Liberal Islam?

[madd0ct0r]

The problem, IMO, is a combination of stances on different subjects and how they directly and irreconcilably clash with Western culture:

1. Equality of the sexes -unless a Muslim doesn't observe Sharia law, then they cannot accept this facet of Western civilization.

2. Equality of sexual preference - similar to above, if a Muslim cannot accept the right of homo- or bisexual people to exist, then we again encounter an irreconcilable difference.

3. Apostacy - see above.

4. Infidelity/Adultry - again, as above. Note that I'm not endorsing that this is good or proper behavior, simply that it exists and should be addressed strictly between the parties involved, and definitely that no one should be put to death!

5. Freedom of speech/expression - people/groups do not have the right to *not* be offended - ideas will be presented, or depictions of things you hold dear will be crafted, and you must put up with them. Violence will not be tolerated in response to non-violent portrayals.

6. Deference to secular law/legal system(s) - it is not acceptable to take matters into your own hands, (for certain matters) - honor killings, etc.


The issue is that Western societies cannot compromise when it comes to these matters - we cannot and should not institute censorship laws because many Muslims cannot stand to have Mohammed drawn. We cannot compromise when it comes to gender equality or tolerating people of different sexualities. It is my opinion that, if Muslims wish to join the Western world, then *they* must accept these aspects of modern civilization, not where Western countries pass laws to protect these archaic and bigoted beliefs.

Biostem How many of those are legally enforced in Indonesia?
how many in Malaysia? How many similar rules in say Han China?

It seems obvious to me that Muslim communities exist on a spectrum of liberalism. An average member of a village in Pakistan will have a different degree of tolerance to a middle class family in Malaysia, who would be different to a 3rd generatio British Bangladeshi who would be different to a white Texan convert.

I'd also note Christian communities exist on the same spectrum with quite a lot of overlap. I'd also assert the variation inside both religions is so huge that comparisons are dubious unless specific.

I'd also note the difference between community norms and enshrined legal power. When did Ireland give women the vote? When did they legalise abortion. How liberal does that make them.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Indeed. People put too much emphasis on religious tenets to explain geopolitics. Hindus and Buddhists have butchered innocent Muslim communities for having the "wrong" religion despite their faiths supposedly being the peaceful ones. Joseph Kony's LRA is an example of a Christian terrorist group that's just as backward, intolerant, and violent as ISIS.

The problem of violent Islamist extremism comes from the sexual frustration of young males who have no hope of making their mark on the world or finding a wife in deeply unequal societies combined with a well-funded ideology of violence propagated by Saudi oil money and unintended power vaccuums resulting from the disruption of the region's natural power structures at the clumsy hands of the US and UK over the course of many decades. A cocktail that like will always produce horrendous violence and strife. To lay these results at the feet of 1,500 year old texts is nothing more than an excuse to throw up one's hands and not to bother trying to achieve peace.

[AniThyng]

The problem, IMO, is a combination of stances on different subjects and how they directly and irreconcilably clash with Western culture:

1. Equality of the sexes -unless a Muslim doesn't observe Sharia law, then they cannot accept this facet of Western civilization.

2. Equality of sexual preference - similar to above, if a Muslim cannot accept the right of homo- or bisexual people to exist, then we again encounter an irreconcilable difference.

3. Apostacy - see above.

4. Infidelity/Adultry - again, as above. Note that I'm not endorsing that this is good or proper behavior, simply that it exists and should be addressed strictly between the parties involved, and definitely that no one should be put to death!

5. Freedom of speech/expression - people/groups do not have the right to *not* be offended - ideas will be presented, or depictions of things you hold dear will be crafted, and you must put up with them. Violence will not be tolerated in response to non-violent portrayals.

6. Deference to secular law/legal system(s) - it is not acceptable to take matters into your own hands, (for certain matters) - honor killings, etc.


The issue is that Western societies cannot compromise when it comes to these matters - we cannot and should not institute censorship laws because many Muslims cannot stand to have Mohammed drawn. We cannot compromise when it comes to gender equality or tolerating people of different sexualities. It is my opinion that, if Muslims wish to join the Western world, then *they* must accept these aspects of modern civilization, not where Western countries pass laws to protect these archaic and bigoted beliefs.

