I am curious about something....

[eppie]

Here's what I'm curious about:

All other issues aside, how can any Western female be pro-Muslim culture/society, just on the strength of something like this? This is pretty typical in that type of society after all.... Anyone who wants to dispute that and say that this is the exception and not the rule, can go do some research on their own.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050610/wl_n...an_rape_dc
LAHORE, Pakistan (Reuters) - A Pakistani court on Friday ordered the release next week of 12 men connected to a notorious gang-rape case, including six convicted of the crime, court officials said.


[right][snapback]80152[/snapback][/right]

I can indeed also not imagine this. But you should not connect this cruelty to the islam. As said before, it is purely a question of an old fashioned society. We here in the west left those things behind us, although you still see excesses.

So be very careful in blaming muslim faith for these things. Not long ago you would not get any punishment in the US (south) if you killed a black person....but to blame all US citizens for this goes of course to far. And if we let the christians in the west get too much in power (without some healthy moderation of other people) we would also go back to the middle ages.

So this is a question of development of a country and has nothing to do with religions. A lot of people (especially the last few years here in Holland) also make the mistake in blaming the religion for mistakes of some people, this will only make things worse (creating tension).

[Kylearan]

Hi,

And no, they shouldn't be killed. Not right away.

They should be made to have prolonged suffering, like their victims. Make them beg for death, let them feel dispair, to feel weak and powerless, make them feel burning shame over something they have no control over.

Aaaah ! You were thinking kneecaps and a 5 mile swim back to shore in shark infested waters , just like I was thinking ?

I am just stating in words what everybody is thinking...

All other issues aside, how can any Muslim be pro-Western culture/society, just on the strength of something like this? This is pretty typical in that type of society after all.... Anyone who wants to dispute that and say that this is the exception and not the rule, can go do some research on their own.

-Kylearan

[Occhidiangela]

I can indeed also not imagine this. But you should not connect this cruelty to the islam. As said before, it is purely a question of an old fashioned society. We here in the west left those things behind us, although you still see excesses.

So be very careful in blaming muslim faith for these things. Not long ago you would not get any punishment in the US (south) if you killed a black person....but to blame all US citizens for this goes of course to far. And if we let the christians in the west get too much in power (without some healthy moderation of other people) we would also go back to the middle ages.

So this is a question of development of a country and has nothing to do with religions. A lot of people (especially the last few years here in Holland) also make the mistake in blaming the religion for mistakes of some people, this will only make things worse (creating tension).
[right][snapback]80214[/snapback][/right]

I disagree with you. If you grow up as a secularist, as non religious, you will miss out on how important religious rules and laws are to people in cultures where Islam is imbedded in both the secular and spiritual life of the community. Many Muslims do not advocate, nor even comprehend the utility of, separation of church and state. Among other things, it is contrary to the teachings in the Koran, and it is a Western idea to start with. (At least, in current form.)

It has everything to do with religion in a country. It is as much a part of everyday life as traffic lights are a part of the city where you live.

Occhi

[Minionman]

I disagree with you.  If you grow up as a secularist, as non religious, you will miss out on how important religious rules and laws are to people in cultures where Islam is imbedded in both the secular and spiritual life of the community.  Many Muslims do not advocate, nor even comprehend the utility of, separation of church and state.  Among other things, it is contrary to the teachings in the Koran, and it is a Western idea to start with.  (At least, in current form.)

It has everything to do with religion in a country.  It is as much a part of everyday life as traffic lights are a part of the city where you live.

Occhi
[right][snapback]80219[/snapback][/right]

It has more to do with how people use what the religion says. Other religions have split, some people will ignore or not bother with different parts of a religion, etc. , so even if the laws say one thing groups of people will interperet them differently. Even if it is against the Quran to do some things, cultural groups may or may not follow it based on their traditions, who is in power, who can speak well, etc. If these areas continue to have problems because of these traditions, it seems evewntually people will start ignoring those rules if the rules aren't helping them in any way. The non religious societies now did seem to come from more religious ones in soem way. (this will probably take a long time, but the point is stuill there.)

[Occhidiangela]

It has more to do with how people use what the religion says.  Other religions have split, some people will ignore or not bother with different parts of a religion, etc. , so even if the laws say one thing groups of people will interperet them differently.  Even if it is against the Quran to do some things, cultural groups may or may not follow it based on their traditions, who is in power, who can speak well, etc.  If these areas continue to have problems because of these traditions, it seems evewntually people will start ignoring those rules if the rules aren't helping them in any way.  The non religious societies now did seem to come from more religious ones in soem way.  (this will probably take a long time, but the point is stuill there.)
[right][snapback]80223[/snapback][/right]

Well pointed, it is not as though the slavish adherence to a particular interpretation of the Quran is all that passes for law, otherwise, the men in the article might not have been brought to the bar in the first place.

