Since religion works on a reward system, more good deeds "7asanat" than bad deed "saye'aat", is good for you and is the only way for paradise, then certainly the more good deeds you do the better of you are once you die. Therefore, all your behavior is influenced by this idea.
So if one had the opportunity to do a good deed, wouldn’t he do it? I would, and so would you. Given that you're a normal human being!
So how can I get more good deeds? Just follow what god wants you to do, do good. That seems easy.
So, if I segregate boys and girls in schools, deny her the right to vote, ban her from driving, like in Saudi Arabia and make her wear the Hijab like in Iran also, soon in Kuwait. That must be good.
Religion needs to function for the benefit of society. The driver of religion was the individually motivated gainer, or the minority group of gainers where as the society as a whole never benefits. And if you pay attention at a micro level, the amount of individuals losing the opportunity of free will and a chance to decide, can lead to a behavior counter to what religion was meant to achieve.
And if you continue to do what you think god wants you to do while you take no notice of the issues concerning society then you are mistaken.
----update----
So if one had the opportunity to do a good deed, wouldn’t he do it? I would, and so would you. Given that you're a normal human being!
So how can I get more good deeds? Just follow what god wants you to do, do good. That seems easy.
So, if I segregate boys and girls in schools, deny her the right to vote, ban her from driving, like in Saudi Arabia and make her wear the Hijab like in Iran also, soon in Kuwait. That must be good.
Religion needs to function for the benefit of society. The driver of religion was the individually motivated gainer, or the minority group of gainers where as the society as a whole never benefits. And if you pay attention at a micro level, the amount of individuals losing the opportunity of free will and a chance to decide, can lead to a behavior counter to what religion was meant to achieve.
And if you continue to do what you think god wants you to do while you take no notice of the issues concerning society then you are mistaken.
----update----
error: but this will not solve the problem! i said
Legislator: I shall do what pleases god. he answered
If an individual takes an action that will effect the community motivated by an afterlife reward then the action will output a negative result for that community.
Also if that same individual takes an action that will effect the community motivated by a reward in any given lifetime then the action will output a positive result for that community.
8 comments:
Notice how the most of their agenda's have to do with oppressing women?
I think it is just their way to 'save' themselves from their perverse sexuality.
Frankly these guys stare more than a rowdy teenager would. Then get this growl on their faces when you catch them, like it was your fault he was staring.
So they want to hide away the women lest they fall into temptation.
The concept of restrictive measures in Arab society stem all the way back since the pre-Islamic age. Muslims in the Asian world do not enforce such measures onto their women in the name of Islami as we do since it wasn't part of their social system to begin with.
The ant-women's lib movement, here in Kuwait at least, are using Islam as justification for stamping women's rights as well as other social rights, there's no ambiguity to this fact.
One can twist & turn his or her version of social values any which way, the mere fact that social equality among the sexes is stipulated very clearly, in both scripture and legal code, makes useless any justifications to it's denial by anyone. Implementation and conceptualization are totally different issues altogether.
Logic aside, i think these guys have a psychological condition that mandates them to enforce their manhood in public, probably because they're not able to do so in their own bedrooms.
It's just a matter of different priorities and human nature/instinct (psycology/biology 101). Imagine if banks do not have safes, and instead they store all their money in boxes next to the door! Even the rich would be tempted! Much like your immune system (in most people, it stops minor threats/viruses; but not everyone out on the street has the same level of immunity; sometimes it is their fault for not eating good and keeping healthy, but we don't control that in people out on the street! That's between the person and their Lord).
It is not objective to blame this approach on 'their perverse sexuality'!! This basic instinct is required for the human race to go on (otherwise, no young person in their right mind would think about getting married with all the responsibility and demands that come with marriage; and after marriage, you'd loose interest too quick, thus also affecting procreation). At the same time, this instinct is part of the 'test' of this life, just like adhering to the behavior/dress code in public is part of the 'test'.
I'm frankly sick of tired of some who always play the 'their perverse sexuality/enforce mandhood' card to undermine those with more conservative views on this. Who told you that's what on your mind? It may not affect them this way, but they are worried about others who may be affected and the ramifications to the society (back to the immunity analogy: even if it is someone else who gets infected, the society still suffers through spread of infections and medical treatment costs!)
Having said all that, I submit to you that some 'restrictions' as advocated by many 'conservatives' may be too much or overboard, but that does not negate the fact that some 'restrictions' and proper public behavior are required for the public good (what you do at your own home if your own business!! just don't wear your lingere and go out in public/the street!!)