Biostem How many of those are legally enforced in Indonesia?
how many in Malaysia? How many similar rules in say Han China?

It seems obvious to me that Muslim communities exist on a spectrum of liberalism. An average member of a village in Pakistan will have a different degree of tolerance to a middle class family in Malaysia, who would be different to a 3rd generatio British Bangladeshi who would be different to a white Texan convert.

I'd also note Christian communities exist on the same spectrum with quite a lot of overlap. I'd also assert the variation inside both religions is so huge that comparisons are dubious unless specific.

I'd also note the difference between community norms and enshrined legal power. When did Ireland give women the vote? When did they legalise abortion. How liberal does that make them.

Malaysia has been (back)sliding to the right in Islamic matters for years now, to the point that the younger generation might in fact be more religiously conservative than the previous. That the non Muslim and liberal Muslim part of Malaysia has had to pushback is testament enough to that.

Normally I'd step in here to defend Malaysia against perceptions that it is some sort of shithole, but years of listening to hypocrites talking about moderation in Islam on one hand while vilifying non Muslims on the other is wearing on me.

It's not a shithole and I'd still live here, but don't gloss it over - Muslim women are pressured to wear the hijab and avoid being too sexy, lgbt legal rights are terrible and people get away with it only because they stay out of causing trouble, apostasy for Muslims is a. Hard and difficult process, I grant you adultary seems to be not much of a issue in terms of punishments, and freedom of expression outside of the internet is a bit of a joke in Malaysia, we arrest people for sedition for Facebook postings that support Israel for ducks sake. And secularism. Again, secular forces in Malaysia are driven by non Muslims and a fringe group of liberal Muslims from the upper class. That doesn't help either.

I understand your point and I'm too an extent disappointed I even typed this all out about my country but Islam as an institution is problematic to liberalism and we can't pretend that isn't an issue.

[Adam Reynolds]

Indeed. People put too much emphasis on religious tenets to explain geopolitics. Hindus and Buddhists have butchered innocent Muslim communities for having the "wrong" religion despite their faiths supposedly being the peaceful ones. Joseph Kony's LRA is an example of a Christian terrorist group that's just as backward, intolerant, and violent as ISIS.

The fact that it has occurred with another religion does not mean that you cannot say there is a link. It is like arguing that it makes no sense to ban firearms because people can still stab each other. While true, it is much harder to kill with a knife than with a gun. Likewise, if Islam acts as an accelerant for societal problems, then it could be said to be part of the problem.

The problem of violent Islamist extremism comes from the sexual frustration of young males who have no hope of making their mark on the world or finding a wife in deeply unequal societies combined with a well-funded ideology of violence propagated by Saudi oil money and unintended power vaccuums resulting from the disruption of the region's natural power structures at the clumsy hands of the US and UK over the course of many decades. A cocktail that like will always produce horrendous violence and strife. To lay these results at the feet of 1,500 year old texts is nothing more than an excuse to throw up one's hands and not to bother trying to achieve peace.

While this is indeed true, it can be said that Islam is a factor that caused the current state of affairs.

[ray245]

The problem of violent Islamist extremism comes from the sexual frustration of young males who have no hope of making their mark on the world or finding a wife in deeply unequal societies combined with a well-funded ideology of violence propagated by Saudi oil money and unintended power vaccuums resulting from the disruption of the region's natural power structures at the clumsy hands of the US and UK over the course of many decades. A cocktail that like will always produce horrendous violence and strife. To lay these results at the feet of 1,500 year old texts is nothing more than an excuse to throw up one's hands and not to bother trying to achieve peace.

I won't be so quick to blame it on sex ratio. China and India had a worse male to female ratio and they did not experience so much social unrest compared to the Middle East. And to add to that, we have western radicals joining ISIS as well.

It most certainly does not explain the attackers of the Paris attack, who grew up in a much more liberal society. A number of them actually wanted to choose this kind of radical life.

