A Question about Tolerance

[bolos890]

Hello all. I'm considering following the Islamic deen, and before I make a decision, I'm looking for some answers from some knowledgeable muslims.

So here is my question.

Why doesnt Islamic society tolerate other religions? (ie why does not islam allow christian missionaries or cathedrals in islamic countries?).

[miss-islamic]

Politics and religion are mixed in an Islamic state. You allegiance to the sate is the same as allegiance Islam. Renouncing either is seen as treason.

For Muslim that means accepting Islam always and for non-Muslim accepting the legitimacy and supremacy of Islam.

Russia, as a secular country, doesn’t allow Christian missionaries either. Why would a state based on a specific religion do so? Would a Democratic state in the West allow people to preach Communism? Or “Islamism?”

This is what the prophet (saw) said about the “dhimmis” (non-Muslim citizens) in an Islamic state. (Dhimmis technically includes only Jews and Christian who are considered “ahl kitab” (people of the book) but in practice other non-Muslims (e.g. Hindus) have been dhimmis in Islamic history too.

“He who hurts a dhimmi hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys Allah" (At-Tabarani)."Whoever hurts a dhimmi, I am his adversary, and I shall be an adversary to him on the Day of Resurrection" (Al-Khatib)."On the Day of Judgment, I will dispute with anyone who oppresses a person from among the People of the Covenant, or infringes upon his right, or puts a responsibility on him which is beyond his strength, or takes something from him against his will"(Abu Dawud).

[giordano]

Would a Democratic state in the West allow people to preach Communism? Or “Islamism?”[/SIZE][/FONT]There are Communist parties (and Islamic preachers) in practically all European Democracies.

G

[giordano]

For Muslim that means accepting Islam always and for non-Muslim accepting the legitimacy and supremacy of Islam.[/SIZE][/FONT]Why on earth would non-Muslims ever accept the supremacy of Islam ?

G

[Lone Wolf]

Why on earth would non-Muslims ever accept the supremacy of Islam ?

G

So we can show our tolerance

[hammerofthehuns]

Why on earth would non-Muslims ever accept the supremacy of Islam ?

G

when (i think it was Muhammed al Fatih) took spain,he told the kuffaar, 'i have conquered ur land but not ur hearts' the christians and the jews wept and kuffaar came from distant places 2 live in peace under the muslim rule.

[giordano]

when (i think it was Muhammed al Fatih) took spain,he told the kuffaar, 'i have conquered ur land but not ur hearts' the christians and the jews wept and kuffaar came from distant places 2 live in peace under the muslim rule.Sounds rather far-fetched.

In any case, I don't see many non-Muslims running to live under Muslim rule now. It's rather the other way round.

G

[miss-islamic]

^ http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?t=135729 (http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?t=135729) (second part)

There are Communist parties (and Islamic preachers) in practically all European Democracies.
G
And they are allowed make people communists? Advocate and work to make the democratic state communist?
An Islamic state probably takes the belief that too much freedom is anarchy. And that freedom only comes from accepting what God had ordained and refraining from what he has forbidden. Like the slogan, “If it ain’t halal (allowed), its crap.” :D

Why on earth would non-Muslims ever accept the supremacy of Islam ?
G
Because the state is a based on Islam. They have to respect the authority of Islam.

People who believe in secular democracy don’t believe communism or religious state is equal to them and nor do they give them equal opportunity.

For example, people are sill criticizing and complaining about Islam (which is more correctly, Islamic rule) being spread by the sword (except for the south-eastern countries and some part of Africa which was done through Arab Muslim traders) and its belief in establishing itself all over the world but nobody care that right now Democracy is being spread by bombs and being established all over the world. Not to mention the West’s cult-ure imperialism on the world. Imposed religion is always criticized but there seems to be no criticism for imposing culture…

It’s not about double standard and hypocrisy or intolerance but just natural to think your belief is the correct and the better one. It wouldn’t be your belief if you didn’t believe it was the correct and better one.:)

[giordano]

