocrisy. It's not Muslims who claim that they enjoy secular free societies. Banning people from practicing their religions freely is another level. I want to see Muslim governments protect freedom of practicing religion, and many Muslims expected this from western countries.

However, it is arrogant to expect countries that hold different values than yours to adopt yours.

Agreed.

 

[Sahar]

Well, I have to say that this is a side of Not4Me that I've seen before.

Quite revealing.

What side is this?

 

[MissAlice]

OMG, what I wouldn't give to see Elton John live...

That's not right. /:

 

[Sahar]

I think the problem is:

People in "the West" such as MSizer (no offense :sorry1 see religious people and associate them with people such as not4me (again, no offense :sorry1.

And people like not4me see people from "the West" and associate them with people like MSizer.

So basically, people from "both sides" are making sweeping generalizations and seem to think that their "opposite" is the enemy and that they need to fight (maybe).

Now how do we fix this?

Recognizing the differences is necessary so that I become able to make an informed decision on what I should accept from a different culture and what I shouldn't. But to be honest I have a serious problem in recognizing the common ground. Maybe the painful reality led me to this, I don't know...
I welcome any enlightening thought on the common ground part.