I guess the point I was trying to make is how influential the cultural norms that are imbedded in religious doctrine are, and how a concept like "separation of Church and state" takes some socializing to grow as a fundamental assumption. The separation eppie assumed is, it seems to me, based on the Enlightenment based cultural assumption that is hardly the standard view at life in the hill country of Pakistan.

It is easy to make a profound error in judgment when measuring another's wheat by one's own bushel.

Occhi

[Jester]

I only say "marginally" based on the (slight) numerical and geographical superiority of Christians. If the situation were backwards in terms of Islam having conquered South America (or converted the Slavs, or whatever reversal you like), then I would say "marginally" the other way around.

"The explicit second class status of women, and for that matter a non Muslim in a Muslim society, is a matter of habit, doctrine and centuries of precedent. What is remarkable is the progress that modernists, such as Ataturk or some of the Baathist, made in the face of such embedded norms."

This was true of the United States until... when? The second world war? The fifties? In god we trust? Maybe it isn't even true now. Can you really say that you can go to "christendom" (not only counting the "west", but also Africa and South America) and find attitudes much different from what prevails in much of the Muslim world? Maybe the Christians are ahead in the race, but only in the more priveleged countries, and even then, not by a large enough margin to really pat themselves on the back too hard. There's still a huge amount of work to be done in the area of equality for women, other races, other faiths (and non-faiths), other beliefs.

The US constitution, thanks to a few visionary types, went much farther than those it governs would ever have supported, were it put to a referendum. I hope it continues to do what it is supposed to, and I hope for something as useful in the Islamic world. We'll see.

Jester

[Jester]

"I can envision winning the lottery, but that does not mean I will win it. I'm talking about the real world, not some sort of a hypothetical vision of what things *should* be."

Okay... but if you were a Muslim five hundred years ago, saying that the Christians, the conquering, crusading, colonizing, missionary Christians, with their autos de fe, their inqusitions, their overtly racist mindset, would become the model for tolerance and equality among races and genders?

That would seem like a really, really stupid concept. History moves on, and what seems ridiculous one day is inevitable a century later. It's not impossible. It's not even necessarily improbable. I really don't know, but my suspicion is that Al Jazeera television will have an effect on the Arab world, which will itself have an impact on the Islamic world, and we'll see something quite different from that cultural group within a few decades.

After a couple centuries, who knows?

Or, maybe it won't work out that way. It's pointless to just sit back and speculate. But I see no reason, unless one accepts either racism or a peculiar brand of cultural determinism, to simply declare such a thing impossible. Civilization has changed hands throughout history a dozen times at least, and Islamic civilizations have had their time up to bat just like everyone else. They may again.

Jester

[Occhidiangela]

This was true of the United States until... when? The second world war? The fifties? In god we trust? Maybe it isn't even true now. [right][snapback]80233[/snapback][/right]

How about 1920, or so, after Women's Suffrage? :whistling: That is close enough, since we are talking centuries, and a slow evolution of a culture, or more correctly, a subset of a culture.

An argument has been made that Islam has yet to experience its own Reformation. Others will argue that its shape and form did not grow in complete parallels to Christianity, and that looking for such a reformation is a vain hope.

Change comes in non linear burps and bumps. Some from internal forces, some from external forces. The Islamic world changes, as does the Christian world, to put this in the form of your "five centuries ago" observer, but at different rates and in different directions. The reactionaries in both camps object, which puts Jerry Fallwella and Osama Bin Laden having tea and together bemoaning the various Whores of Babylon who infest the world's airwaves in a valid context. :D

Occhi

[jahcs]

Minionman:

It has more to do with how people use what the religion says. Other religions have split, some people will ignore or not bother with different parts of a religion, etc. , so even if the laws say one thing groups of people will interperet them differently. Even if it is against the Quran to do some things, cultural groups may or may not follow it based on their traditions, who is in power, who can speak well, etc. If these areas continue to have problems because of these traditions, it seems evewntually people will start ignoring those rules if the rules aren't helping them in any way.

Agreed. Some of the most dangerous folks in any religion are the ones who take bits and pieces from a religious text and combine that with hellfire and brimstone style rhetoric. They prey on a populace's hopes and fears, say "God tells us to do this," and then proceed to do it - regardless of the fact it may be contrary to the spirit and motive behind the religion. I don't recall the exact percentages I read in a published report but a significant percentage of the suicide bombers are young, and of those, quite a few are women. The leaders of these groups are preying on the impressionable youth to do their dirty work.

Radical extremists in any religion do not help their cause. Many Americans believe most Muslims are happy to strap a suicide belt onto their bodies and run onto a schoolbus full of children. I would venture that only radical fringe elements of Islam is like this.

Jester:

Okay... but if you were a Muslim five hundred years ago, saying that the Christians, the conquering, crusading, colonizing, missionary Christians, with their autos de fe, their inqusitions, their overtly racist mindset, would become the model for tolerance and equality among races and genders?