And they are allowed make people communists? Advocate and work to make the democratic state communist?[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]Of course they are. We have had Communist parties in France, Italy, Spain,etc promoting the institution of a Communist State. Some of those political parties even had remarkable success at elections (i.e. more than 20% of all votes). After the fall of the Berlin wall, they are however in a deep crisis.
An Islamic state probably takes the belief that too much freedom is anarchy. And that freedom only comes from accepting what God had ordained and refraining from what he has forbidden. Like the slogan, “If it ain’t halal (allowed), its crap.” :D Well, I deeply disagree with that approach


Because the state is a based on Islam. They have to respect the authority of Islam. Why ? if the "Islamic State" was instituted by violence, such as invasion, a coup etc, it deserves no respect at all

People who believe in secular democracy don’t believe communism or religious state is equal to them and nor do they give them equal opportunity.
care to expand on that ?
For example, people are sill criticizing and complaining about Islam (which is more correctly, Islamic rule) being spread by the sword (except for the south-eastern countries and some part of Africa which was done through Arab Muslim traders) and its belief in establishing itself all over the world but nobody care that right now Democracy is being spread by bombs and being established all over the world. Not to mention the West’s cult-ure imperialism on the world. Imposed religion is always criticized but there seems to be no criticism for imposing culture… Democracy doesn't claim to be God's word, and it is by no means perfect. In fact, it's the worst system on earth, bar all other ones.
Islam claims to be from God, so one would expect somehow higher standards from the Islamic State

It’s not about double standard and hypocrisy or intolerance but just natural to think your belief is the correct and the better one. It wouldn’t be your belief if you didn’t believe it was the correct and better one.:) Agreed.

However, however... I see a lot of freedom in Western Democracy. For Islamic Dawah, for Communists, anti-vivisectionists, Scientologists... whatever.

A lot more freedom than in majority Muslim countries.

G

[miss-islamic]

Of course they are. We have had Communist parties in France, Italy, Spain,etc promoting the institution of a Communist State. Some of those political parties even had remarkable success at elections (i.e. more than 20% of all votes). After the fall of the Berlin wall, they are however in a deep crisis
Well communism is a gone now. But there would be nothing wrong with Muslims in the West working to make the democratic states they live into Islamic states? You learn something new everyday, huh?:rubeyes:

Why ? if the "Islamic State" was instituted by violence, such as invasion, a coup etc, it deserves no respect at all
One a governments come to power, people have no choice but to respect it authority and its laws.
I live in Canada and it makes us sing “oh Canada, my native homeland…” in school and when we get our citizenship. Isn’t it more like stolen land?

care to expand on that ?
How did the world react with Iranians wanting to become an Islamic state? Or with Muslims voting for “Islamists” in Egypt, Palestine, Algeria, Turkey e.t.c?
Did the U.S in the Cold War let people choose to be governed by Communism? Or did lead coups and even putting and support dictators so that Communism (supposedly) would not come to power?

Communism or “Islamism” are not allowed to spread or seen as evil but secular democracy isn’t because secular democracy spreading is bringing good to the world (from their point of view). They don’t realize the communists or Islamists believes the same and think secular democracy evil and they have every right to too.

To quote “Islamic conquest did not aim at spreading Islam by the sword as enemies of Islam claim, but they aimed at liberating man from the oppressive subjection imposed by disbelieving states on their people which preclude them from the freedom of embracing Islam.”
Democracy doesn't claim to be God's word, and it is by no means perfect. In fact, it's the worst system on earth, bar all other ones.
Isn’t that a quote from Winston Churchill? :D
Islam claims to be from God, so one would expect somehow higher standards from the Islamic State
But its followers are humans.
In any case, religion, specifically Islam, does not tolerate those who want destroy it.

Agreed.
However, however... I see a lot of freedom in Western Democracy. For Islamic Dawah, for Communists, anti-vivisectionists, Scientologists... whatever.
A lot more freedom than in majority Muslim countries.
G
Freedom is not our priority. I hope you aren’t, like many people mistakenly do, thinking that people come to the West do for their “freedoms.” It is actually a drawback for Muslims.

