tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post6887511764257385454..comments2024-03-28T09:43:20.058-05:00Comments on Bayou Renaissance Man: Discrimination, distrust and xenophobia: Part 5Peterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10595089829300831372noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-28198152598257977772012-04-24T00:24:42.314-05:002012-04-24T00:24:42.314-05:00And as a counterpoint to the Telegraph article:
h...And as a counterpoint to the Telegraph article:<br /><br />http://thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/asia-mainmenu-33/11443-christian-massacres-a-result-of-us-foreign-policytweellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08164718561825615886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-31442824151587109452012-04-21T17:16:32.228-05:002012-04-21T17:16:32.228-05:00As always an interesting post. Picking out one se...As always an interesting post. Picking out one section, the section I know something about, I tend to think that people vastly underestimate the historical impact of the European Religious wars, which really start to flare up as early as the 1400's and don't die down until nearly 1700, in shaping Western civilization. <br /><br /> They are in a very real sense an outgrowth of the developing concepts of state nationalism, centralized government and the attempts of both local secular leaders and the papacy to apply centralized power. As the struggle for statehood (that is a bureaucratic, centralized government with regularized taxation, trade, parliaments, etc) begins to crystalize into actual states, the religious issue gains in ferocity, especially in regards to persecution of heresy and fundamentalism. <br /><br />It is no accident that the Reformation, the Inquisition, things such as Witch Hunts appear in the late (very late) 1400's. This is the same time period that most secular rulers and the Church are finally creating states based on 'rule of the law' as opposed to personal loyalty. <br /><br />But the catch is that the law, for other complicated reasons, in the Western world is not seen, even in the medieval world, as emanating from the Bible or the Church. Law is sui generis and equal to Roman Law, at least in the British Isles, Scandinavia, and about half of the Holy Roman Empire (Germany/Eastern Europe). The question of whether Law trumps the Church simmers from 800 to 1500...it is answered over the next 300 years with a level of ferocity that equals the worst of the current wars.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-84645260555292286852012-04-20T21:23:13.110-05:002012-04-20T21:23:13.110-05:00OK, I'll grant you that there are Kurani Musli...OK, I'll grant you that there are Kurani Muslims who reject the Hadith. They're not exactly mainstream, though, and not very numerous or high profile. And yes Shia and Sunni have different hadiths. However, both Shia and Sunni regard Hadith and Sira as indispensable in interpreting the Koran and reaching legal opinions. <br /><br />Muslims, especially in regions such as Indonesia which had long periods with limited contact with Muslim heartlands, are not strict in practice. Such Muslims have a very difficult time arguing against Wahhabi missionaries and the thinking available today on the Internet. The forces which V.S. Naipaul described in <i>Among the Believers</i> haven't weakened.<br />Also, you are studiously ignoring my statements about equal rights etc. under Sharia. <br />As you say, your readers will draw their own conclusions.Peter Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-44198864334022073102012-04-20T20:40:38.470-05:002012-04-20T20:40:38.470-05:00@Peter B: With respect (and I really mean that), ...@Peter B: With respect (and I really mean that), you're wrong. If the <i>hadith</i> and <i>sunnah</i> were binding on all Muslims, the <i>Madh'habi</i> (which recognize no less than <i>eight</i> Islamic schools of thought, according to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amman_message" rel="nofollow">Amman Message</a>) and the <i>madrassas</i> they control <b>would all agree on their essential elements.</b> Clearly, they do not, or else something like female circumcision would not be a custom confined to certain areas and cultures, but would have spread throughout the Islamic world. It's precisely because the <i>Madh'habi</i> do not necessarily agree on interpretation of the <i>hadith</i> and the <i>sunnah</i> that they vary from each other in their <i>fatwahs</i> and other rulings concerning cultural matters.<br /><br />I'm not going to continue this debate, because you've clearly made up your mind, and you have the right to do so. I'll hope that others will read what I've written, follow the links I've provided, and be able to assess the facts for themselves.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10595089829300831372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-72281947158012522322012-04-20T18:23:43.490-05:002012-04-20T18:23:43.490-05:00source you referenced in your first comment cited ...<i> source you referenced in your first comment cited hadiths rather than the Koran</i><br /><br />I'm sorry but that's a fantasy that does not comport with what Islam is <b>on its own terms.</b> You can't have Islam without Hadith any more than you can have the Catholic Church without the Magisterium, or Judaism without the Talmud. <br />Unless there is a revolution in Islam and the gates of ijtihad are reopened, Islam IS Koran, hadith, and the Sira, the canonical biographies of the Perfect Man, and the accumulated precedent in the legal records.Peter Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-20059348628584984152012-04-20T18:09:26.772-05:002012-04-20T18:09:26.772-05:00PS: That probably came out more caustic than I mea...PS: That probably came out more caustic than I meant it to be, but there you have it. I also did not mention other religious texts as I have not read anything in them, so I cannot really comment on the morality of the dieties in hinduism, shinto, etc.Mikaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04894602732468692375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-57841010219064899772012-04-20T18:04:47.172-05:002012-04-20T18:04:47.172-05:00I try not to be too biased one way or another, I&#...I try not to be too biased one way or another, I'm of the opinion that religion is bad in general, and dogma is bad in particular(even secular dogmas).