Why do muslims hate democracy

[outhouse]

Who is "not everyone"? And what experiments did they perform? Good luck.

Without an outside source, which at this point is 100% imagination, your barking up a tree. umpkin:

 

[Sleeppy]

Without an outside source, which at this point is 100% imagination, your barking up a tree. umpkin:

No evidence.

 

[outhouse]

No evidence.

Exactly, you have none that an outside source even exist.

You have mythology and imagination, beyond that you have no evidence for any outside source.

Free will stands tall right now and not a shred of evidence suggest otherwise.


Anyone can pervert evidence to meet a preconceived conclusion like you are that something non existent guides us.

 

[Sleeppy]

Exactly, you have none that an outside source even exist.

You have mythology and imagination, beyond that you have no evidence for any outside source.

Free will stands tall right now and not a shred of evidence suggest otherwise.


Anyone can pervert evidence to meet a preconceived conclusion like you are that something non existent guides us.

What are you talking about? Where did I suggest that something nonexistent guides us? More of your dishonesty. Will is the result of DNA, or physical properties interacting according to the laws of physics with the environment.

I gave you 3 independent studies to think about. Evidence. You have nothing whatsoever but your own imagination on the matter- no pun intended.

 

[suncowiam]

I read the article concerning the subconscious making initial decisions before the conscious mind. I was actually expecting something more fundamental than the human brain to describe free will. On the surface, it might seem like a correlation but there's too much of what can be called a "black box" if one had to only depend on the subconsciousness. Just because the brain is already instinctively making decisions still does not fully prove especially concerning the clause that says the consciousness can veto the initial decision. Our own emotions are driven by the subconsciousness and we are still able to consciously veto these emotions. We can also unlearn the the cause of the emotions like fear of the dark or jealousy.

I'm simply skeptical with that assertion. There's actually another article pointed out by one of the comments to contradict the findings:
Free Will Is Not An Illusion | Psychology Today

Personally, I just need a more fundamental explanation in physics then one based on human neurology...

 

[outhouse]

Will is the result of DNA, or physical properties interacting according to the laws of physics with the environment.

.

Then it should be easy to prove. :slap:



Yet every source you provided admits it is not the answer

 

[outhouse]

Personally, I just need a more fundamental explanation in physics then one based on human neurology...

I don't


For when I wake up each day, every decision is my own. Nothing or no one makes any choice for me.


Everything I do is of my own free will.


If it is not my will, then something else would have control, and at this point in time it does not exist.

It is ludicrous, to redefine words to pervert them beyond rational context.

 

[suncowiam]

I don't


For when I wake up each day, every decision is my own. Nothing or no one makes any choice for me.


Everything I do is of my own free will.


If it is not my will, then something else would have control, and at this point in time it does not exist.

It is ludicrous, to redefine words to pervert them beyond rational context.

I agree with you but won't dispute science if and when it comes.

We still need to place responsibility on individuals: 1) for our own happiness and 2) for punishment

Individuals can't be given a free ride because of a no free will debate.

Let's say free will doesn't physically exist, I'm gonna just rationalize that I happen to have a very happy predetermined life.

 

[outhouse]

I agree with you but won't dispute science if and when it comes..

Could you imagine what would have to be known, before we would ever get to that level.

Um Im guessing speciation


I don't think there is any science I dispute. The findings perverted with imagination however [not you] I will always have a problem with.

We still need to place responsibility on individuals: 1) for our own happiness and 2) for punishment

Individuals can't be given a free ride because of a no free will debate.

Agreed

 

[outhouse]

Im guessing all the people in musliville must be fast asleep!


There not trying to take over the forum right now

 

[psychoslice]

I think its because these people don't trust human intervention, and believe strongly that only god can have all the answers, when in fact their god is only someone's imagination, their own thoughts of what is wrong and right, very sad actually.

 

[Smart_Guy]

I see that those (no one specific in mind) who think they know everything (while they either don't, or know something completely wrong) have emerged again

So much misinformation about Islam. Not to mention mixing Islam (a religion) with Muslims' doings (people). This is sad

 

[Viker]

Wow. That's a loaded question. They didn't even bother putting a question mark. Kinda makes it a statement.

 

[Estro Felino]

As for the rest, we should live in a society that promotes what is best. So in regards for women, it is better for women to be covered and not reveal her body or curves, rather that the opposite, and a woman should not be allowed to do the opposite. For it is not what is best for her or the society in regards to prevent promiscuity and molestation. Being covered is the better deterrent.

This vision of yours is a bit scary. Because it is like seeing evil in everywhere.
I can assure you that women who wear sexy and provoking clothes do not have wicked intentions.
They wear those clothes because they like them. or for pragmatic reasons

I can give you an example: a female friend of mine, after she turned 20, started neglecting her looks. She used to wear large and uncool clothes.
No man would look at her and she was still a virgin. So I convinced her to beautify herself. She bought nice and sexy clothes. She started putting on make-up. Thanks to this new restyling, she finally found a boyfriend.