[giordano]

[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]Freedom is not our priority. I hope you aren’t, like many people mistakenly do, thinking that people come to the West do for their “freedoms.” It is actually a drawback for Muslims.
Thanks, I'll give a detailed reply to your remarks as soon as I have time (tonight ?)

On your last remark only: yes, I am deeply convinced that many people come to the West in order to enjoy "freedom".

Of course, many immigrants are attracted mostly by economic incentives (our "Western" societies do present better economic opportunities than most other countries), but many persons come to the "West" because they are persecuted for their political or religious beliefs, or their ethnic origin.

Yes, many persons actually enjoy our "freedom"; it may be a drawback for some Muslims, but it surely isn't for millions of people and, in my humble opinion, it's something that "Westerners" can rightly proud of.

All the best

[giordano]

Well communism is a gone now. But there would be nothing wrong with Muslims in the West working to make the democratic states they live into Islamic states? You learn something new everyday, huh?:rubeyes:
Muslims could of course found political parties with an Islamic character and agenda in any Western democracy - I can see no constitutional obstacle - as long as they don't advocate violence...

Once a governments come to power, people have no choice but to respect it authority and its laws.
Wrong. Might is not right.
If a government came to power in a "undemocratic" way, people have the right to resist it. A government which seizes power thanks to an invasion, or a coup, has no legitimacy.

Ever heard of anti-Nazi and anti-fascist resistance movements during WW II ? an Islamic state based on an invasion, or a coup would have absolutely no legitimacy, and most people would resist it. I live in Canada and it makes us sing “oh Canada, my native homeland…” in school and when we get our citizenship. Isn’t it more like stolen land? All land is ultimately "stolen". There always was some other people living before you where you are living now.

Take Palestine : Neanderthalians, Cro-magnon, Caananites, Jews, Babylonians, Persians, Macedonians, Romans, Persians again, Byzantines, Arabs, Franks, Arabs again, Jews etc etc
How did the world react with Iranians wanting to become an Islamic state? Or with Muslims voting for “Islamists” in Egypt, Palestine, Algeria, Turkey e.t.c? We should discuss each separate case. Just to mention your last case: Turkey elected an "Islamist" President. What happened ? nothing. Of course, many people are not happy about that.Did the U.S in the Cold War let people choose to be governed by Communism? Or did lead coups and even putting and support dictators so that Communism (supposedly) would not come to power?Yes, you have a point, during the cold war the US tried to avoid Communist takeovers as much as they could, and especially in Latin America (Cuba, Chile, Nicaragua... not that these takeovers were "democratic" by any means - the one exception being perhaps Chile)...
Actually, Communists legally took part in Governments in Europe (e.g. in France, Italy, Finland, Iceland), South Africa, several Indian States etc etc but the US were far from happy and exerted political pressure.
Communism or “Islamism” are not allowed to spread or seen as evil but secular democracy isn’t because secular democracy spreading is bringing good to the world (from their point of view). They don’t realize the communists or Islamists believes the same and think secular democracy evil and they have every right to too. As I said, in my view secular democracy is, by far, the best system of Government. Of course, it comes in many shapes and sizes and is far from perfect, but it works very, very well in most countries.
To quote “Islamic conquest did not aim at spreading Islam by the sword as enemies of Islam claim, but they aimed at liberating man from the oppressive subjection imposed by disbelieving states on their people which preclude them from the freedom of embracing Islam.” Well, this is exactly what a certain Mr Bush is saying : "in Iraq, I simply wanted to liberate Iraqis from the oppressive subjection imposed by the Baathists on their people which precluded them from the freedom of embracing democracy"
.
Isn’t that a quote from Winston Churchill? :D
Yes: congratulations. I quite admire Winston Churchill.
In any case, religion, specifically Islam, does not tolerate those who want destroy it.
Sorry, but such generic statements mean very, very littleFreedom is not our priority. I hope you aren’t, like many people mistakenly do, thinking that people come to the West do for their “freedoms.” It is actually a drawback for Muslims.
I already answered that. Millions of people appreciate our "freedoms". You included, since you live in Canada.