<br /><br />It inhibits questioning, critical thinking, exploration of new ideas, and fosters blind belief and ignorance.<br /><br />That's not to say every religious person is lacking these things(I'm sure Peter isn't), but it's despite their religion if they're not. There's even religious elite scientists, though they're a small minority(7%).<br /><br />Religion is a tyranny of the mind, an enemy of reason.<br /><br />Imagine how much more advanced our technology would be, and how much less war there would be, if there was no religion in the world.<br /><br />I don't even consider them to have value to our morality. Morality has evolved during human history, the greatest positive changes often resisted by religious institutions.<br /><br />Even a cursory read of the bible, tanakh or koran reveals the deity to be a fickle, malicious being unworthy of worship, whom a large majority of the people living in the world is morally superior to.Mikaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04894602732468692375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-36921288678203496962012-04-20T17:52:11.046-05:002012-04-20T17:52:11.046-05:00Yep, it's complicated. Still, I can read and c...Yep, it's complicated. Still, I can read and compare the words of Jesus with Mohammed, and although there are many similarities, Mohammed comes away as being a lot greedier and nastier. Many evils have been done in the name of Christianity and against the teachings of Christ, those same evils done in the name of Islam are not against the teachings of Mohammed and often parallel his actions.<br /><br />I know Muslims who are good people, folks I would trust with my money and my daughters. One of them stated to me that Radical Islamic terrorists didn't speak for him any more than the Westboro Baptists spoke for me. I suggested proof - I would publicly denounce the Westboro Baptists and any other such group he wanted by name as a Catholic and a Christian, he would publicly denounce the Moslem terrorists as a follower of Islam.<br /><br />He couldn't do it. That says it all, right there.tweellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08164718561825615886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-44387913377527666332012-04-20T17:35:23.595-05:002012-04-20T17:35:23.595-05:00@Peter B: The source you referenced in your first...@Peter B: The source you referenced in your first comment cited <i>hadiths</i> rather than the Koran as authority to permit female circumcision. That in itself demonstrated that local teaching relates to custom rather than the commands given by 'divine revelation' contained in the Koran, <i>which does not mention the subject</i>. Furthermore, Al Azhar is not a <i>binding</i> religious authority over most of Islam, not even in some of the regions you mentioned, such as Southeast Asia. That's demonstrated by the <i>absence</i> of female circumcision in many of those regions.<br /><br />Also, there is no 'normative Islam', just as there is no 'normative Christianity' - there are denominations, sects and other divisions that may agree on certain common teachings, but may also differ widely on their interpretation and application. I've tried to demonstrate this fact throughout this series.<br /><br />With the greatest of respect, it seems to me that you're looking for 'black-and-white' certainty when in fact this does not exist. I fully agree that certain Muslim sects and/or teachings are potentially very dangerous to Westerners, whether Christian or not; but I can't point to an individual Muslim and say for sure whether or not he or she holds such views or will act on them. I don't think one can do the same about individual Christians, either. I can't in good conscience issue a blanket condemnation of an entire religion on the basis of such uncertainty.<br /><br />Your mileage may vary, of course. I can't force or persuade you to act against your own conscience - only appeal to you to inform that conscience as best you can, then make up your own mind.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10595089829300831372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-65479214005519915252012-04-20T17:12:05.289-05:002012-04-20T17:12:05.289-05:00The Westboro Baptist Church is the lunatic fringe....The Westboro Baptist Church is the lunatic fringe. The Shafi'i madhab, one of the four major schools of Muslim jurisprudence, is followed, according to Wikipedia, "by approximately 35% of Muslims worldwide in Southeast Asia, Northeast Africa, the Middle East, and parts of the Indian subcontinent." <br />Al Azhar is one of the oldest and most prestigious madrassas in the world. To dismiss its rulings as "local fatwas" is ludicrous.<br /><br />I will put it bluntly: Normative Islam is not a religion in the sense that Christianity is in the USA. Perhaps the closest analogy would be the Mormon Church in pre-statehood Utah and even that isn't accurate. Individual Muslims can certainly be good neighbors and good citizens. <br /><br />You may say "render unto Caesar" but Islam rejects the Church/State separation. Its official, canonical dream for the world is one in which Islam's religious leader <i>is</i> Caesar and Sharia is international, national, and local law.<br /><br />Sharia as taught by the legal authorities over almost all of the world's Muslims is not compatible with freedom of speech, freedom of religion, equal rights for women or democracy. <br /><br />Peter, you seem to be looking for a moderate Islam; it does not exist on a scale large enough to matter geopolitically. (Moderate Muslims, yes, and that always matters.) We can hope that Islam may moderate; though the process for Christianity was long and bloody indeed. For now, I will close with the words of Turkey's "moderate" leader: <br /><br />Speaking at Kanal D TV’s Arena program, PM Erdogan commented on the term “moderate Islam”, often used in the West to describe AKP and said, <i>‘These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”</i>Peter Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-16402812284547269962012-04-20T14:35:06.766-05:002012-04-20T14:35:06.766-05:00@Peter B: That's an Egyptian cultural norm, w...