[ray245]

Thought I should make this clear. I'm not saying there is no liberal Islam movement today. There are indeed various liberal Islam movement and figures around the world, but their outreach is very tiny to the extend it does not exist to most people. Liberal Muslims tends to be liberal on an individual basis as opposed to as a community.

Whereas there tends to be much stronger and more well known liberal Christian communities with female priest and etc. ( Like others have said, this is partly due to these religions being forced to accommodate the much more liberal population.)

There are of course many many moderate Muslim communities in the world today, but being moderate does not mean they are liberal. It would be akin to saying the Catholic Church is liberal, which it isn't.

[AniThyng]

Thought I should make this clear. I'm not saying there is no liberal Islam movement today. There are indeed various liberal Islam movement and figures around the world, but their outreach is very tiny to the extend it does not exist to most people. Liberal Muslims tends to be liberal on an individual basis as opposed to as a community.

Whereas there tends to be much stronger and more well known liberal Christian communities with female priest and etc. ( Like others have said, this is partly due to these religions being forced to accommodate the much more liberal population.)

There are of course many many moderate Muslim communities in the world today, but being moderate does not mean they are liberal. It would be akin to saying the Catholic Church is liberal, which it isn't.

If anything, bringing up the existence of liberal muslim movements in Malaysia as a counterpoint to "Islamic countries are not all conservative" is probably along the lines of asserting the United States is not conservative because of the existence of Unitarians. Liberal feminist organizations like Sisters in Islam are barely tolerated and on the verge of outright deviancy by the official Islamic institutions of Malaysia and the broader Malaysian public, and at best speak for a minority of malays with a very liberal bent relative to the rest of the Malay-muslim street. The dichotomy is even more pronounced when you look at the leadership of other moderate/liberal secular groups in Malaysia, which are biased towards non-malay/non-muslim demographics.

Malaysia has played a good game of portraying itself as a moderate muslim nation, and it certainly is compared to Saudi Arabia and its ilk, but whatever liberalism currently exists in Malaysia is *in spite of* and not *because* of any form of mainstream Islam I am familiar with.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Indeed. People put too much emphasis on religious tenets to explain geopolitics. Hindus and Buddhists have butchered innocent Muslim communities for having the "wrong" religion despite their faiths supposedly being the peaceful ones. Joseph Kony's LRA is an example of a Christian terrorist group that's just as backward, intolerant, and violent as ISIS.

The fact that it has occurred with another religion does not mean that you cannot say there is a link. It is like arguing that it makes no sense to ban firearms because people can still stab each other. While true, it is much harder to kill with a knife than with a gun. Likewise, if Islam acts as an accelerant for societal problems, then it could be said to be part of the problem.

I'll grant that all 3 Abrahamic religions have been more associated with violence than other religions given similar conditions, but that's still no justification to single out Islam. Christian Europe was far more violent and brutal than Islam is today, and with a much higher body count to match.

The problem of violent Islamist extremism comes from the sexual frustration of young males who have no hope of making their mark on the world or finding a wife in deeply unequal societies combined with a well-funded ideology of violence propagated by Saudi oil money and unintended power vaccuums resulting from the disruption of the region's natural power structures at the clumsy hands of the US and UK over the course of many decades. A cocktail that like will always produce horrendous violence and strife. To lay these results at the feet of 1,500 year old texts is nothing more than an excuse to throw up one's hands and not to bother trying to achieve peace.

I won't be so quick to blame it on sex ratio. China and India had a worse male to female ratio and they did not experience so much social unrest compared to the Middle East. And to add to that, we have western radicals joining ISIS as well.

It most certainly does not explain the attackers of the Paris attack, who grew up in a much more liberal society. A number of them actually wanted to choose this kind of radical life.

It's not the male-female ratio by itself that's the problem, it's the disenfranchisement of huge swaths of society combined with the other factors I mentioned. Young male ambition turns violent when there's no hope of betterment, a well-funded and pervasive doctrine of violent extremism complete with a very real bogeyman that rains death from the skies on a regular basis and whose behavior can easily be painted as Great Satan-esque, and a lack of legitimate power structures to contain this rage due to decades of irresponsible imperialist misadventures throughout the region. Neither China nor India have these problems to nearly the same extent as Middle Eastern Islamist hotbeds, although both (particularly India) have their share of religious strife.

