Our values are superior to yours so...

[Gharib]

Australia is quite multicultural, IMHO. They don't prevent you from practicing your religion almost any way you want (but under Australian law you can't have more than one wife, sorry). Try going to one of your beloved Islamic countries (which you're not living in for some reason) and practice a religion openly that isn't Islam. If they let you live you'll get to pay a nice little extra tax. Yay!

Also we can talk about all the cultural devastation Islam has caused and is causing, even to it's own historical centres...

Perhaps s/he who is without sin should be casting the first stone.

This is for another thread, btw, I can have 4 wives if I wanted to. To be married I only need Islamic approval. I don't need the recognition of the government of Australia. It's not illegal to have kids with another woman while being married to another.

Like a friend of mine says, where there's a will there's a way. lol hahah

But for a different topic, I don't want to go into this.

 

[Koldo]

By going into other countries, and forcing them to follow our way of life.

Countries... such as?
That's what i wanted to know.

And this is a great paradox. I can see your point. Who's ethical values are greater, and who's worse? This isn't an easy question to answer. And it's this precise reason why each country should decide their own values, their own ethics, and their own fate.

Do you mean to say the citizens of each country should fend for themselves?
Because the term 'country' isn't equal ( or even similar ) to the term 'people' in every nation.

Even this choice has negative consequences.

I could disagree with the quality of life example. The poor, the unhealthy, the hungry, those who do without because of the greed of those who have plenty, would surely disagree.

Just compare it to other countries who are doing much worse at the end of the spectrum.

This is true, to an extent, but it's all a matter of perception.

It is true to the average joe.

If said country wants a theocracy, who are we to say otherwise? I think there's a huge difference between getting other countries to agree with you on certain points, for the mutual benefit of both/all parties involved, and going into a country and forcing them to have our same mindset and way of life.

I said: "Else your country is at the risk of being turned into a colony ruled under a theocracy in the future."

As in being ruled by another country.
If other countries don't share some of your values, they might weaken yours and eventually attain control over it. Although that's a rather extremist scenario to the USA, at this day and age.

Spreading your ideology around also works as a preemptive measure to avoid a foreign ideology ( opposite to yours ) to become the norm in your country. Because as i said, we don't live in a void.

How exactly is the USA forcing other countries to have the same mindset and way of life though?

 

[Gharib]

When another countries laws include killing innocent children you are damn right my countries laws are better. I never did say "corrupt middle eastern countries" as this doesn't only occur in the middle east, I'm not sure where you got that from.

We were talking about the middle east, that's what the thread is about.

Islam does not support the killing of innocent people especially the rape victim. Nor do Muslims support it. You just need to learn to accept that different crimes happen in different countries due to culture. There are crimes that occur in your country that I abhor very much, are you happy for me to bring my army there and force everyone to change their culture and tradition and turn Canada into an Islamic country?

And the double standard starts now.

 

[jonman122]

We were talking about the middle east, that's what the thread is about.

Islam does not support the killing of innocent people especially the rape victim. Nor do Muslims support it. You just need to learn to accept that different crimes happen in different countries due to culture. There are crimes that occur in your country that I abhor very much, are you happy for me to bring my army there and force everyone to change their culture and tradition and turn Canada into an Islamic country?

And the double standard starts now.

Double standard? The last time a girl in Canada was honor-killed by her father, the man was put in jail and will likely stay that way for a very long time. There are crimes that happen in every country that people abhor, the RCMP killing an innocent man made huge controversy here, especially when the police tried to cover it up, but it was exposed and the RCMP has since had to change how they operate so something like that doesn't happen.

The difference is, the crimes that happen here are dealt with and the parties involved are severely punished. When I hear of people stoning women to death for having sex out of marriage and the government of that country doing nothing or even allowing it to happen with their full knowledge, or with their blessing, I'm shocked that people could be so medieval. No matter who you are or where you are from, that is something that should be looked down upon.

 

[Revoltingest]

Speaking from a Muslim perspective, in many threads about Islam, I find a problem.
I am certain that many non Muslims don't like some Islamic concepts and rulings. And they believe it's oppressive...I don't know barbaric...whatever. And I am not sure that non Muslims realize that many Muslims have a trouble with some Western concepts (I said Western because they are dominating the world currently) and see them very negatively and with disgust as some see Islam.