You see? Wearing those clothes is something necessary

 

[Sonofason]

I suppose what the Islamic world is trying to tell us is that they do not have an ounce of self control, that they can't control their desires to rape and molest beautiful women, and that if we desire to have our women unmolested, we had better cover them up. It is not that the women are evil for being scantily clothed, it is because the men in their culture are.

 

[Al-Fatihah]

This vision of yours is a bit scary. Because it is like seeing evil in everywhere.
I can assure you that women who wear sexy and provoking clothes do not have wicked intentions.
They wear those clothes because they like them. or for pragmatic reasons

I can give you an example: a female friend of mine, after she turned 20, started neglecting her looks. She used to wear large and uncool clothes.
No man would look at her and she was still a virgin. So I convinced her to beautify herself. She bought nice and sexy clothes. She started putting on make-up. Thanks to this new restyling, she finally found a boyfriend.

You see? Wearing those clothes is something necessary, unless you want to be lonely for the rest of your life.

Response: Not at all. Clothes are worn as a reflection of a person. And look at what you just stated yourself. A woman could not get a boyfriend until she wore sexy clothes. This makes my point. As she resorted to sex appeal for male companionship, instead of relying on her inner beauty and character. The very same thing a prostitute or promiscuous person does.

Furthermore, no storyline or media show in the world portrays sex by wearing clothes that covers themselves. Rather, they wear revealing clothes. So for you to act as if clothes does not play a role is simply being untruthful.

 

[Al-Fatihah]

I suppose what the Islamic world is trying to tell us is that they do not have an ounce of self control, that they can't control their desires to rape and molest beautiful women, and that if we desire to have our women unmolested, we had better cover them up. It is not that the women are evil for being scantily clothed, it is because the men in their culture are.

Response: To the contrary, it's the Non-Islamic world trying to tell us that they know what is best and that it is perfectly fine to be naked in public because they can control their desires, only to be exposed of their hypocrisy and degrading behavior as they exploit women into rape and molestation by glorifying sex. Showing no shame for the harm and demeaning culture towards women. Whereas Islam serves to uplift and protect women from such degradation.

 

[Sonofason]

Response: To the contrary, it's the Non-Islamic world trying to tell us that they know what is best and that it is perfectly fine to be naked in public because they can control their desires, only to be exposed of their hypocrisy and degrading behavior as they exploit women into rape and molestation by glorifying sex. Showing no shame for the harm and demeaning culture towards women. Whereas Islam serves to uplift and protect women from such degradation.

Actually, to a great extent, I agree with your sentiments here. I don't let my children run around naked in public, and I don't let them run around scantily dressed. I do believe that women who do run around half naked have no dignity, and so I suppose that you are correct, that a culture which advocates this degradation of women is quite depraved.

So then, why not just ensure that your children and your women cover themselves up? Why chop off the heads of those who disagree with you. Can't we just allow the hell-bound mentalities of the depraved to proceed to hell on their own accord? Do we have to lend a hand to send them there?

 

[paarsurrey]

Originally Posted by paarsurrey
Religion is for ethical, moral and spiritual uplift of human beings. It has got nothing to do with the temporal/secular/worldly realms until they obstruct its way.

Interesting....I have a similar view.
I've no problem with religion until it gets in the way of liberty, commerce & peace.

Thanks and regards

 

[paarsurrey]

But isn't the main problem that theocratic leaders base most of their ideas of a government from the Hadith. Which gives rules to have a society be built on God's laws?
Now i'm not saying its impossible for muslims to be democratic. Indonesia for example is an example that works.

But its kinda hard when someone is really bound deep into the theocratic values and is very convinced that this stuff is real, and follows others who say you must do this. And demand theocracy in other countries they come too.

Its sad that terrorism and these people have painted this religion in a negative view though, but thats the more reason that they should speak more against it to convince people that they do not support it. I mean in Israel for example they have full rights to practice any religion they want, even muslims, Palestine where hamas is, just want that land for muslims and exterminate the jews. Even though it is sad that there are still conflicts on this when one could just share. Since it doesn't really belong to anyone other than planet earth, but have relevant interests of religious people who want to worship there due to holy books etc.

So if one can see core values of equality and freedom of expression. Then democracy in my opinion is the best. But i think more just needs to stand up and speak up against. The problem is they might seem hypocrites. Because... islamic countries use sharia, theocracy, islamic laws.

So how can a muslim criticize a system for not working when one believe in the thing that they use to control a country? So i believe more people should see what benefits it has with religious freedom. That that is the way to truth. To see who is right and who is wrong by embracing it.

I might sound a little preachy. But lets see what you people think ^^

But isn't the main problem that theocratic leaders base most of their ideas of a government from the Hadith. Which gives rules to have a society be built on God's laws?

Theocratic Leaders do politics in the name of religion, they exploit religion but truthful religion does not support them and they are not representatives of Islam/Quran/Muhammad.

Quran is the first and the foremost source of guidance for Muslims whatever the denomination.

Hadith was collected 250/300 years after Muhammad, it is not an alternative of Quran.

Regards