@Peter B: That's an Egyptian cultural norm, which has been adopted by local Islamic authorities, but is <i>not</i> part of Islamic revelation as such. The local <i>fatwas</i> issued by Egyptian religious authorities are not binding on Islam as a whole, or on all Muslims. I spoke about this earlier in this article, as you'll recall.<br /><br />I fully agree that female circumcision is a barbaric custom stemming from an overly patriarchal and paternalistic society, and should be stamped out as soon as possible.<br /><br />@Anonymous at 2.08 pm: You're absolutely right that some 'fruit' demonstrated by Muslims is indeed rotten to the core, and fit only to be rejected. You and I are on the same page there. My problem is with those who condemn all Muslims, or the whole of the Islamic world, because of the actions of such misled, misguided and flat-out thuggish individuals. As I've said earlier in this series, that sort of judgment is like condemning the whole of Christianity because of the beliefs and actions of the Westboro Baptist Church.<br /><br />It sounds to me like both of you have done your best to maintain a balanced perspective. That's the best anyone can do. I hope I've succeeded in doing the same, and not going overboard on the other side of the equation by being too tolerant! We all have to work towards balance, and maintain it. God grant we succeed in doing so.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10595089829300831372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-38036724363200708782012-04-20T14:08:38.308-05:002012-04-20T14:08:38.308-05:00Thank you Peter for an interesting and well though...Thank you Peter for an interesting and well thought out series. I enjoy your blog very much. I do not always agree with you but in many instances I do and your blog can always be counted on as a source for interesting reading. <br /><br />The last section of this series does a good job of summarizing and I agree with much of it. Islam can not be understood and its complexities comprehended in a short amount of time or be attained by the reading of a book. It has to be encountered socially and much study must be undertaken to really understand it. Westerner's know little if anything about it and therefore "know the tree by it's fruit." I don't understand the scientific explanation for why a certain type of seed germinates and becomes an apple tree and produces apples. It really doesn't matter to me how this occurs. What matters to me is I like apples and if a tree produces good apples I like that tree. By the same token I don't understand the scientific explanation for why cancer cells grow. My only inclination to find out would be to determine what I can do to eliminate cancer and reduce my risk of getting it because I don't like cancer or things that cause it. Now not all apple trees grow good apples. We judge trees individually and I think that this is the point you are trying to make in this article. A muslim shouldn't be judged simply because he is muslim. Look at their fruit. I doubt many if anyone would disagree with this from a societal viewpoint and that point is well taken. <br /><br />We westerners see the fruit of Islam as a whole in soundbites which show beheadings, homicide bomber attacks etc and we don't like that fruit. Furthermore, we don't ever hear any of the so called "moderate muslims" come out and publicly denounce these actions. On the contrary we see video of muslim students in the cafeterias of our college campuses cheering as the Twin Towers collapse. What opinion of Islam is the average American or Westerner supposed to develop under those circumstances? I agree that everyone has to be taken as an individual and that no one should be targeted or discriminated against because of the heritage of their muslim faith. This I will grant you and would even be willing to defend. However, I have seen the fruit of Islam and it in my mind goes into the same category as cancer. Just observing the countries where it is the religion of the land is enough. When you observe the quality of life, the lack of freedom, the severity and cruelty with which it treats it's own people I know I don't want any of that fruit and I don't want that fruit even remotely influencing the culture I live in. As far as the muslim man in the workplace or the store is concerned I will treat him based upon the way he treats me and conducts himself as an individual. That is the best I can do and all that anyone should expect.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6244999628674918029.post-58099904780172331402012-04-20T13:45:13.162-05:002012-04-20T13:45:13.162-05:00While you may consider female circumcision to be e...While you may consider female circumcision to be extra-Islamic, many Muslim legal authorities <a href="http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/2068.htm" rel="nofollow"> beg to differ with you.</a> Certainly those of the Shafi'i school, predominant in Egypt; here is the relevant section of <i>Reliance of the Traveller</i>, which is considered to be authoritative by the jurists at Al Azhar:<br /><br /><i>e4.3 Circumcision is obligatory (Sheikh 'Umar Barakat's commentary: for both men and women. For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar. Bazr) of the clitoris (n: not the clitoris itself, as some mistakenly assert). (Sheikh 'Abd al-Wakil Durubi's comment: Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna, while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.)"</i><br /><br />Even this, however is a text prettified for Western consumption. The note does not reflect the meaning of the Arabic actually specifies the entire clitoris, not its foreskin.Peter Bnoreply@blogger.com