Now this is not my problem. My problem is not about having opposite views. But about the fact that because you think that your values are better than mine, we have to formulate the laws of our country according to yours. I can't help saying this is a typical imperialistic mindset. Almost all Muslim countries have suffered from Western imperialism and colonialism. And they have paid very expensive price for this and in their attempts to get their independence (of course they still do).

I am taking prostitution as an example and don't really mean to discuss it, you think that prostitution is somehow a human right for whatever reasons you have and they must be good reasons in your eyes. Anyone who wishes to be a prostitute must not be prevented from doing so. And it happened that your society agrees on this idea so the laws are in cope with this.

On the other hand, I don't think it's a right and I think it must be illegalized. The society I live in agrees on my view and it's manifested in the Law.

Of course the people of your country don't accept the idea of forcing my views on them. Readily we can hear the screams out loud when the word Shari'a is mentioned there.
Why don't you expect Muslims in their countries to do the same? I mean refusing to be ruled by non Muslim values that are inconsistent with theirs?

Human rights cross borders and are universal. Sorry when we are having our differences on some values, surely this means they are not universal. Sure there are some universal values, but we disagree on others. Not because there are some people who consider them to be universal, they must be. Not because you think that yours are more superior to ours, it must mean we should be ruled by yours (except of course believing that you have more powers than others and this gives you the right to subdue them).

Some Muslims may disagree with me. Certainly, there is a different non-Muslim perspective to all this.

Long time no see
Not For Me!

My values are superior to everyone else's.
Why?
- I favor voluntary Sharia law here (USA). Think of it as agreeing to it as a form of arbitration wherein all affected parties consent.
- I don't want to impose our system upon other countries.
- I allow pork product consumption.

Of course, not all will see my values as superior, but one sign of my superiority is that I peacefully tolerate their error.

 

[Gharib]

Double standard? The last time a girl in Canada was honor-killed by her father, the man was put in jail and will likely stay that way for a very long time. There are crimes that happen in every country that people abhor, the RCMP killing an innocent man made huge controversy here, especially when the police tried to cover it up, but it was exposed and the RCMP has since had to change how they operate so something like that doesn't happen.

The difference is, the crimes that happen here are dealt with and the parties involved are severely punished. When I hear of people stoning women to death for having sex out of marriage and the government of that country doing nothing or even allowing it to happen with their full knowledge, or with their blessing, I'm shocked that people could be so medieval. No matter who you are or where you are from, that is something that should be looked down upon.

So back to square one, please read Sahar's OP. I don't think you have read it.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

ImmortalFlame,
I will not go into why or why not prostitution should be legalized/regulated. This is not the question.

But when establishing moral authority, the "why" most certainly is important. We have to be able to rationalize our morality, otherwise it is entirely arbitrary.

Indeed. We don't disagree.

I have some questions for you,
You described how you advocate legalization/regulation of prostitution and the so called "equal rights" for homosexuals and any different treatment to such issues disgust you.

I wouldn't put prostitution in the same category as the equal treatment of homosexuality, I just think there's little argument against the existence of well-regulated prostitution in place of illegal prostitution.

Okay we now know what disgust you.
But...do you realize that your take may disgust me as well?

I realize that, but that doesn't matter; my morality is that homosexuals deserve to be treated equally to heterosexuals - and that the law should reflect that - and that prostitution is not inherently damaging to society provided it is well regulated and not exploitative. If you find either of those propositions disgusting then you are more than welcome to explain why, but just dismissing them for no other reason than that indicates to me that you aren't really trying to be moral, just trying to uphold a very specific, and rigid, moral framework for the sake of it. I've given my reasons as to why I think these things are right, and unless you can formulate better, rational reasons as to why they are not, I see no reason to defer to your moral standard whatsoever.

If your answer is yes, do you think I have the right to force my views on a given society that adopt your take on these issues because I think values are not equal and mine are superior?

