Apostates of Islam

[Mr Spinkles]

What I said has nothing to do with apostasy. And my point wasn't about proselytizing being harmful to the national security but I was trying to show that you can believe in and practice your religion freely without proselytizing.

Just for clarification: are Muslims allowed to proselytize to non-Muslims, in your view, or is the punishment exactly the same for anyone who proselytizes?

In theory, perhaps you are right. In practice, I don't think there can be free, open, honest discussion and debate. Again, I ask you to try a thought - experiment. Imagine that you live in a country where you can be arrested, maybe even executed in extreme circumstances, if the proper atheist judges find you guilty of proselytizing or making yourself an enemy to atheism. Now I'm an atheist--hey comrade not4me, let's have a debate about atheism vs. Islam. Just don't insult atheism, or spread any lies about it, like that Muslim blogger did a few weeks ago, who's still in prison. Then I might have to report you to the proper atheist authorities.

So, do you truly feel safe and free to express yourself now?

 

[Sahar]

Just for clarification: are Muslims allowed to proselytize to non-Muslims, in your view, or is the punishment exactly the same for anyone who proselytizes?

Repeating for the third time: the Islamic state is biased to the da'wa of Islam. So, of course the answer to your question is yes, they are allowed and supported by the government.

In theory, perhaps you are right. In practice, I don't think there can be free, open, honest discussion and debate. Again, I ask you to try a thought - experiment. Imagine that you live in a country where you can be arrested, maybe even executed in extreme circumstances, if the proper atheist judges find you guilty of proselytizing or making yourself an enemy to atheism. Now I'm an atheist--hey comrade not4me, let's have a debate about atheism vs. Islam. Just don't insult atheism, or spread any lies about it, like that Muslim blogger did a few weeks ago, who's still in prison. Then I might have to report you to the proper atheist authorities.

So, do you truly feel safe and free to express yourself now?

When I gave you an idea about the Christian situation in Egypt, it wasn't "in theory". It's in practice.
I'd like to remind you that I can't help you concerning the details. As I said before I don't know what is the definite red line, it could be indefinite too in reality and in practice as you said but can't this be said about other issue like racist speech (or what's called hate speech), how can such issues be defined clearly?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Who should decide? How things work in a secular democratic state?

I provided several links and essays....I hope that isn't a cop-out on my part. I could quote just one or two relevant parts, if that's fair. As I've said before, a lot depends on a belief among the people in human rights, and what those rights are.

Also in fairness, I will read any links and essays on your view of the Islamic state that you care to provide. (I have read some provided by Peace and I think Cordoba in the past.) I don't mean to proselytize but the essays I provided really are the most eloquent arguments for secular democracy and natural rights, I don't expect you to accept the arguments, but there they are if you are interested.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Repeating for the third time: the Islamic state is biased to the da'wa of Islam. So, of course the answer to your question is yes, they are allowed and supported by the government.

Biased indeed. I would call that prejudice and inequality. I.m.o. equality is a human right.

When I gave you an idea about the Christian situation in Egypt, it wasn't "in theory". It's in practice.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you mean here.

I'd like to remind you that I can't help you concerning the details. As I said before I don't know what is the definite red line, it could be indefinite too in reality and in practice as you said but can't this be said about other issue like racist speech (or what's called hate speech), how can such issues be defined clearly?

Of course, I understand that these are not always clear-cut issues. As you rightly pointed out, we can only talk here about general principles.

 

[Sahar]

I provided several links and essays...

Yes, thanks I appreciate them, I will check them when I have time.

Biased indeed. I would call that prejudice and inequality.

Your right to think so.

 

[AbuKhalid]

Biased indeed. I would call that prejudice and inequality. I.m.o. equality is a human right.

All states are prejudiced towards the dominating ideology on which they are based. A communist state towards communism and capitalist democratic state towards capitalism/democracy. Just like this an Islamic state would promote Islam.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Your right to think so.

You mean, as long as I keep it to myself?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

All states are prejudiced towards the dominating ideology on which they are based. A communist state towards communism and capitalist democratic state towards capitalism/democracy. Just like this an Islamic state would promote Islam.

There is an enormous difference between the prejudice which arises unbidden, and which always must be combatted in every state, and the deliberate and conscious sanction and approval of prejudice and inequality, inherent to not4me's view of the Islamic state. It is the difference between the liberal commitment to equality and the authoritarian commitment to inequality.

It is the difference between:

...an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo and infidel of every denomination." --Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821

"We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to Virginia Baptists, 1808
​

And:

Repeating for the third time: the Islamic state is biased to the da'wa of Islam. So, of course the answer to your question is yes, they [people who proselytize for Islam] are allowed and supported by the government [but everyone else is not].
--not4me
​

The difference between these commitments is so enormous, that it must take an extremely delicate, careful routing of one's own neural connections to avoid noticing it.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

By the way, may I ask, am I "fighting" Islam right now, by posting what I am posting, in your opinion?
In an Islamic state, would there be grounds for my arrest?

And not4me, in fairness you did not answer my question about the thought-experiment: do you truly feel safe and free to express yourself now [after imagining the thought-experiment] ?

