Where did all the Muslims, in RFs, go?!

[icehorse]

Yes. But the question is, do Muslims seek or value "independent scrutiny" as @danieldemol's claim implies.

I vote no. They do not care about that at all. But they are human beings, so, the insults and unfair judgments will take their toll.

Here's how I feel: it makes sense to apply scrutiny to an idea or a doctrine if someone is actively promoting it as "the best". It's not appropriate to criticize and scrutinize a doctrine or religion when some one says, "It's mine".

People seem to pick on Islam simply because it exists, and they pick on Muslims simply because they are Muslims. When someone makes a ridiculous claim, by all means, apply the full force of critical analysis against it. But the claim "It's mine" is not a claim of "it's the best". And until someone says "It's the best"; i think it's rude to begin scrutinizing their religion without empathy.

First off, I will stand by my claim that Islam's core claims are incoherent, I believe that is a fair judgment.

Now @Saint Frankenstein just said that Muslims do not claim that Islam is a religion of peace. That's very relevant to this discussion. If he's correct, then the rest of us have every right to scrutinize their doctrines. Can you see that if Muslims claim that Islam is NOT peaceful, the rest of us have every right to be suspicious?

 

[dybmh]

Yes.. thank you for straightening me out.. I was fighting a compulsion to rip you a new one.

LOL! Maybe some other time, then...

 

[dybmh]

First off, I will stand by my claim that Islam's core claims are incoherent, I believe that is a fair judgment.

Yeah. I personally do not value coherence in a religious context. If I did, would not be able to define myself as spiritual.

This one statement ^^ is very deep if the definition of coherence is borrowed from quantum mechanics.

Now @Saint Frankenstein just said that Muslims do not claim that Islam is a religion of peace. That's very relevant to this discussion. If he's correct, then the rest of us have every right to scrutinize their doctrines. Can you see that if Muslims claim that Islam is NOT peaceful, the rest of us have every right to be suspicious?

Yes. But the problem I have comes in a different form. It's not suspicion... it's denial.

 

[Wandering Monk]

Yeah. Not only that but a Conservative Shul was attacked in 2018... so, ya know.... the fear has a real, current, rational source.

But that doesn't mean that the stereotype accurately describes Islam or Muslims. Please tell me that you and I are in agreement on this?

I'm on the edge on this issue. Pew Research released a survey in 2013 that indicates a large minority of Muslims support Sharia in their countries.

Of those, another large minority support making Sharia apply to non-Muslims:

So, tell me, am I not supposed to be concerned about this?

 

[danieldemol]

And Islamophobia is alive and well in the Jewish community. I have first hand knowledge. It is most often found in the elder generation. But, the Islamophobic elders look for opportunities to indoctrinate the children with their own poisoned point of view.

That’s not Islamophobia, it is hatred of and bigotry towards Muslims

If you deny it, you are denying the truth, just like flat-earth advocates.

I’m not denying that hatred of, and bigotry towards Muslims exists

If you say Islamophobia doesn't exist, then you're in denial.

The fear of Islam exists, but depending on whose Islam we are talking about (there is not only one Islam) that fear is both legitimate and healthy.

I totally get that you don't like Islam.

Wrong

What I don't get is what appears to be:

Total.
Lack.
Of Empathy.

Wrong again, I completely empathise with opressed Muslims and non-Muslims, that’s why I won’t be using a word which has been used to oppress people from both within and outside of Islam for voicing legitimate criticism.

 

[dybmh]

I'm on the edge on this issue. Pew Research released a survey in 2013 that indicates a large minority of Muslims support Sharia in their countries.

View attachment 35742



Of those, another large minority support making Sharia apply to non-Muslims:

View attachment 35741

So, tell me, am I not supposed to be concerned about this?

Hi,

Do you know how many people were excluded from this survey?

I do.

Also, this is Sharia, not Fiqh. Fiqh is much more valuable in this discussion because it shows how Sharia is applied.

 

[dybmh]

That’s not Islamophobia, it is hatred of and bigotry towards Muslims


I’m not denying that hatred of, and bigotry towards Muslims exists


The fear of Islam exists, but depending on whose Islam we are talking about (there is not only one Islam) that fear is both legitimate and healthy.

Wrong


Wrong again, I completely empathise with opressed Muslims and non-Muslims, that’s why I won’t be using a word which has been used to oppress people from both within and outside of Islam for voicing legitimate criticism.

Dude...

Why don't you just tell me what Islamophobia means, and then I'll use your definition?

 

[Revoltingest]

Nah, Jock. It'll be yer wee flatulence......after all the haggis

That can't be it.
(I blamed @Wirey.)

 

[Niblo]

That can't be it.
(I blamed @Wirey.)

I stand corrected!

 

[danieldemol]

Dude...

Why don't you just tell me what Islamophobia means, and then I'll use your definition?

Islamophobia is the irrational fear of an idea. As a word it can be and often is used to tar legitimate fears such as the healthy, sane and reasonable fear of apostasy and blasphemy laws as illegitimate.

Therefore when we are discussing hatred of and bigotry towards Muslims we should use clear language to describe that, and not pejorative terms used to oppress those with legitimate criticism from within and without the Muslim community.

 

[Wandering Monk]

Hi,

Do you know how many people were excluded from this survey?