I certainly would have a problem with you doing that, because you haven't shown how your values are superior. If you could, then I would likely have less of an issue with it. In the UK, traditional values are being turned over all the time - homosexuality having already been mentioned, as we recently passed a bill to allow gay marriage. This wasn't "forced" on our society, it's a conclusion we came to when our old, traditional values simply could no longer stand up in the face of rational justification. And when I hear that a country like, say, Nigeria is issuing death warrants for homosexuals or beating them in the streets, I feel I am more than justified in standing up and demanding that some action be taken to prevent them from doing so. We're not talking about matters of interpretation, here. We're talking about every single human being's right to be treated like a human being, and if any society is failing to live up to it's responsibility of doing so, then it absolutely deserves to be corrected.

Note that this doesn't really apply in all cases, just cases where human rights are being trodden on. I don't think prostitution is a human right, but I think a society which regulates, rather than criminalizes, prostitution is fairer and more understanding society. But law is very different animal, and changes in law must always come from the changes to a country's internal moral framework. When these laws are made into weapons by a society to discriminate against people and dismiss their human rights, that's when I feel it is justified in taking action against them.

 

[jonman122]

So back to square one, please read Sahar's OP. I don't think you have read it.

Oh no, I read it, but if what she's saying (if what YOU are implying she's saying) is that it's OK in your religion to kill children for being raped, then yes you're very wrong and in that case I'm not sure that I care what you think about Canadian or western law and culture, because whatever you think or want we aren't going to murder innocent children and we'll stop it whenever we are able... because it's wrong.

 

[Gharib]

Oh no, I read it, but if what she's saying (if what YOU are implying she's saying) is that it's OK in your religion to kill children for being raped, then yes you're very wrong and in that case I'm not sure that I care what you think about Canadian or western law and culture, because whatever you think or want we aren't going to murder innocent children and we'll stop it whenever we are able... because it's wrong.

OMG, Really???????

Show me where I said that I, Islam or that anyone else is OK with killing raped children?

Or even killing children for any matter whatsoever.

If you can't, then please do not distort my statement.

 

[Gaura Priya]

Oh no, I read it, but if what she's saying (if what YOU are implying she's saying) is that it's OK in your religion to kill children for being raped, then yes you're very wrong and in that case I'm not sure that I care what you think about Canadian or western law and culture, because whatever you think or want we aren't going to murder innocent children and we'll stop it whenever we are able... because it's wrong.

Umm... we both live in the same province.

You do know that the story behind the honour killing of that girl from her father was from a SIKH family? Not only that, but in their case, they were also from South Asian descent.

Also, you should know better that Islam and Sikhism do not allow the killing of children. I have no idea where you even thought of this, but alright. I grew up with many Muslim women in my local city area, and they were just like you and I, hun! :areyoucra

 

[jonman122]

OMG, Really???????

Show me where I said that I, Islam or that anyone else is OK with killing raped children?

Or even killing children for any matter whatsoever.

If you can't, then please do not distort my statement.

You' said that I'm elitist, that you disagree if not downright despise my moral values or those of my country and when I said it was horrible that countries would stone or whip girls to death when they were raped you said I should stop attacking your religions morals. It just where it sounded like that was where your logic was headed.

 

[Gharib]

Umm... we both live in the same province.

You do know that the story behind the honour killing of that girl from her father was from a SIKH family? Not only that, but in their case, they were also from South Asian descent.

Haven't you heard, Muslims were behind the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

 

[Gharib]

You' said that I'm elitist, that you disagree if not downright despise my moral values or those of my country and when I said it was horrible that countries would stone or whip girls to death when they were raped you said I should stop attacking your religions morals. It just where it sounded like that was where your logic was headed.

Don't tell me where what sounded like, please show me where I said I support the killing of children.

If you can't, please don't ever distort my statements. One thing I strongly hate very much is false accusation. Don't ever do it unless you have the evidence.

 

[jonman122]

Umm... we both live in the same province.

You do know that the story behind the honour killing of that girl from her father was from a SIKH family? Not only that, but in their case, they were also from South Asian descent.