Most of us have moved beyond that mindset. We've grown and become more "enlightened" to the benefits of equality between genders and races. Many Muslim nations haven't moved forward much in the last several hundred years, for various reasons.
-The types of societies in many Muslim nations still rely on family and clan groupings. This style of society is known for extraordinarily long memories regarding enemies and feuding.
-Many of the rules imposed on Middle Eastern society come from Islam. The religious and government leaders are not likely to create change that goes against the primary religion.
-Currently the Muslim world is ruled by men - why would they want to change that?
-Poorer countries like those of the Middle East (or at least where there is an extreme separation between the rich and the common folk) are ruled by the rich. They can buy the bullets so they rule by force.
-It is easier to rule your populace if they don't know any other doctrine than what you teach them in your religious teachings and in your state run schools.

Hopefully our current actions in the Middle East can be seen by current and future generations, not as the oppression or control of Islam, but as a vehicle for change to bring some of the more modern ideals to that part of the globe. Demcratic process, equality, more open communication, etc.

[Guest]

This is all rather silly.

Just because these particular atrocities seem to be accepted in a Muslim nation doesnt mean they are Muslim practices.

The Japanese did horrible deeds in WW2, does that mean Buddists are cruel fiends.

We all know plenty of bad things done by people in Christian nations.


Lets use logic - actions of sub groups can not be used to judge the whole group.

[whyBish]

Here's what I'm curious about:

All other issues aside, how can any Western female be pro-Muslim culture/society, just on the strength of something like this?

...

It was the latest twist in a case that provoked an outcry in Pakistan
[right][snapback]80152[/snapback][/right]

So, it caused an outcry in the country that it occurred in. So how does this make it a supported happening within that country, let alone within that religion?

[Occhidiangela]

This is all rather silly.

Just because these particular atrocities seem to be accepted in a Muslim nation doesnt mean they are Muslim practices.

The Japanese did horrible deeds in WW2, does that mean Buddists are cruel fiends.

We all know plenty of bad things done by people in Christian nations.
Lets use logic - actions of sub groups can not be used to judge the whole group.
[right][snapback]80268[/snapback][/right]

Your generalization is unsound, since like another poster, you measure another's wheat by your own bushel. The sub group is related to the larger body, though your warning to look deeper, to find the critical distinctions, is well made.

Occhi

[eppie]

I disagree with you.  If you grow up as a secularist, as non religious, you will miss out on how important religious rules and laws are to people in cultures where Islam is imbedded in both the secular and spiritual life of the community.  Many Muslims do not advocate, nor even comprehend the utility of, separation of church and state.  Among other things, it is contrary to the teachings in the Koran, and it is a Western idea to start with.  (At least, in current form.)

It has everything to do with religion in a country.  It is as much a part of everyday life as traffic lights are a part of the city where you live.

Occhi
[right][snapback]80219[/snapback][/right]

I don't think things like one should not steal, one should not kill etc.etc. are things we like to obey because of some religion. It are thinsg we decided to obey in a civilized society because we think they are good.
1000 years ago, when everybody was religious people "had" to do also a large amount of things we don't allow today. Torture, slavery, crusades are things religion now does not allow.....but at that time it did.
Therefor I think the influence of a certain religion on our modern day life is smaller than most people say/think. And if we in the west would have been muslims instead (from 1500 years ago) we would now probably have a comparable society. The characteristic of modern society is that it will find out "itsself" which things are good and which are not, we don't need a holy book as a guidline for that. That is also why in general the western countries have a more liberal attitude towards religion.

I don't think these things say anything about the kind of religion.

[Guest]

Please dont talk gibberish at me. We alll ready have one poster here is specializes in long and pretty nothing.

I made only 2 generalization and I doubt you had a problem with them.

1 "This is ALL rather silly" this not a bad generalization because its actually rather obvious what I was aiming at(the original poster and thoe who accepted his basic framework)and "all" was a form of speach.

2 "We ALL know plenty of bad things done by people in Christian nations"
Its possible some of us have never heard of an ill dead preformed by a cgristian, but unlikely.



At any rate I did not make generalizations for my point, in faact I was measured and rather careful.

Actions of sub groups CAN be used as evidense for a whole group but only when you show at least that they arent a varient on your point, this was not done at all here.

[Doc]

Please dont talk gibberish at me. We alll ready have one poster here is specializes in long and pretty nothing.

I made only 2 generalization and I doubt you had a problem with them.

1 "This is ALL rather silly" this not a bad generalization because its actually rather obvious what I was aiming at(the original poster and thoe who accepted his basic framework)and "all" was a form of speach.

2 "We ALL know plenty of bad things done by people in Christian nations"
Its possible some of us have  never heard of an ill dead preformed by a cgristian, but unlikely.
At any rate I did not make generalizations for my point, in faact I was measured and rather careful.

