Question for Muslims: Why would Westerners want or need Sharia? (convert, punishment)

[rifleman]

In democratic countries, with people of free will and equal rights, and with the typical Constitutional rights afforded in Canada, the United States, Great Britain, Australia and many others, what aspect of Muslim sharia laws do you think would improve our lives?

You've asked us what bothers us about it, and we have responded with many examples of it's barbaric and chauvinistic nature. It's disregard for basic gender equality, and it's denial of true religious freedom. It's open association with ongoing world terrorism.

Now you need to tell us why we should consider it. What does it offer as an improvement over our exiting system? What is so horribly lacking in the basic Judeo-Christian legal system that has evolved in Western countries?

Is it simply because it's absolutely mandated by your theocratic religion? Is it because you'd like to convert us to Islam?

Explain carefully. We're listening.

[elwill]

first of all , i want to emphasize that i don't believe that we have the rights to impose our laws on others

i believe anyone born in a state has a right to participate in its legislation.

everyone, born in a given country, whatever be his re­ligion or colour or creed acquires the basic fundamental civic rights. And the most important among these rights is the chance at least, to participate in the shaping of the legislation.
Of course, parties come and go; majority parties today may turn into minority parties tomorrow. Everybody's wish is not fulfilled or carried out. But in principle, everybody has a fair chance and an equal chance to make his say heard at least by the opposition, on matters of common principle.

so rifleman , i hope we try to not lead this discussion as a relegious issue , let us lead the discussion from analytical point of view , and just discuss the positives and the negatives of secular laws and these ones which muslims believes that it gain better results than yours

are you okey with that ?

as a start , without going into details . i will give you just overview about why we think that shariah law is the best

we believe that when Islamic law is applied, crime drops significantly as to when compared with the other man made laws

i really hope if this thread goes in respectfull manner so that everyone get benefited from exchanging ideas (no mattar how far we differs but it really matter how far we have the ability to manage succesfull communication )

[Fullback32]

elwill, if this is the way of your people and your people are good with it, then who am I to argue? If it is taken willingly and without coercion by your people, then it is their decision and way. In more reference to rifleman's question though, I am an American Indian - a Comanche specifically. We were given a way to us from the Creator that we are happy with. It is a way that has served my people for a long, long time and we see no reason to change it. The Christians attempted to force their way upon us. While they were successful to a certain degree, there were a lot of us who resisted. The same would happen to any other religion that attempted to force its way upon the people. We firmly believe that each man and woman has the freedom to follow the Creator the way they wish...or not follow at all.

[tgnostic]

I agree whole heartedly, and good health to that.

[Mightyqueen801]

Originally Posted by elwill

Moderator cut: Orphaned

Thank you for your explanations. The idea that the victims of thieves and other criminals are more important than the criminals themselves is important to most people in the US as well, and there is usually an outcry when the punishment meted seems to favor the criminal over the victim.

The United States' constitutional protection against cruel and unusual punishment was not pulled out of thin air, but rather a progressive reaction to some of the punishments used in older western European societies, our mother country of England included, such as drawing and quartering, beheading women for adultery or beheading men for speaking against the king, etc. Such punishments were often meted out according to the power of the person making the accusation and approved by the Church, similar at the time to the religious approval in Islamic law. There's also the factor that a human being who would be willing to even perform the act of cutting of another human being's limb (or disemboweling or beheading) probably has something seriously wrong with them also.

Now I'd like to move on to something beyond mere theft. Most westerners, myself included, were horrified and haunted by the stoning in Somalia last year of a 13-year-old girl who was convicted under Islamic law of adultery after she was gang-raped. As I'm sure you are aware, she was taken to a stadium holding about 1000 onlookers, buried up to her neck, and stoned alive. I cannot conceive of a way you or anyone else could persuade me that there is any justice or lawful reason, religious or otherwise, for such an inhumane punishment. In most people's eyes, this girl was a victim, not a law-breaker. However, I will give you the opportunity to explain this.

Similarly, women in Afghanistan are in prison on charges of adultery because they were raped. Yes, the rapists are in prison as well, which satisfies your explanation that the law is equal for both men and women, but there seems to be no distinction in these cases between someone who commits a crime and someone who is a victim. Again, please explain the logic behind this.