Also, you should know better that Islam and Sikhism do not allow the killing of children. I have no idea where you even thought of this, but alright. I grew up with many Muslim women in my local city area, and they were just like you and I, hun! :areyoucra

The countries that abide by sharia law do in fact stone people to death, I remember not so long ago watching a video on YouTube of all places of a woman and a man being stoned to death for being in love but having sex out of wedlock. I also recall a girl who was raped by a 40 year old man being given 100 lashes, which she later died from in hospital. The latter I'm not entirely sure was in a muslim country, but both of those examples are of things that clash with my morals and that I find abhorrent.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

The reason they went to Iraq and not India was because of Islam, plain and simple.

I wouldn't say it was necessarily because of Islam, but because of people who thought different than us. There was also the oil, which was a big motivator. But I can almost guarantee that if large oil fields were found in somewhere like Ireland, the US wouldn't even think to go in, because they're lifestyle and mindset is similar to ours. We bully the weaker countries who don't think like us. This isn't right. We should just keep to ourselves, except in extreme circumstances.

 

[BSM1]

It WAS actually oil. The media coverage in the US utilised religion as an excuse to do so.

Yeah, we conquered the country, took over the oil fields, and now our gasoline is $1.89 a gallon......oh, wait, none of that happened. As a matter of fact it seems we aren't even in the country as a force now...........hmmmm.

 

[Gharib]

I wouldn't say it was necessarily because of Islam, but because of people who thought different than us. There was also the oil, which was a big motivator. But I can almost guarantee that if large oil fields were found in somewhere like Ireland, the US wouldn't even think to go in, because they're lifestyle and mindset is similar to ours. We bully the weaker countries who don't think like us. This isn't right. We should just keep to ourselves, except in extreme circumstances.

You are absolutely right, but so am I. The reason why the people of Iraq think differently is because of Islam.

There was no Democracy, so the way to destroy a people is to change their government and what it allows and what it doesn't. Democracy allows pretty much most of what Islam doesn't.

 

[Gaura Priya]

The countries that abide by sharia law do in fact stone people to death, I remember not so long ago watching a video on YouTube of all places of a woman and a man being stoned to death for being in love but having sex out of wedlock. I also recall a girl who was raped by a 40 year old man being given 100 lashes, which she later died from in hospital. The latter I'm not entirely sure was in a muslim country, but both of those examples are of things that clash with my morals and that I find abhorrent.

They certainly clash with mine as well, but just like any religion, you have to separate religion from politics.

I just finished Benazir Bhutto's book, "Reconciliation" on audio, and she spoke of her dream of an Islamic democracy, in which both Islam and democracy can abide together in the same breath. I highly recommend her book, and she was one wonderfully progressive woman who held to her faith and loved her religious culture.

The present fundamentalist Shari'a law is actually anti-Qur'anic, but many Islamic countries claim that it somehow has to do with their religion. We have two Canadian associations that both see these things and more as cultural and have nothing to do with Islam proper: the Muslim Canadian Congress, and the Canadian Muslim Union.

I've even hung out with lesbian and gay Muslims in Vancouver. Pretty amazing if you ask me!

People like Ismaili Muslims do much good in the name of religion. The Ismaili Muslims in our province once a year do a charity drive and walk for some cause, such as raising funds for cancer research, or the like. So to think that a religion can be depicted through some countries' laws is pretty narrow-minded.

It's like assuming that Canadian Christianity must be barbaric because of the practices done in the name of Christianity in Africa, for example. Or the anti-homosexual stances of the Unitarian Universalist congregations in Africa, versus its otherwise progressive stances elsewhere in the world.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Countries... such as?
That's what i wanted to know.

Iraq is the most recent one. We were lied to, and led to believe that they had WMD's, when most studies showed that this wasn't the case. Then, after we took over, we set up a democratic style government, when it's been made somewhat obvious they didn't want such.

Do you mean to say the citizens of each country should fend for themselves?
Because the term 'country' isn't equal ( or even similar ) to the term 'people' in every nation.

Even this choice has negative consequences.

What I mean is that each country should decide, for themselves and on their own, without outside help, what type of government they have, what style of economic system they have, etc.

Just compare it to other countries who are doing much worse at the end of the spectrum.

And, by the same token, we can compare it to other countries who are doing much better.

I said: "Else your country is at the risk of being turned into a colony ruled under a theocracy in the future."