It's not uncommon for middle and upper class males to be the ones to carry out these acts, btw. The poor are too busy just trying to survive.

[Adam Reynolds]

I'll grant that all 3 Abrahamic religions have been more associated with violence than other religions given similar conditions, but that's still no justification to single out Islam. Christian Europe was far more violent and brutal than Islam is today, and with a much higher body count to match.

I agree that Christianity isn't really any better throughout history. But it is better today because it went through the liberalization process that skipped the Muslin world.

Though I agree about the rest of what you are saying. It largely is young men that are the problem rather than the religion itself.

It's not the male-female ratio by itself that's the problem, it's the disenfranchisement of huge swaths of society combined with the other factors I mentioned. Young male ambition turns violent when there's no hope of betterment, a well-funded and pervasive doctrine of violent extremism complete with a very real bogeyman that rains death from the skies on a regular basis and whose behavior can easily be painted as Great Satan-esque, and a lack of legitimate power structures to contain this rage due to decades of irresponsible imperialist misadventures throughout the region. Neither China nor India have these problems to nearly the same extent as Middle Eastern Islamist hotbeds, although both (particularly India) have their share of religious strife.

Another factor is economics. While parts of the populations of China and India are disenfranchised, there are things for them to do other than cause trouble.

[ray245]

I'll grant that all 3 Abrahamic religions have been more associated with violence than other religions given similar conditions, but that's still no justification to single out Islam. Christian Europe was far more violent and brutal than Islam is today, and with a much higher body count to match.

That I agree. Although, I would like to point out this isn't merely about violence but about liberalism within such communities. Most Muslim communities today aren't violent, but that does mean they are liberal either. Not distinguishing the two is rather problematic.

We need to acknowledge that Islam did indeed provide those terrorist with a framework to hate the Western liberal culture, and see it as immoral. However, the idea of seeing western culture today as immoral is not exclusive to terrorist alone. I have personal experience with very religious Muslims that do see western culture in this way even if they do not support any terrorist movement.

It's about how we can resolve such antagonistic attitude that is crucial here.

It's not the male-female ratio by itself that's the problem, it's the disenfranchisement of huge swaths of society combined with the other factors I mentioned. Young male ambition turns violent when there's no hope of betterment, a well-funded and pervasive doctrine of violent extremism complete with a very real bogeyman that rains death from the skies on a regular basis and whose behavior can easily be painted as Great Satan-esque, and a lack of legitimate power structures to contain this rage due to decades of irresponsible imperialist misadventures throughout the region. Neither China nor India have these problems to nearly the same extent as Middle Eastern Islamist hotbeds, although both (particularly India) have their share of religious strife.

It's not uncommon for middle and upper class males to be the ones to carry out these acts, btw. The poor are too busy just trying to survive.

That still doesn't deal with Islam being appealing to many Muslim youth in the west. Or females finding IS appealing as well.

Fundamentalist Islam has provided these people not just with a reason to attack the west, but also a way of life they deem is better than liberal western culture which they deem to be too materialistic and immoral.

You don't have to join any terrorist group or even sympathise with them to adopt such a view. That is the much bigger problem we have to deal with.

Terrorist groups finds its recruits from people that already feel that way before they decided to fight.

[wautd]

The question is whether our society, in general, can accept the notion of Islam itself as liberal? Could we see Mosques that is happy to allow Muslim homosexual marriage?

I think it should be possible, but don't underestimate the billions of dollars that Saudi has spent to fund salafist mosques and madrassas all over the world to spread their hate ideology wahabism. Europe needs imams that share the culture and ideals of the country they live in. Now you often get Saudi preachers preaching things that are the anti-thesis to a liberal society.
In Africa, more aid should be sent for real schools. In large parts, kids either have the choice between no education or an "education" in a Saudi funded madrassa