[rifleman]

I will add in however, elwill, that in American, Canadian and most Western democratic societies, we value diversity not homogeneity. So we openly and legally encourage all types of religion, including "no religion" (atheism). How would I, as an enthusiastic vocal atheist, be treated in a strictly Muslim country? Ostracized, separated, socially demonized and morally rejected?

If so, such a singular and mandated religious position will never sell here. It disallows human variability and individuality. That seems to be why there's such rabid unrelenting mob mentality in Islam.

You should also know that while freedom certainly has it's problems, including allowing people to have their own thoughts and ideas, it's still the best system out there. Of course the more radical an individual's mindset, or the more psychologically disturbed or criminally deranged types will have more opportunities for savagery, but that's just a cost of absolute freedom.

It's worth noting that such personalities still cannot be guaranteed to be suppressed. Two of the most heinous of all serial mass murderers were Russians, under the vile and repressive USSR government of The Cold War Era:

• Pichushkin and Chikatilo, both in the late '90s.

...when everyone there was supposedly under intense public scrutiny, like in the George Orwell movie, "1984".

BTW, are you familiar with that movie? If not, you should probably rent it and watch what cultural totalitarianism's consequences can be.

As well, we'll of course never know if such personalities ever surface in Iran, for instance, since the government completely suppresses "bad news", rather like the Chinese, North Koreans and old-time Russians do, to present the faked facade of complete social peace and harmony.

Simply put, and obviously, that fantasy of vast social harmony does not exist anywhere in this world, even under Islam. I note that the general population of Iran, for instance, apparently hates the tyrannical government there, with it's vicious application of Sharia. They'd rather live as we do in the West.
___________________________

Next, I'd like to hear your ideas on the advancement of science and the arts under Islam. It's certainly flourishing under Western cultural, religious and governmental freedoms and personal expression. Meantime, the Islamic countries buy western technology (war materiels, vehicles, aircraft, arts and music, clothing styles, etc.). Their apparent modern contributions seem to be, well, non-existent. Now don't go listing science from 2000 - 3000 years ago; we've moved on, and I don't know of an Islamic space station or moon landing or Kepler or Hubble or Allah space telescope. In fact, they can't even get their bomb-grade Uranium enrichment right, having to buy old Russian and Chinese technology.

But hey; I could be all wrong.

[geofra]

Originally Posted by rifleman

Next, I'd like to hear your ideas on the advancement of science and the arts under Islam. It's certainly flourishing under Western cultural, religious and governmental freedoms and personal expression. Meantime, the Islamic countries buy western technology (war materiels, vehicles, aircraft, arts and music, clothing styles, etc.). Their apparent modern contributions seem to be, well, non-existent. Now don't go listing science from 2000 - 3000 years ago; we've moved on, and I don't know of an Islamic space station or moon landing or Kepler or Hubble or Allah space telescope. In fact, they can't even get their bomb-grade Uranium enrichment right, having to buy old Russian and Chinese technology.

But hey; I could be all wrong.

Now you said not to do this, but I can't resist. Islamic science thrived during the European Dark Age. Algebra, the bane of my high school existence, the arabic number system, and the use of the number zero were all shown to Europeans by the Muslims.
I'm not disagreeing with your premise. I'm just using my limited knowledge of Islamic history to exhibit it. Back then Islam allowed a much more diverse range of opinion and custom than it does today. It had to in order to spread across the known world as it did in the 8th century.
When freedom to think outside of the box is allowed and encouraged then a very vibrant society thrives. Unfortunately, a puritanical attitude does exactly the opposite. It's amazing the truth of this.

[rifleman]

Originally Posted by geofra

Now you said not to do this, but I can't resist. Islamic science thrived during the European Dark Age. Algebra, the bane of my high school existence, the arabic number system, and the use of the number zero were all shown to Europeans by the Muslims.

I'm not disagreeing with your premise. I'm just using my limited knowledge of Islamic history to exhibit it. Back then Islam allowed a much more diverse range of opinion and custom than it does today. It had to in order to spread across the known world as it did in the 8th century.