Actions of sub groups CAN be used as evidense for a whole group but only when you show at least that they arent a varient on your point, this was not done at all here.
[right][snapback]80287[/snapback][/right]

Watch it bub.

There is more wisdom in my ramblings than you will ever know in your lifetime. Just because I don't make it easy to glean doesn't mean it's not there, it just means you have to work to find it. Something you obviously are incapable of doing. <_<

[Occhidiangela]

Please dont talk gibberish at me. We alll ready have one poster here is specializes in long and pretty nothing.

I made only 2 generalization and I doubt you had a problem with them.

1 "This is ALL rather silly" this not a bad generalization because its actually rather obvious what I was aiming at(the original poster and thoe who accepted his basic framework)and "all" was a form of speach.

2 "We ALL know plenty of bad things done by people in Christian nations"
Its possible some of us have&nbsp; never heard of an ill dead preformed by a cgristian, but unlikely.
At any rate I did not make generalizations for my point, in faact I was measured and rather careful.

Actions of sub groups CAN be used as evidense for a whole group but only when you show at least that they arent a varient on your point, this was not done at all here.
[right][snapback]80287[/snapback][/right]

The Bhuddist Japanese was not a parallel. First off, the dominant religion for cultural shaping in Japan was, in the context of your WW II example, Shinto. Also, Bhuddism's ability to coexist with Shinto is not mirrored in the Islamic cases presented. Cultural shifts typically take generations to manifest themselves and stabalize. Are you familiar with Future Shock?

Your Christian example was careless, in a temporal sense. It is not a current parallel any more than the Japanese parallel was. The "woman's rights" position that informs much public and international discussion is a relatively recent phenomenon. I'll put a stake in the ground and tie it to Women's Suffrage movements in Western/Enlightenment societies. That was influenced by Christian cultural mores, more specifically, Protestant branches.

This gets us to where we agree. The sub genres of a culture do not always line up: as true in our own country as anywhere else. What you can say is that those Muslim cultures, or subcultures, that have embraced some elements of the Enlightenment are more likely to accept better social equality, whereas more conservative or reactionary elements reject them with vigor.

The Christian and subset Enlightenment founded cultures have led in the ideology of equality, pulling the less progressive ideologies with them . . . for better and worse.

Is the conversation silly? When you play the reducto absurdum card, perhaps, but I think the conversation had already gone a bit further than that.

Occhi

[Guest]

I think youre scum.


I have a very low opinion of you because - you say your right - give no reason - and then have the nerve to say you are better than other people because they dont agree with you.

If you dont have the deciency to engage in a dialectic about your ideas then dont insult other people when they dismiss your ideas.




Dont mistake my thread that said Im glad you post on this forum for me saying something good about you personally.

[Guest]

Actually they were better analogies than you realize. Because they were about perceptions not the religions themselves.


Im not defending or attacking Islam at all here. I am attacking the faulty analysis methods that are the foundation of this thread.


And you make a mistake in your analysis "This gets us to where we agree. The sub genres of a culture do not always line up: as true in our own country as anywhere else. What you can say is that those Muslim cultures, or subcultures, that have embraced some elements of the Enlightenment are more likely to accept better social equality,"




What the purist forms of Islam would utterly reject what happened in Pakistan. Most everything that happened in that case is rather contrary to Islamic law. Im quite comfortble saying Islam direpects women, but this case is really just a bunch of primative asses disrespecting women(and young boys it appears).

[Doc]

I think youre scum.
I have a very low opinion of you because - you say your right - give no reason - and then have the nerve to say you are better than other people because they dont agree with you.

If you dont have the deciency to engage in a dialectic about your ideas then dont insult other people when they dismiss your ideas.&nbsp;
Dont mistake my thread that said Im glad you post on this forum for me saying something good about you personally.
[right][snapback]80298[/snapback][/right]

Point out exactly where this is true please... That I have stated I am better than other people that don't agree with me. People disagree with me all the time here and many times I engage them in conversation. Most of the time in a civil fashion. I like when people disagree with me, because it opens the doors for debate. I respect folk like Occhi and Shadow and lots of others because they disagree with me and can do so with reasonable arguments. Something you typically fail to do unless you are provoked a great deal and have your nose tweaked.

That's more than once now you have made broad sweeping generalisations about me that have no basis, the first being the whole long and pretty nothing bit.

Put up, or STFU.

[Occhidiangela]

What the purist forms of Islam would utterly reject what happened in Pakistan. Most everything that happened in that case is rather contrary to Islamic law. Im quite comfortble saying Islam direpects women, but this case is really just a bunch of primative asses disrespecting women(and young boys it appears).
[right][snapback]80300[/snapback][/right]

I'll buy that. :)

Occhi