The proposed legislation would restrict fatwas only to a state-appointed council. Currently, the powerful Muslim Brotherhood movement and other smaller hard-line Islamic groups issue edicts.
| Bookmark this post: |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Add a Comment
from Jordan
said:Oh Mohammad this is a heavy artillary bombardment, but really very well articulated.
Hey look, the Islamic Brotherhood can "politicize Islam" as they want as long as they do not claim they have the "ONLY" script of political Islam. The problem is not politicizing Islam but cliaming the ultimate right, denying others from that rights and using fatwas to cement their arguments.
Now, do we need a state-controlled fatwas or "Abu fares" controlled fatwas in Jordan (privatization of fatwas". For me both are negative but what is better? Keeping someone like Abu fares or Abu zant dragging us into the circles of hatred and violence or having a state-controlled fatwa that supports only the government?
This is our problem. As a secular I prefere to separate religion from state, but of this does not happen I prefer government fatwas than Abu fares fatwas. This is my opinion and I do not claim the ultimate right, unlike the MB.
from United States
said:I have to admit I'm a bit idealistic here.
At the end of the day, religion, politics, socialism, liberalism, capitalism, they are all ideas of how to organize our society.
The question is.. are all ideas equal?
If yes, and this is my idealistic position, then it doesn't harm to let each party use whatever "idea tools" to gather the people around it.
However, and this is your point, ideas are not created equal. Secularists in general (although not you), feel at times that religion is a voodoo magic that is much much more powerful than any other form of idea.
Thus, they say it's "unfair" to use these ideas.
It's similar to fighting off a duel: both parties must use similar weapons. It's unfair for one to use bigger weapons that the other.
If we consider religion a "stronger idea", then why that is? it seems to be because it fulfills a certain need, desire, or instinct for people. Ideas based on need or desire are stronger than ideas based on abstract thoughts.
However, and this is the second important question, even if it's stronger, does this mean political parties cannot use it?
Let's say that open-market policies caused a wide-spread poverty because most local industries crashed due to the global competition. People are poor and hugry. Is it illegal for a political party to "politicise hunger" in this case? For the party to call upon "all those who are hungry" to follow to fix the problem?
One can argue that hunger and poverty are even stronger needs, desires, or instincts than even religion.
In this second case, it seems to be very obvious that of course a political party is not only permitted but even encouraged to address the poverty problem.
If one allows the second case for hunger and poverty, why should one disallow the case for religion?
As an ideal
Add a Comment
<<Home
from United States
I don't understand how people like you and Nas, who defend civil freedoms, can endorse "state controlled religion"!!
Many secularists criticize Islamists for not "accepting democracy." However, once in a "democratic position", those same secularists try to ban Islamists by law - weakening the very same democracy they were defending!
I consider myself a secular, but I will never attack the Islamic Brotherhood on the basis of "politicizing religion". It is as if you're attacking socialists for "politicizing work-conditions" or attacking capitalists on "politicizing poverty".
Any political party is defined by a common ground that is shared by its supporters. Religion, food, morality, and any thing that interests the citizens of the country can be that shared ground.
The islamic brotherhood's common ground is the belief that "Islam is a Comprehensive System for society and it should be implemented".
They are not "using islam" - they believe that Islam is more than praying at the mosque, and (evidently) many people agree with them.
If you want to gain support for other political parties, you should convince the people, not use force (government laws) to prevent the islamic brotherhood from reaching them.