I do.

How many were excluded? Apparently those in the West. Are their attitudes substantially different than their fellow Muslims in other parts of the world?

 

[dybmh]

Islamophobia is the irrational fear of an idea. As a word it can be and often is used to tar legitimate fears such as the healthy, sane and reasonable fear of apostasy and blasphemy laws as illegitimate.

Therefore when when we are discussing hatred of and bigotry towards Muslims we should use clear language to describe that, and not pejorative terms used to oppress those with legitimate criticism from within and without the Muslim community.

ok. no problem. I simply didn't know that the word was used to stifle opposition. I just thought it was fear of Islam. Literally.

 

[dybmh]

How many were excluded? Apparently those in the West. Are their attitudes substantially different than their fellow Muslims in other parts of the world?

yes. it is significant. There's another Pew survey ( i think it's more recent that 2013 ) that shows that the Muslims who were excluded value 2 things above all others: The Qur'an and the love/affection for the Prophet Muhammad.

Note: I think that belief in One G-d was assumed to be true, and thus wasn't measured.

But the most sigificant problem is Pew didn't ask the right question. They asked about Sharia not Fiqh.

It's like asking if the Law is in Leviticus... but not asking if people are literally "stoned to death".

 

[icehorse]

Yeah. I personally do not value coherence in a religious context. If I did, would not be able to define myself as spiritual.

Wow! A couple of thoughts about that:

- If we want Muslims to be accepted, then coherent beliefs would help.
- I take umbrage at any claim that hints that religion is necessary for spirituality

 

[icehorse]

Do you know how many people were excluded from this survey?

Wait, what? Well I guess 1.8 billion minus 40,000 were excluded. but I'm guessing that's not what you meant? Are you taking issue with the idea of statistical sampling? Or perhaps you're taking issue with the countries in which the polling was done?

 

[dybmh]

If we want Muslims to be accepted, then coherent beliefs would help.

The point is, Muslims don't want acceptance, just common courtesy will suffice. Not lumping the Sunnis and the Shias with the Terrorists ( who are criminals ) is a good start. And if someone who is a Muslims says... "Yeah, uh.... we don;t actually apply those rules the way you think we do.... " I think people should believe them. That just seems like common sense.

I take umbrage at any claim that hints that religion is necessary for spirituality

That's not what I meant. Just consider what it means for you to be spiritual ( however you choose to define it ) and then try to be objective about whether or not your reasons for considering yourself spiritual are coherent.

If you want to talk about that more, I do think it's fascinating. But it may be a bit tangential to Islam, and why Muslims may feel discouraged here on RF.

Here's the point:

Coherence is not valued in Islam, not in the way I think you are defining it. So whether or not it is coherent shouldn't be a factor at all when it comes to common courtesy. I vote that no western religions are coherent. If they were they would be science not religion.

Regarding spiritual beliefs and cultivation paths and practices, I think a few of them are coherent; but they are the exception not the rule.

 

[dybmh]

Or perhaps you're taking issue with the countries in which the polling was done?

yes, it excluded "western Muslims" who are not intimately devoted to Sharia as a concept. Also, if the bar graphs are copied and pasted into a thread, then it skews the results even further.

But I am also saying that Pew failed to ask the question in a manner which will describe Islam ( the religion ). And that's because I don't think Pew knew to ask about Fiqh. I think they were just hyped up about the word Sharia similar to the way many American news outlets did at that time.

 

[icehorse]

The point is, Muslims don't want acceptance, just common courtesy will suffice.

But if their beliefs are not peaceful, why should we be courteous?

 

[icehorse]

yes, it excluded "western Muslims" who are not intimately devoted to Sharia as a concept. Also, if the bar graphs are copied and pasted into a thread, then it skews the results even further.

But I am also saying that Pew failed to ask the question in a manner which will describe Islam ( the religion ). And that's because I don't think Pew knew to ask about Fiqh. I think they were just hyped up about the word Sharia similar to the way many American news outlets did at that time.

The key point here is whether a country's laws are independent of religion. Secular countries that support freedom of religion are the OPPOSITE of theocratic, and in that regard, Sharia and Fiqh are very similar.

 

[danieldemol]

Just thought I’d add this from Wikipedia;

‘Fiqh (/fiːk/;[1] Arabic: فقه‎ [fɪqh]) is Islamicjurisprudence.[2] Fiqh is often described as the human understanding of the sharia,[3] that is human understanding of the divine Islamic law as revealed in the Quran and the Sunnah (the teachings and practices of the Islamic prophet Muhammad and His companions). Fiqh expands and develops Shariah through interpretation (ijtihad) of the Quran and Sunnah by Islamic jurists (ulama)[3] and is implemented by the rulings (fatwa) of jurists on questions presented to them. Thus, whereas sharia is considered immutable and infallible by Muslims, fiqh is considered fallible and changeable. Fiqh deals with the observance of rituals, morals and social legislation in Islam as well as political system. In the modern era, there are four prominent schools (madh'hab) of fiqh within Sunni practice, plus two (or three) within Shi'a practice.’

Fiqh - Wikipedia

In practice all the atrocities done in the name of Islam are the results of Fiqh, so I don’t see why it gets a free pass just because it is the human application of Shariah and not necessarily the precise equivalent to Shariah itself.