Anyway, thanks for your replies, and all the best

G

[Babbage]

Well communism is a gone now. But there would be nothing wrong with Muslims in the West working to make the democratic states they live into Islamic states? You learn something new everyday, huh?:rubeyes: Examples: http://www.islamicparty.com/ http://www.hizb.org.uk/hizb/index.php


One a governments come to power, people have no choice but to respect it authority and its laws.
I live in Canada and it makes us sing “oh Canada, my native homeland…” in school and when we get our citizenship. Isn’t it more like stolen land?
what land wasn't stolen? You have the choice of leaving a land whose authority and laws you do not respect.

How did the world react with Iranians wanting to become an Islamic state? Or with Muslims voting for “Islamists” in Egypt, Palestine, Algeria, Turkey e.t.c? Varied from one place to another. One problem with some political islamists is that they intend- as they openly say- see my references above- to establish an islamic state and to prevent anyone changing it back. If people intend to do that then it is reasonable to forcibly stop them doing so. In Turkey, for example, where the islamists work within the constitution and allow open opposition they have been accepted as a valid party.
+
Did the U.S in the Cold War let people choose to be governed by Communism? Or did lead coups and even putting and support dictators so that Communism (supposedly) would not come to power?Yes. As did the communists. The USA took the rhetoric of communism much more seriously than- it transpired- was justifiedand behaved in comparable ways.

Communism or “Islamism” are not allowed to spread or seen as evil but secular democracy isn’t because secular democracy spreading is bringing good to the world (from their point of view). They don’t realize the communists or Islamists believes the same and think secular democracy evil and they have every right to too. Certainly. However, within a secular democracy a much greater range of policies is possible when they are necessary. i don't think that a forceful spread of secular democracy is necessary or desirable. The effective superiority of secular democracy to totalitarian societies is so great that the totalitarian societies can be left to destroy themselves.

To quote “Islamic conquest did not aim at spreading Islam by the sword as enemies of Islam claim, but they aimed at liberating man from the oppressive subjection imposed by disbelieving states on their people which preclude them from the freedom of embracing Islam.”To quote who?
Have you ever heard of "doublethink"? So, islam brought people the freedom to embrace islam but not to do anything else. Given the long record of those countries in getting rid of islam and the lasting hatred of islam in such countries the natives obviously weren't properly grateful.
.
Isn’t that [Democracy doesn't claim to be God's word, and it is by no means perfect. In fact, it's the worst system on earth, bar all other ones] a quote from Winston Churchill? :D
It is. It epitomises the arguments Karl Popper took two volumes to make in The Open society and its Enemies
[Islam claims to be from God, so one would expect somehow higher standards from the Islamic State ]
But its followers are humans.
In any case, religion, specifically Islam, does not tolerate those who want destroy it. You'd expect god to have the wisdomto enable his follwers to create a society and a state manifestly superior to any other, regardless of their flaws however. Indeed, the open society is precisely superior because it allows for human error and folly and to correct them with the least possible harm. It is interesting that you think that not approving of an unchanging muslim state is "trying to destroy" islam. Muslims- like anyone else- have the right to impose whatever restrictions they please on themselves. However they cannot restrain others unless they do direct harm to others.
Freedom is not our priority. I hope you aren’t, like many people mistakenly do, thinking that people come to the West do for their “freedoms.” It is actually a drawback for Muslims.
Doesn't stop them coming though, does it? If muslims don't want freedom for themselves, they are welcome not to have it. Unfortunately they don't want others to have freedom either.
Many muslims would like to believe that what they regard as the advantages of the west can be got without freedom. In fact those advantages are direct consequences of the west's being an open society, however flawed and they are inextricably mixed.

[Babbage]

when (i think it was Muhammed al Fatih) took spain,he told the kuffaar, 'i have conquered ur land but not ur hearts' the christians and the jews wept and kuffaar came from distant places 2 live in peace under the muslim rule.Almost certainly not true. there wasn't much peace in Islamic spain. Apart from internecine warfare with the christian states there were civil wars, coups d'etat, rebellions, usurpations and regular invasions from Morocco. After all, if the christians were so enthusiastic about muslim rule in Spain, why did they spend several hundred years getting rid of it and end up getting rid of the muslims too?