When freedom to think outside of the box is allowed and encouraged then a very vibrant society thrives. Unfortunately, a puritanical attitude does exactly the opposite. It's amazing the truth of this.

Well stated, geofra, but my continuing OP point is: what would sharia law offer us Westerners now, in today's society? Not the acknowledgment of past achievements, because for one thing, their contributions to modern-day cutting edge science have almost completely died off. This may, in fact, be a DIRECT result of sharia, and it's absolute mandate of complete theocratic dominance there, instead of letting individuals have some level of intellectual freedom. Instead, it seems that if they speak out these days, they are brutally punished. Of course, I may be wrong. (IMBW)

So, again, if we were to buy into the inclusion of sharia into our Western laws and philosophies, what would we possibly hope to see relative to what we've achieved so far here? What benefits? Improvements? More intellectual freedom? More or at least improved gender equality? Less crime? A "better" citizenry? More advancements in science (are our efforts in western science currently suppressed in some way I"m not aware of?)

Again, I refer to these things relative to our current Western achievement levels, not those of modern day Islam. In other words, would we have better gender equality in, for instance, the US of A or Canada if we incorporated sharia's ideas of feminine rights?

NOTE: (It's worth noting that the attempt by Muslim leaders two years ago in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada to incorporate sharia law into the city's statutes seemed to be driven by the legal protection that Canadian laws and their Constitution afforded Muslim women. The Muslim men could not "discipline" their wives as they wished to, and they wanted to be able to do so, but legally. In other words, the Muslim immams there seemed intent on bringing back "the big stick" mode of discipline, but Canada would not let them). (IMBW)

From what I've seen in the media, the exact opposite [in terms of achieving equality under sharia] would be true; Muslim men seem to like to humiliate their women in public, and brutally, but I could be wrong. Show me where I'm wrong, and where women here would benefit from sharia.

And as for science; it's usually quite effective at debunking ancient tribal myths that Christianity, Islam and all other old wooden icon theocracies cling to, so science would likely also suffer dearly under Islam. It certainly seems to have in Iran's current, and Iraq's past, dynasties. (IMBW)

I'm aware of the contributions of past Muslim culture [>> 2500 yrs ago], but as with any past culture, even the Neanderthal ones in France, when confronted with problems to be solved, they often did exactly that. It was a simple case of survival. Hence the creation of tools (spears, obsidean knives, fishing nets, etc...). But scholarly investigation for it's sake alone? Islam seems to discourage that. (IMBW)

As always, I'm open to others' intriguing ideas and compelling commentary! Lead on!

[TRANSPONDER]

At last. A thread on Islam that is worth reading.

Yes, the strongest claim for Sharya is that it will sort out criminal and anti - social behaviour.

There may well be some mileage in taking a different view from just handing out an ASBO which the punk can hang proudly on his bedroom wall as a certificate of street - cred or popping a major crim into comfy accommodation where they are fed at public expense.

On the other hand, I am impressed by the positive results of actually talking to and helping many of these people and finding some other alternative to anti- social behaviour and then crime. Many of these bods are not bad, they are bored.

So we can get some ideas from shariya but to adopt it and its ways does not commend itself to me.

I was looking at Islamic women just now (trying to find an Iranian writer who argued that the problems in Islam are due to the spread of Arab - derived strict fundamentalist law and custom) and the shout is that womens' bad treatment is being consistently overlooked. Now I have heard many times that muslim women rather like their way of life and their mode of dress and even the polygamy thing. There are advantages in having a bunch of other ladies about. My problem is, when there are problems that need to be addressed - and there sometimes are - they are dealt with in a tough and often violent way. And there is a general closing of ranks and a refusal to consider - because that is what the koran says or that's what they have got used to doing and a mixture of both.

That's why I have a problem with Shariya and would never want to see it adapted into our system of law much less follow it.

[eloy]

You say lies. Jews and religions based on their dogmas were the most severe murderers. And "West" is created on money of Jews. Between you there are no distinctions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...serial_killers
There were no "Moslems" in 8 century.