----
مجهولون اعتدوا على فتاة متغيبة حتى فقدت الوعي في بر الدوحة
Unknown individuals attack/molest a girl until she lost conciousness in Doha desert,Kuwait.
تخضع فتاة الى العلاج في مستشفى الصباح لمساعدة رجال الامن في معرفة هوية من اعتدى عليها حتي أفقدها للوعي وهل من اعتدى عليها شخص أم عدة اشخاص وكان مواطن ابلغ عن وجود فتاة شبه متوفيه وبنقلها للعلاج اكد الاطباء ان هناك اعتداء وقع عليها حيث فقدت الوعي وبالاستعلام على الفتاة تبين ان هناك قضية تغيب مسجلة من جانب ذويها
خلاص سو اللي تبيه
ماني ضاغط عليك
Loool!
I had a chance to discuss the issue of discussing these issues on the net/blogs with those with more experience.
I was adviced that it all boils down to agreeing on the premises first. If we don't agree on the common premises, there cannot be a debate/discussion.
The basic premises we need to consider here in this discussion are (just because they are 'premises' does not mean they are just assumed and cannot be proven; I'm just pointing out that the discussions such as this one cannot be undertaken in an objective manner before discussing/prooving/agreeing on these pre-requisite premises):
1- The Creator exits
2- The Creator can/is able to send Prophets.
3- He did indeed send Prophets, the last of which is the Prophet Mohammad, to convey His commandments.
4- Prophet Mohammad was sent with the Qu'ran and he also did and said things; this constitues issues that are of varying logical degrees of being required (Must do:Wajib, Must not do:Haram, can do with reward:Mandoub, shouldn't do but without punishment if you do do:Makrouh, and permissable/mubah: no reward and no punishment if you do)
5- After all these premises, we switch gears into logic and deductive sciences/theories; in other words, we use our minds as best as we can as we were ordered to ponder and use our minds by the Creator in the Qur'an.
There are those who made it their life mission and dedicated their mind and time to be the best at deducing the principles on how to use the premises above in our life (Sciences of Usul-Fiqh/Principles of Jurisprudence, Jurisprudence/verdicts and other branches.
So, #5 is best effort approach. Whereby, you would be pressed by common sense to adhere to the results, just like you would adhere to medical opinions in your life and you would be labeled 'errorneous' (pun intended ;p ) if you do not adhere (of course, like any other similar field, there are those who stray out of the fold, even doctors; so there is also a logically deduced requirement on whose opinion can be trusted and whose opinion cannot be trusted or is negligable when compared to those who are on higher levels; example: if you get a medical opinion that conflicts with that of a higher level doctor(s) who are higher ranked based on a logical ctrieria, e.g. years of experience/speciality, then you wouldn't be rational if you don't take the opinion of the highest ranking one, unless you had a choice between opinions of equally high ranking doctors of course; the example of which is the four schools of thought/Mathahib in Islamic jurisprudence). The science of Principles of Jurisprudence covers the details of the criteria to use to evaluate/choose those of trustworthy credentials to give/deduce opinions/verdicts.
" I cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue, unexercised and unbreathed, that never sallies out and sees her adversary, but slinks out of the race where that immortal garland is to be run for, not without dust and heat.
Milton, John
Areopagitica: A speech for the Liberty of Unlicensed Printing to the Parliament of England
Without the ability to choose to be moral, Milton says, there is no morality.
In a nation-state which contains a diversity of belief, the LAWS need to be pertinent and relevant and acceptable to all citizens, even, I would suggest, resident non-citizens. Prohibit alcohol if you want (I don't think it is very effective), prohibit serving pork, OK, but when people start mandating specific religious clothing, that goes too far.
I believe it is not unreasonable to ask us to cover ourselves from elbow to knee - isn't that the traditional requirement?
BTW - Great entry, Error. :-)
Miya
yes you have a point there, but I think thats only one dimension of a greater issue. Them being as such has to do with a deprivation of certain privileges they once had. Men are men after all.
Aggz
it is a psychological issue to a certain extent but it is also widely greater than that
abu
the scope of this topic does not extend to a broader audience in this case i.e. none-believers and even between believers some premises are widely controversial especially logic because belief has nothing logical to it.
ma6goog
write shorter posts .
intlxpatr
unfortunately we're highly immoral society and I think thats due to need and scarcity of avail.
Thank you :)
Post a Comment