The Islamic State - a perfect society?

Why would there be a need for such punishment in an Islamic state? If the countries laws were built on Islam/Quran, which is claimed to be perfect in every way, wouldn't that society be a crime free paradise?

Why are there pedophiles, rapists, murderers and drug traffickers in an Islamic state? Do the people there not give a rat's pattootie about their perfect religion and what their obligations are to it?

How can an alleged "religion of peace" even survive in such a society?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

A crime free society is one where no human action is considered criminal. Human beings as a society are the same everywhere. What Islam does is provide a social framework that permits a regulation of human behaviour to the human extent possible. Since all Islamic societies should be based on social consensus, it is upto the people to decide which acts should be punished in what way. Islamic laws also give victims' families the option to forgive the criminal if they so choose.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, I suppose we can start by reminding you of what you already know

Well, in terms you and I would both accept, nature provides. I've said of sex crimes before that even if we manage to educate date-, acquaintance-, and spousal rape out of society, nature will still provide us with sociopaths. I think the same is true of murder insofar as there will always be sociopaths and psychopaths.

In terms you and I would reject, God has His own purposes that aren't meant to be understood by finite creatures such as ourselves.

In political and historical terms, we must recall that Islam originated in the seventh century, in a particularly harsh environment, and much of what the Qur'an codified was a selection of pre-existing sociomoral codes that originated among nomadic peoples in that environment. Islam goes through periodic fits of redefinition, and as you're such a critic of the faith and its history, I can safely presume you've studied those at least as much as I have. At present, Islam exists in a sociopolitical cycle that is still recovering from a traumatic decline after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. The influence of fundamentalism is expected, and the period and severity of that influence is exacerbated by external influences. Muslims are humans, too. You seem to forget that from time to time. The faith that produced Rabia (perhaps the most famous of female Sufis, who once asserted that she would burn the Kaba'a if it stood in the way of a Muslim's path to God), Rumi, and al Hallaj (ana al haqq), to say the least, is also capable of producing greedy and corrupt people as well. Islam has fought at least two massive civil wars over this, and the only thing that prevents the current internecine discord from exploding to such a degree is that issues like the Israeli theocracy and the Western institutions that bankroll and cover for its crimes have given them something to focus on. Still, though, as we saw in Iraq, those internal grievances still smolder, and often flash into open flame.

There are a couple ways of looking at that. Either it subsists beneath the corrupted exterior, or else it simply dies.

And we can also consider the idea of society. How can Islam exist as a religion of peace when it has, for its entire existence, been viewed by Christians as an enemy and, in recent years, an object of human exploitation by the Western world?

I'm an American. I hear Christians frequently call this a Christian nation. But the one thing we won't ever do as a nation is turn the other cheek and attempt to rise above the violence. And Muslims, like Christians, being human, are subject to its psychological processes. That's why the guilty among them are more likely to make excuses than fulfill the demands of faith.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

i believe any society that is based solely on a holy book is doomed to failure simply because most "laws" written in such books are so vague in nature that they can be interpreted in almost opposite ways.

 

Like the US constitution? If it had not been vague, you'd never have agreed that black people were human too.

 

i haven't seen anything in the constitution that would allow another human being to be owned as a slave.
this is the reason i believe such "role models" as thomas jefferson should be totally excised from our history.

if there is anything like that in the constitution i would definitely like to see it.

edit:
and to add to all of this, the constitution was "written by man" and therefor easily changed. this cannot be said of anything "written by god" or "a prophet".

 

No, Islam doesn't "permit" regulation, it "demands" regulation. And clearly, that has failed miserably in an Islamic state.

WHOA!!! Social consensus? Whatever happened to the Quran and it's "social framework?"

WHOA!!! The people decide? Whatever happened to the Quran and it's "social framework?"

So what?

 

What do random cut and pastes from unknown discussions have to do with the present thread? Is there an argument that you would like to make? I don't feel like going back and looking at the contexts of the sentences you have posted without any allusion to what point you are making in the discussion

I just looked up one:

Source: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2102555

And it tells me nothing about any point you are making here in response to what I have posted.

 

And yet, it was written by men who owned slaves. Do you think it would have been better if they had specified that blacks were not included as humans?

What part of the US constitution has been rejected, refuted or "easily changed"?

 

the fugitive law
importation of slaves
3/5's of a person
insurrections

go read some history fella

 

yes, a dark spot for sure. i have no love for fucknut jefferson sam.

amendments maybe?
how can you amend a prophesy without a prophet?

 

You re-interpret what they wrote aka "we, the people" magically includes black people

 

wasn't this one of the reasons for the civil war?
people knew slavery was wrong.

 

but see? you can't do this with something "written by god".
you cannot say "well this is wrong, we'll amend it".

 

Original sin. Humans are not thought to be born perfect.

 

Original sin is a Christian concept. In Islamic theology humans are born without any sin and are responsible only for their own actions.

...And whatever a soul earns is itself responsible for it; and no load bearing soul will bear anyone else’s load... [6:164]

 

why do you worship whitey so?

 

Is that the new Aryan theory where "whitey" created monotheism?

 

Although born without original sin, a person is vulnerable to committing sins and becomes accountable for them after the age of reason.​

So, people aren't perfect, even in Islam. Otherwise, there would be no need for laws.

 

fuck whitey and their white allahs and jehovahs, sam
return to the fold and worship our multihued and multilimbed gods