As in being ruled by another country.

Ok, I misunderstood. My apologies.

If other countries don't share some of your values, they might weaken yours and eventually attain control over it. Although that's a rather extremist scenario to the USA, at this day and age.

Spreading your ideology around also works as a preemptive measure to avoid a foreign ideology ( opposite to yours ) to become the norm in your country. Because as i said, we don't live in a void.

Then you would be perfectly fine with other countries coming in and doing the same to us? If you're fine with us doing it to other countries, then you would have to apply the same standard and say that it's ok for it to be done to us. I'm not really ok with that.

How exactly is the USA forcing other countries to have the same mindset and way of life though?

By the influx of western culture into nations where the people have made it clear they don't want it, like a McDonald's on every corner, the things seen on TV, music, etc. Not to mention placing democracies where people want theocracies, or capitalism where people want socialism, etc.

 

[jonman122]

Don't tell me where what sounded like, please show me where I said I support the killing of children.

If you can't, please don't ever distort my statements. One thing I strongly hate very much is false accusation. Don't ever do it unless you have the evidence.

I'll compile the evidence I have below here.

And now that Muslims have control and wish to implement Islamic law, all of a sudden 'mankind as a whole' must stand up. Why doesn't mankind stand up for the constant killing of innocent people in Palestine, Syria, Sri Lanka, Burma etc?

Keep your 'elitism' to yourself.

And before you do any of that, stand up to your own government who supports a war where it's ally kills hundreds of innocent kids through drones. Talk about hypocrisy.

I'm Canadian and my government doesn't use (can't afford) drones to kill people. That's America. What I'm gathering from this is that you believe all western culture is based on American culture and I am very glad to say that is not true.

Very nice post sister.

The white man is always superior to everyone else. They are more evolved apparently. For humanity to move forward the racist white man must be obeyed.

Anyone who comes to Australia must 'blend' in and know the language, not bring their culture here and live a different way of life. Yet when the English came here the aboriginals had to obtain a passport to be called citizens of Australia. And now when an english speaking person goes overseas, everyone must speak his language.

In all honesty all I can say is good on them.

Others here who also live in Australia seem to think it's very multicultural, what I'm interpreting from this is a deep dislike for western culture as a whole (due in part to your previous statement, lumping together Canada and the USA like it's the same place) and that you think the "white man" has to have control over the world. I'm pretty sure that isn't the case.

That's not why I used the word 'elitism'. I used it in relation to him claiming to have better laws and that humanity must stand up when a wrong occurs in the corrupt Middle Eastern countries.

Like I said and I stand by it, if your laws are so superior to everyone else's and that only 'YOU' know what's right and wrong then there's a world that's at crisis out there. By all means go help them.

Here you're claiming Canadian law is not better than Islamic law. Islamic law, in some countries, is used to stone people to death. This is partially where I deduced that you may in fact agree with their interpretation of Islamic law, especially since you seem to have such a tactful disregard for western laws (which would agree with countries that use Islamic laws to uphold basic human rights.)

We were talking about the middle east, that's what the thread is about.

Islam does not support the killing of innocent people especially the rape victim. Nor do Muslims support it. You just need to learn to accept that different crimes happen in different countries due to culture. There are crimes that occur in your country that I abhor very much, are you happy for me to bring my army there and force everyone to change their culture and tradition and turn Canada into an Islamic country?

And the double standard starts now.

In countries where Islamic law is used to stone people to death, women who have been raped do not count as innocent, or victims. That's why they're stoned to death. I do agree, lots of muslims don't support it and they hold rallies in their respective countries while these innocent women are murdered, but it's still done. Instead of standing up for Islamic law, maybe just stand up for the ideals of Islam as a religion. Islamic law implies a government, with policies and such.

With all of these put together, it seemed to me that you were defending laws that directly conflict with the idea that women are innocent after having sex out of wedlock or after being raped. If that was not the case, then why are you trying to defend this culture? Defend yours,defend what you really believe and agree with me that stoning women who have sex out of wedlock is wrong and stoning/lashing girls who are raped is wrong instead of saying that I'm elitist and my culture is horrible in your eyes.