 

[Gharib]

From my perspective, Islam is worse than a system of man-made laws that change over time....it's a system of man-made laws that don't change over time.

you are free to have an oppinion and a perspective on any matter.

but it is better to be part of a sysmtem who'se laws do not change, than to belong to a system where the laws get changed after a while.

i get senteced to death for drugs this year and i get hanged for it.

next year some other man is in charge of the country and if you get caught with drugs nothing happens to you.

see how unjust man-made laws are that change over time?

 

[kai]

Corruption of the society is absolutely not a human right (at least in the Islamic dictionary). The Islamic state is different from the secular one, it is important to always keep this in mind. What is acceptable in a secular society can be very unacceptable in an Islamic one. And we can disagree on what you recognize as a human right.

all societies can adapt if allowed to , because of people being able to think outside of their box, Societies have to have the ability to change or they will falter, Some societies however are forced into a state of stagnation, Like the soviet Union or religious based states ,because they cannot adapt to the world they live in they wane and die.

I beleive the Islamic state to be such a state, Muslims are not allowd to think outside their box, Islam is all, there is nothing else.

Equality should be the goal of all human beings Equality of race or Gender,creed or colour, Islam in any form today does not allow for this. so it has an achilles heel, sooner or later people will seek equality.

 

[Sahar]

You mean, as long as I keep it to myself?

Then what do you want to do?

I was just acknowledging that it can be looked the way you did.

 

[Sahar]

all societies can adapt if allowed to , because of people being able to think outside of their box, Societies have to have the ability to change or they will falter, Some societies however are forced into a state of stagnation, Like the soviet Union or religious based states ,because they cannot adapt to the world they live in they wane and die.

I beleive the Islamic state to be such a state, Muslims are not allowd to think outside their box, Islam is all, there is nothing else.

Equality should be the goal of all human beings Equality of race or Gender,creed or colour, Islam in any form today does not allow for this. so it has an achilles heel, sooner or later people will seek equality.

Islam equate between all peoples. No person is better than another except by righteousness (and only God knows what is in our hearts). However, the political system in Islam doesn't allow for corruption.
Islam directs its followers to a certain path but we believe this is the straight path, the shortest path to happiness and prosperity. There is no stagnant society, societies do change and Islam can interact effectively with the changes as Islam is very dynamic and flexible.
Stagnant is the last thing that can be said about the Khilafa (as an example of the Islamic political system especially in its beginning) that was the outcome of the revelation to Muhammad (pbuh).

 

[kai]

Islam equate between all people. No person is better than another except by righteousness (and only God knows what in our hearts). However, the political system in Islam doesn't allow for corruption.
Unfortunately that doesnt allow for religious equality
Islam directs its followers to a certain path but we believe this is the straight path, the shortest path to happiness and prosperity. There is no stagnant society, societies do change and Islam can interact effectively with the changes as Islam is very dynamic and flexible. How can it change if the rules are unchangeable, if the Basis of rule and interaction with others is unchangeable

Stagnant is the last thing that can be said about the Khilafa (as an example of Islamic political system especially in its beginning) that was the outcome of the revelation to Muhammad (pbuh).

Hi Not4me

The Khilafa was at a time of meteoric rise, but what since?

 

[Sahar]

My argument with Mr Spinkles should be read in its context, coming and saying Islam opposes equality between human beings is great injustice. Certain ideas that harm the Muslim society will not be allowed whether it comes from Muslims or non-Muslims equally.

 

[Sahar]

Unfortunately that doesnt allow for religious equality

Freedom of belief and practice of religion that Islam ensures is inequality?

 

[Sahar]

How can it change if the rules are unchangeable, if the Basis of rule and interaction with others is unchangeable

The basics are the same because human beings are human beings (when they become replaced by other beings, I agree here that the basics should change), however the details change as the circumstances change.

Hi Not4me

The Khilafa was at a time of meteoric rise, but what since?

Sorry?

 

[Sahar]

Oh I didn't pay attention,
Hi kai

 

[Breathe]

Freedom of belief and practice of religion that Islam ensures is inequality?

Not quite, sadly. In many/most Islamic countries, one cannot build a new church/synagogue/Zoroastrian place of worship, and often in many cases, they cannot repair damaged ones. Coupled with the fact apostasy from Islam is punishable via the death penalty in many nations, and others see nothing wrong with it, as well as Christians, Jews or Zoroastrians in these nations not being allowed to preach as well, because if they did they would have reprisals, this certainly is not religious equality, but other religions are second class.

I know that freedom to worship is supposed to be part of shari'a, and that is why dhimmi must pay the jizya (amongst other reasons), but this is not always the case.

I once sat on a coach with a Coptic Christian fellow, many many moons ago and we got to talking; he told me about life in Egypt and how he'd often be heckled by Muslims as he went to church. He told me that often in Muslim countries, including Egypt, they are not allowed to the ring the bells, or be too loud in their worship or mournings, in case they offend a Muslim. This was probably four or five years ago, so this is if memory serves.

I don't know how life is in the capital of Egypt, though, but he wasn't from the capital, he was from somewhere else, and said things can often be more difficult for Christians in Egypt outside of the capital.

But, can you answer how much of this is true, being in Egypt yourself? And if I've not gone senile and got it wrong D) can you tell me, how is this equality for other religions?

 

[kai]

Hi Not4me

The Khilafa was at a time of meteoric rise, but what since?

what has happened since, where has the adaptation or change led to?

Freedom of belief and practice of religion that Islam ensures is inequality?

if only Muslims can prosetylise then thats not equality