Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Funkdafied]

Perhaps it's your own powers of observation that need work and your own arrogance that needs checking. It seems to come down to your own perception against mine, and I wouldn't put much stock in your perception of reality going on the things you write on this forum.

[Big_Bird]

OK, whatever. This is exceedingly dull.

[Adventurer]

[jkelly80]

[Kuros]

[Justin Hale]

Well, the thread's title is Islamophobia - building bridges or destroying them and I will directly answer this question. As I have said before several times, Sharia Law is in complete opposition to laws in Western countries regarding the following:

monogamy
provisions for divorce
the rights of women
custody of children
laws of inheritance
laws of evidence
freedom of belief
freedom of expression
provisions for blasphemy
provisions for apostasy.

Given that it is impossible, assuming one subscribes to the rule of law of sovereign nation states, to faithfully observe the above, I vote "destroy" (the bridges) for people seeking to live in the West whilst subscribing to Koranic literalism. Liberal Muslims - for example those in the European professional classes - are obviously welcome.

For me this is part of a broader battle; the battle against biblical and koranic literalism. Cherry picking the Bible/Koran is also to be scrutinized, but that�s less important. Adherents to literalist interpretations of these ancient books in the West - which posit demonstrable falsehoods, gross indecency, scabrous barbarism and uncivility contrarian to nature, reason and sanity - aren't religious (they're mentally ill) and should be treated as such.

We don't tolerate neo-naziism, we defeated communism, we defeated Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy (and the other fascist Catholic states) and Imperial Japan, so why have anything other than total lack of toleration for a totalitarian regime that you can't even die to leave? How Right Wing do these folks want things?

I respect Jesus and Mohammad because they were modernizing, seminal men, but literalist interpretations in 2008 are totally inappropriate and what Islam desperately needs is liberal, modernizing voices to be heard. There's evidence that those voices are threatened and bullied by the fundamentalist mob, even in Canada, UK and Netherlands. In those countries, the law says those folks can say what they like, but Islamic forces prevent them. The liberal voices are where we require bridges and the fundamentalist forces are where we require destruction of bridges.

Christopher Hitchens nailed it in To hell with the Archbishop of Canterbury

[Adventurer]

[quote="Justin Hale"]Well, the thread's title is Islamophobia - building bridges or destroying them and I will directly answer this question. As I have said before several times, Sharia Law is in complete opposition to laws in Western countries regarding the following:

monogamy
provisions for divorce
the rights of women
custody of children
laws of inheritance
laws of evidence
freedom of belief
freedom of expression
provisions for blasphemy
provisions for apostasy.

Given that it is impossible, assuming one subscribes to the rule of law of sovereign nation states, to faithfully observe the above, I vote "destroy" (the bridges) for people seeking to live in the West whilst subscribing to Koranic literalism. Liberal Muslims - for example those in the European professional classes - are obviously welcome.

For me this is part of a broader battle; the battle against biblical and koranic literalism. Cherry picking the Bible/Koran is also to be scrutinized, but that�s less important. Adherents to literalist interpretations of these ancient books in the West - which posit demonstrable falsehoods, gross indecency, scabrous barbarism and uncivility contrarian to nature, reason and sanity - aren't religious (they're mentally ill) and should be treated as such.


Adventurus thus wrote:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above is very interesting. Obviously, those must be taken into consideration. As far as monogamy, polygamy is extremely rare in the Middle East and banned in Tunisia and Turkey. You may your token person with more than one wife if you go to the region, but it is quite rare. The rights of women are behind that of the West as they are in Korea. I hope Saudi women will get to drive some time soon. I think that will take another 5 years or so.

However, that's changing. It has changed a lot in Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria. Just recently, women in Kuwait were granted the right to vote. So, we can say there are movements towards women's rights. That's something positive, but it is not close to what exists in Western Europe. Turkey has to change some of its laws that were viewed as discriminatory for it to get a better chance to enter the EU.
The laws of evidence don't apply to Muslim countries when it comes to men and women. Most Middle Eastern countries have a mixture of Sharia law and either French or British law. It's a mish mash.
North America is influenced by Judeo-Christian laws or ideas.

The laws of apostacy are tricky. The only country that really allows a change of religion are Lebanon and Turkey. Egypt just recently allowed Christians who converted to Islam to return if they married Muslim men and got divorced or if they converted to Islam, because the Coptic Church for whatever reason doesn't allow divorce in Egypt.


My view on this is that the West should not bend to Sharia laws and have Muslim and Jewish courts, that reminds me of the Muslim Empire or something centuries ago, and the West doesn't need to be like some neo-liberal empire with different religious courts. And Muslims need to modernize their laws even further as has been done in Turkey, Egypt, and somewhat in Kuwait. They also need to take a stronger and tougher stance against the abuse of both women and children. There was some conference in Jordan some years back about the issue, but it is very weak. You can basically do what you want to your children down there and get away with it, not that abuse doesn't exist all over the world.
In Europe, you can easily get your parents arrested if they seriously abuse you. That's the way it should be.

The Geert film is interesting in one sense, if I may, though I object to his methods. How is it interesting? It highlights what dangers there are that you mentioned when you interpret religion literally as the Wahhabis and ignorant followers of Binladin do. They are the enemies ideologically of people like the enlightened Avicenna who helped inspire Europe to develop and taught Europeans. He represent the best of Islam and the backward elements have too much sway over Muslims and the Imams who have literal interpretations and lack any major sense of consciousness need to be booted out or re-trained if that region wants to modernize beyond having gadgets as one poster mentioned.


P.S. The Muslim world must get used to some criticism from within and without whether the criticism is right or wrong.

[Justin Hale]

Thankfully, we've much common ground, Adventurer. I realize you don't share my athiesm and anti-theism, but we share the following common ground: no Shariah in the West, no beating daughters to death in honor killings, complete lack of toleration for opposition to teaching the holocaust compulsorily, the law of the land being the only law. Your final paragraph above I agree 100% with.

[Big_Bird]

[stevemcgarrett]

Adventurer wrung his wrists: