/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Secularization among Dutch Muslims



KAding
08-05-2009, 10:57 PM
Interesting statistics were published by the Dutch Statistics Office last week. I don't know about you guys, but I love statistics :statisfie. Among other things they measured the number of Muslims, Protestants and Catholics that went to church on a weekly and monthly basis and compared it with similar figures from 1998.

Religious beliefs in Holland:
- 48% of the population is Christian
  • 29% Catholics
  • 19% Protestants

- 5% is Muslim (825.000 people)
  • 95% have a non-Western background
  • 1.5% are converts to Islam (13.000)


In 1998 47% of the Muslims went to the mosque at least once a month. In 2008 this figure had dropped to 35%. About half of the Muslims in the Netherlands never or hardly ever go to the mosque. Among catholics the number of monthly churchgoers dropped from 31% to 23%. Among protestants the figures were much higher at 63% in 2008.

I found it most interesting that clearly Muslims are not immune to secularization and that later generations apparently really do become more relaxed about their religion. From my perspective this is a good thing, since I believe more religion will only create more divisions and more social tension. After all, religions are generally very good at fostering an 'us' vs. 'them' sentiment or at least that is often how it ends up. Another interesting figure was the number of converts as part of the total Muslim population. As far as I know very little research was done on that subject in any European country. At 1.5% the number of converts was actually higher then I expected, but it is still fairly negligible, with 98.5% of Muslims being born from Muslim parents.

I have a question though. Is going to the mosque mandatory in Islam? Or can one easily be a fully practicing Muslim without going to a mosque?

Source: http://www.cbs.nl/en-GB/menu/themas/...guageswitch=on
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Uthman
08-06-2009, 07:32 AM
:threadapp
Reply

Uthman
08-06-2009, 10:13 AM
Hi KAding
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding
Is going to the mosque mandatory in Islam? Or can one easily be a fully practicing Muslim without going to a mosque?
From Islam-QA: http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/8918/
Reply

Amadeus85
08-06-2009, 03:42 PM
There are more catholics than protestants in Netherlands? Thats suprising in this old motherland of reformation. I think that with the rise of secularization, there are also more divorces, lonely parents, fatherless children, children born out of family, adulteries, pornography, bigger apathy in the society (as the Dutches dont care what would happen with their country after their death, which is typical to atheists and agnostics). There are fewer children born at all without the rligious mandatory. With bigger secularization there are less chances for Netherlands to exist as a country with european culture in next century. Thats why Im always suprised when many europeans are in favour of secularization of society.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Uthman
08-06-2009, 05:30 PM
Obviously I am not pleased about the idea of secularised Muslims but I can see how there is a conflict between Islam and mainstream Western culture - having them together is a recipe for disaster (literally).

KAding, are you surprised that Muslims are not immune to secularisation?
Reply

Muezzin
08-06-2009, 05:41 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Uthmān
KAding, are you surprised that Muslims are not immune to secularisation?
I'm surprised. I thought it was part of the MMR vaccination.
Reply

Foxhole
08-06-2009, 09:44 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Amadeus85
There are more catholics than protestants in Netherlands? Thats suprising in this old motherland of reformation. I think that with the rise of secularization, there are also more divorces, lonely parents, fatherless children, children born out of family, adulteries, pornography, bigger apathy in the society (as the Dutches dont care what would happen with their country after their death, which is typical to atheists and agnostics). There are fewer children born at all without the rligious mandatory. With bigger secularization there are less chances for Netherlands to exist as a country with european culture in next century. Thats why Im always suprised when many europeans are in favour of secularization of society.
It's true, so many problems in the secularized west. Why can't they just follow the wonderful examples of all those societies that are governed by religion?

Can't they see how smoothly everything works if the citizens just obey the special people with special god powers, you know, the ones who appointed themselves?
Reply

Amadeus85
08-06-2009, 10:05 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Foxhole
It's true, so many problems in the secularized west. Why can't they just follow the wonderful examples of all those societies that are governed by religion?

Can't they see how smoothly everything works if the citizens just obey the special people with special god powers, you know, the ones who appointed themselves?
Maybe You didnt notice that the western secular people are simply dying out? Whats left of these goods, if this civilization wants to commit a mass suicide. I dont understand You at all dude.
Reply

KAding
08-09-2009, 05:33 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Uthmān
Obviously I am not pleased about the idea of secularised Muslims but I can see how there is a conflict between Islam and mainstream Western culture - having them together is a recipe for disaster (literally).
Well, at least based on how things are going now, yes it does seems a recipe for disaster and social conflict. But who knows, maybe in a few decades the whole Muslim vs. West fuss will have blown over. Just like Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and whatnot have no real problems living in the West nowadays either.

KAding, are you surprised that Muslims are not immune to secularisation?
No, I am not. I never thought they were, but that wasn't based on much hard data, just clever analysis ;). It was also somewhat wishful thinking though.

I think this is excellent news because it undermines the message of extremists on both sides. Claims by people like Wilders who keeps saying Muslims and the West cannot coexist fall flat if Muslims turn out to adopt more secular life-styles and identities. And Muslim extremism will have fewer chances of taking root, just like it has a hard time taking root in, say, Albania or Bosnia, simply because they have a more relaxed attitude towards their religion.
Reply

KAding
08-09-2009, 05:40 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Amadeus85
Maybe You didnt notice that the western secular people are simply dying out? Whats left of these goods, if this civilization wants to commit a mass suicide. I dont understand You at all dude.
'Secular people dying out'? I think you are missing an important point here. Birth rates aren't nearly as important as the mix of freedom of conscience , individual choice and social change. If birth rates are really that important then Christianity would never have lost ground in Europe, since everyone was born from Christian parents at one point. My parents were born to Christians who went to church weekly, yet my parents aren't religious. Orthodox groups have been having more children for ages, yet they are not getting any bigger demographically.

The whole point here is that people lose their religion or at least adopt a more private or secularized interpretation of religion. Many children of more orthodox believers will leave their parents way of life and religion as well. Or maybe it will be the other way around in the future, who knows, but that isn't determined primarily by birth rates but by social and cultural shifts IMHO.
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
08-09-2009, 05:55 PM
This is a ridiculous idea. Sorry big nope from me.
Reply

czgibson
08-09-2009, 06:06 PM
Greetings,

I think this is excellent news.

Less religion equals less opportunity for conflict. I'm not aware of any exceptions to that rule.

Peace
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
08-09-2009, 06:07 PM
^Thats nonsense! People will still find things to argue about and fight over. Humans r dumb like that...
Reply

czgibson
08-09-2009, 06:13 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Light of Heaven
^Thats nonsense! People will still find things to argue about and fight over. Humans r dumb like that...
If you're right, then religion just gives them one more thing to argue or fight about.

Peace
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
08-09-2009, 06:16 PM
Yet the focus is on religion....pretty.
Reply

czgibson
08-09-2009, 06:22 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Light of Heaven
Yet the focus is on religion....pretty.
Um, what?

:?

Peace
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
08-09-2009, 06:40 PM
^^ I should be asking you that. Answer?
Reply

Al-Zaara
08-09-2009, 06:51 PM
But these statistics are quite weak, I can't seem to find it strong, 'cause secularization is quite a wide term, whilst 'visit to the mosque' is not. Secularization equals less visits to the mosque/church?

(Less visits can be 'cause one is too busy with work that one has to clinge to in fear of today's high unemployment, doesn't show your religious side.. for example.)

non-western background.
I wonder what that is, everything outside Europe? What about the U.S. ?
I mean, I do consider ex-Yugoslavia to be in Western territories and with a "Western" past/present. But then again, I hear some who think Bosnia is not "west".

About statistics in general, I wish they were more detailed about their definitions.
Reply

czgibson
08-09-2009, 06:57 PM
Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by Light of Heaven
^^ I should be asking you that. Answer?
I'm sorry - you've lost me.

Peace
Reply

Al-Zaara
08-09-2009, 07:00 PM
^ May I try to help? I think she means there are so many other things which people argue about yet the focus is on religion being the 'all-time-bad' and thus ignores practically all other kinds of reasons.
Reply

KAding
08-09-2009, 08:35 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Light of Heaven
Thats nonsense! People will still find things to argue about and fight over. Humans r dumb like that...
Of course that is true, but also irrelevant. Yes there will always be social tensions or strife, but clearly in some countries/societies there is less of it then in others. That cannot be explained by simply saying 'people will still find things to aruge about and fight over', now can it?

Some societies are simply less divided, less fractured and less partisan then others. And as a consequence they are also less violent. You can see that everywhere by just comparing countries.

Yet the focus is on religion....pretty.
Religion plays a very important role, simply because to so many people religion is simply so fundamental in their life. It to a large extends determines their cultural habits, their identity, their political beliefs, their morals, etc...

Yes, some other beliefs do the same, such as nationalism or political ideologies in general. But few are as all-encompassing as religion.

Now, in general I am all for diversity, but there are also some serious risks involved if the rift between different social groups becomes too big. We can't just ignore that by saying 'oh people are just like that'. I'd rather not the Netherlands end up anything similar to, say, Thailand or the Philippines.
Reply

czgibson
08-09-2009, 09:26 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Al-Zaara
^ May I try to help? I think she means there are so many other things which people argue about yet the focus is on religion being the 'all-time-bad' and thus ignores practically all other kinds of reasons.
That would be an odd thing to say since no-one's mentioned religion being the "all-time bad" as far as I can see.

Thanks for trying to help. I suppose some things are just not meant to be understood. :)

Peace
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
08-09-2009, 11:18 PM
Yes sis Zaara.

It doesn't necessarily have to be here nor direct. But whether you'd like to admit it or not, those who do not associate themselves with religion per se or think people aught to be relaxed, feel religion is just about the worst reason.

And for this point I beg to differ!
Reply

north_malaysian
08-10-2009, 01:47 AM
If the Muslims are becoming more secularised in Holland..... why Geert Wilders is so scared of them?
Reply

Muezzin
08-11-2009, 02:07 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

I think this is excellent news.

Less religion equals less opportunity for conflict. I'm not aware of any exceptions to that rule.

Peace
Josef Stalin disagrees.

Or maybe he doesn't. I'm not sure if genocide counts as conflict or not. It's so one-sided.
Reply

czgibson
08-11-2009, 02:20 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Muezzin
Josef Stalin disagrees.

Or maybe he doesn't. I'm not sure if genocide counts as conflict or not. It's so one-sided.
He was a communist and the centre of a personality cult. That's like religion on double-strength!

I'm not saying "get rid of religion and then we'd have world peace", it's just that religion gives people one more thing to fight about. And because religious disputes are based on faith, no rational argument can ever say one side is right or wrong. That is why religious disputes are particularly intractable.

Religion causes more problems than it solves, and we need to grow out of it.

Peace
Reply

Muezzin
08-11-2009, 02:31 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

He was a communist and the centre of a personality cult. That's like religion on double-strength!
Ah, but communism is anti-religious. Arguably certain communists were so fervently anti-religious that they matched the fervour of religious zealots.

(I am not saying all anti-religious people are zealots, and I'm not saying all religious people are zealots either)

I'm not saying "get rid of religion and then we'd have world peace", it's just that religion gives people one more thing to fight about. And because religious disputes are based on faith, no rational argument can ever say one side is right or wrong. That is why religious disputes are particularly intractable.

Religion causes more problems than it solves, and we need to grow out of it.

Peace
I see where you're coming from, I truly do.

It's simply the case that people are always going to have religion. If not, they'll invent one. It answers a universal human need (whether it's perceived or real is the subject of another thread).

It's also simply the case that even were it to cease to exist, people would continue to fight. Kids and adults conflict over the silliest of things, be they secular or religious. Take away a reason to fight, and us good-old 'uman beans will manufacture one to take its place. It's like a mutated, man-made Hydra that now burps nerve gas and vomits atomic bombs.
Reply

Uthman
08-11-2009, 02:32 PM
Greetings czgibson
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
And because religious disputes are based on faith, no rational argument can ever say one side is right or wrong.
I don't know about other religions, but many people have converted to Islam based on a rational and logical approach.

And that reminds me; I have a reply outstanding to your post in the Is Islam based on faith? thread.

Just as well, because I was about to lead this thread off-topic. Shame on me. ;D

Regards
Reply

czgibson
08-11-2009, 03:20 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Muezzin
Ah, but communism is anti-religious. Arguably certain communists were so fervently anti-religious that they matched the fervour of religious zealots.
Yes, this is well-known. However, as your comment almost implies, the similarities between communism and religion are so obvious that it is now a commonplace to link the two. Like many world religions, it claims all other religions are false. It has its holy books, its hope for the redemption of mankind and an egalitarian society akin to paradise, and it has its heroes, who are venerated like saints.

This connection is not entirely new: a 1949 collection of essays by ex-communists, which was one of the first documents that made known to people in the West what life was like in the Soviet Union, was given the title The God That Failed.

Here are a couple of articles about communism as a religion:

The Hidden Link Between Communism And Religion

Was Communism The Last Big World Religion?

It's simply the case that people are always going to have religion. If not, they'll invent one. It answers a universal human need (whether it's perceived or real is the subject of another thread).
That's an interesting point. I agree that religion will probably always exist in some form, but it would be much better for us all if a majority of people could sublimate their religious impulses into something healthier, like, for instance, looking after the planet.

It's also simply the case that even were it to cease to exist, people would continue to fight.
Oh, I don't deny that for a moment.

Kids and adults conflict over the silliest of things, be they secular or religious. Take away a reason to fight, and us good-old 'uman beans will manufacture one to take its place. It's like a mutated, man-made Hydra that now burps nerve gas and vomits atomic bombs.
What a beautiful image. :D

format_quote Originally Posted by Uthman
I don't know about other religions, but many people have converted to Islam based on a rational and logical approach.
I'm really not convinced by that, unless you're talking about people who already believed in god in the first place. There is no rational reason to believe in god, but if you already do then I wouldn't have any major objection to calling a conversion to Islam a rational thing to do.

And that reminds me; I have a reply outstanding to your post in the Is Islam based on faith? thread.

Just as well, because I was about to lead this thread off-topic. Shame on me.
I don't believe that's even possible. :D

My I say how refreshing it is to have a discussion that isn't accompanied by all the insults and rudeness that too often plague these nether regions of the forum?

Thank you, sirs; I continue to hope for your very good health. :)

Peace
Reply

Amadeus85
08-11-2009, 06:11 PM
Czgibson if You want to eradicate divisions from the nations so why not get rid of parliamentarism, which divides Englanders, Germans, Frenchmen into socialists, conservatives, liberals, greens.
BTW, please dont match communism with religion. Its didgusting that nowadays atheists do that, as 50 years ago they would greet "uncle Joe" as the hope of progressive world. Thats a hypocrisy. Communism is a Enlightment in practice. Communism evolved from liberalism through socialism. Communism is the child of anglo-saxon materialism (just like neo liberal capitalism). Marx was inspired by english doctrines, marxism was a capitalism for the proletariat, based on the greed and invidualism (just like anglo saxon capitalism). It amazes me that some atheists want us believers in God, to apologize for crusades, jihads, jewish religious wars, but still, they, atheists, arent matured enough to admit that the atheistic, man made ideologies, communism, racism (born from darwinism) created worst cruelties seen by this Earth. In Miedival Holocaust couldnt have hapenned, it hapenned after Enlightment, was done by rational men in the name of man made ideology. Gulag, the grave of millions, in the name of progress and better world, without the religious superstitions. Communism a religion? Lenin, killing thousands priests and blowing up churches, would laugh that in 2009 some people really think that way. Communism might be seen as religion only by post modernistic mind, but following this way of thinking, Your atheism is also a religion, and You are a believer. I just call for some common sense.
Reply

czgibson
08-11-2009, 09:50 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Amadeus85
Czgibson if You want to eradicate divisions from the nations so why not get rid of parliamentarism, which divides Englanders, Germans, Frenchmen into socialists, conservatives, liberals, greens.
Good idea! It's a stupid system that forces people to adopt the party line when they might have different views to share. Mind you, I'm not sure what we'd replace it with.

BTW, please dont match communism with religion. Its didgusting that nowadays atheists do that, as 50 years ago they would greet "uncle Joe" as the hope of progressive world. Thats a hypocrisy.
I wasn't here fifty years ago, so I guess I'm off the hook on that one.

The atheists that did support Stalinism (and that's certainly not all of them) only did so before it became widely known that Stalin was a psychopath.

Communism is a Enlightment in practice. Communism evolved from liberalism through socialism. Communism is the child of anglo-saxon materialism (just like neo liberal capitalism).
Absolutely. Marx's lasting achievement is providing the most detailed critique of capitalism the world has seen. That is where the Enlightenment gave the impetus for his work. The proposed replacement, communism, is an idea that was too ideal to be practicable. For it to work, the leaders would have to be saints, honest to a degree that is simply impossible in politics.

Marx was inspired by english doctrines, marxism was a capitalism for the proletariat, based on the greed and invidualism (just like anglo saxon capitalism).
Marxism is capitalism for the proletariat? Could you just break that down for me a bit? I know I'm not always the quickest of cats, but that sounds a bit bonkers to me.

It amazes me that some atheists want us believers in God, to apologize for crusades, jihads, jewish religious wars, but still, they, atheists, arent matured enough to admit that the atheistic, man made ideologies, communism, racism (born from darwinism) created worst cruelties seen by this Earth.
First off, racism existed long before Darwin. I expect you have heard about slavery, to give one example.

Secondly, atheism on its own can't be held responsible for the atrocities you mention. Unquestioning faith in other dogmas is what allowed them to happen.

In Miedival Holocaust couldnt have hapenned, it hapenned after Enlightment, was done by rational men in the name of man made ideology.
You are surely aware of the centuries of persecution that Jews have been subjected to? The only reason six million Jews weren't killed in five years during the Middle Ages is that the technology didn't exist then. When the plague arrived in Europe in the 1340s and everyone was terrified and trying to work out what had caused it, guess who was top of the list of suspects? Jews were burned across Europe in huge numbers. If they could have killed six million, they would have.

Gulag, the grave of millions, in the name of progress and better world, without the religious superstitions. Communism a religion? Lenin, killing thousands priests and blowing up churches, would laugh that in 2009 some people really think that way.
He wouldn't laugh - he'd curse that he'd been found out. Where else did he learn the mechanics of how to maintain power? If you compare transcripts of the show trials under Stalin with medieval interrogations by the Inquisition, you will see remarkable similarities. Communism became the ideology of worship of the state, and if you want to teach people how to worship, what better tools are there to use than religious ones?

Communism might be seen as religion only by post modernistic mind, but following this way of thinking, Your atheism is also a religion, and You are a believer. I just call for some common sense.
Yes, I'm definitely a believer in atheism. I don't know there's no god, I just believe it. So we can agree there's faith involved.

Does this make atheism a religion? No.

Where are its holy books? Where are its dogmas, prophets and saints? What is atheism's "promised land" or paradise? What are its traditions and rituals? When are its feast days?

Atheism is far too simple to be a religion. People believe in it because they admit the strength of a single proposition: "there is no god". Religions need a lot more than that to hoodwink people into believing them.

Peace
Reply

Amadeus85
08-11-2009, 11:45 PM
[QUOTE=czgibson;1200271]Greetings,



I wasn't here fifty years ago, so I guess I'm off the hook on that one.
Just like I didnt live during Crusades, Woodrow didnt live during islamic conquest of India and some Jew didnt live in a time when jews were conquesting Philistines, but You still think that we should apologize for those acts. Believe me, in my country communism existed for 50 years, the words atheist and communist meant almost same. Of course some atheists were trockists, some even more marxist than the Polish United Workers' Party. In 50' and 60 there were plenty of people like Dawkins, the personal enemies of the God, with same shine in their eyes, with same pride. Now they speak about those times with shame, they are forgotten, just like will be mr Dawkins in year 2050.


Absolutely. Marx's lasting achievement is providing the most detailed critique of capitalism the world has seen. That is where the Enlightenment gave the impetus for his work. The proposed replacement, communism, is an idea that was too ideal to be practicable. For it to work, the leaders would have to be saints, honest to a degree that is simply impossible in politics.

You are aware that terror was already included there, in marxism? The revolution fighting with capitalists. So this is the finest system?


Marxism is capitalism for the proletariat? Could you just break that down for me a bit? I know I'm not always the quickest of cats, but that sounds a bit bonkers to me.
Yes it is, capitalism was based on the will of profit by the owners, and the communism was based on will of profit by the workers. Same greed, same individualism, internationalism.



Secondly, atheism on its own can't be held responsible for the atrocities you mention. Unquestioning faith in other dogmas is what allowed them to happen
.

The connection between atheism is bigger than You think.


You are surely aware of the centuries of persecution that Jews have been subjected to? The only reason six million Jews weren't killed in five years during the Middle Ages is that the technology didn't exist then. When the plague arrived in Europe in the 1340s and everyone was terrified and trying to work out what had caused it, guess who was top of the list of suspects? Jews were burned across Europe in huge numbers. If they could have killed six million, they would have.
You are very wrong, You remember about the Thou Shall Not Kill comandment? Europe those times were under spiritual rule of the Roman Catholic Church, killing innocent people was and always is against religion. You mention some actions when catholics did break the commandments, but are You aware that during the Crusades bishops were defending jews against lynches? The history of antisemitism is a time when anti jewish riots did happen, but for most of the time, which is over 1 thousand years, jews and christians did live in peace, both in own closed communities, both didnt like each other, but no one even thought about the Final Solution of The Jewish Cause. It was against religion and the religion then ruled the people. Holocaust as well as Gulag were possible just after the mind for many people replaced the faith. When rationalism won with religion. Because for Germans, killing of jews was rational (because of economical reasons) but it was against religion. In polish language words Aushwitz (Oświęcim) and Enlightemnt(Oświecenie) sound alike, I think that its not a mistake. Only the secular man, not fearing of hellfire, in the name of man made ideology, could have kill 6 million people in death factories. On the other part of the world, the idol of the progressive world and the left, the one who eradicated religious suspicion from eastern and central Europe, Joseph Stalin, killed dozens millions. Well, thats a price of a progress, as many leftists and atheists were saying.

He wouldn't laugh - he'd curse that he'd been found out. Where else did he learn the mechanics of how to maintain power? If you compare transcripts of the show trials under Stalin with medieval interrogations by the Inquisition, you will see remarkable similarities. Communism became the ideology of worship of the state, and if you want to teach people how to worship, what better tools are there to use than religious ones?
I know that for atheists comparing communism to religion is just another level of your eternal war against religion, but here you all should think twice about the thousands of priests killed by this system, about dozens thousands of simple believers who lost life because of it. I wonder if you ever lived in communistic country, well I have lived. When in 80's communists were killing polish priests they didnt do it in the name of another )marxist) religion, but in name of atheist and eraditication of all religions. It was their aim, to destroy christianity, islam, judaism. If You search for the roots of communism so search in French Revolution, with the first genocide (Vandea). So I will say again, it is immoral and hypocritical for the religious victims of communism that now many atheists link that jacobin and enlightment doctrine with religion. It same as if You link national socialism (another ******* son of enlightment) with judaism.



Atheism is far too simple to be a religion. People believe in it because they admit the strength of a single proposition: "there is no god". Religions need a lot more than that to hoodwink people into believing them.
I think that we should stick to the traditional meanind of the word religion. Christianity, judaism, islam, those are religions. Doctrines, ideologies are not. Communism was not a religion, it was anti religion, as it didnt teach about God, and was against God.
Reply

AntiKarateKid
08-11-2009, 11:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding
Well, at least based on how things are going now, yes it does seems a recipe for disaster and social conflict. But who knows, maybe in a few decades the whole Muslim vs. West fuss will have blown over. Just like Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and whatnot have no real problems living in the West nowadays either.



No, I am not. I never thought they were, but that wasn't based on much hard data, just clever analysis ;). It was also somewhat wishful thinking though.

I think this is excellent news because it undermines the message of extremists on both sides. Claims by people like Wilders who keeps saying Muslims and the West cannot coexist fall flat if Muslims turn out to adopt more secular life-styles and identities. And Muslim extremism will have fewer chances of taking root, just like it has a hard time taking root in, say, Albania or Bosnia, simply because they have a more relaxed attitude towards their religion.
It doesn't undermine "extremists" who say Muslims and the West cannot coexist. Those people who neglect to visit the Mosque are abandoning Islam and thus are not acting as Muslims. If they were fully observant Muslims living in the West with no problems then you may have a point.

One thing just struck me. Muslims can pray in their homes and do so 5 times a day. Just because they don't visit the Mosque doesn't mean they aren't praying at home. It is different for the Christians who don't have much direction on how to pray at home. I myself was religious but neglected to actually visit the Mosque in favor of praying at home regularly
Reply

czgibson
08-12-2009, 01:32 AM
Greetings Amadeus85,

I can see what you're saying, but I don't think you can see what I'm saying. We've just got two different interpretations of history.

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

Peace
Reply

AntiKarateKid
08-12-2009, 01:53 AM
I don't think these results mean as much as you think. Islamic worship can be easily done at home, though we are encouraged to pray in a congregation. As opposed to Christian worship which is usually associated with visiting the Church. I myself prayed at home for a long time and didn't go to the Mosque, yet still didn't consider myself secular at all.
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
08-12-2009, 01:25 PM
Yea and you gotta remember most women pray at home. They probably haven't been counted...so stats can vary.
Reply

KAding
08-18-2009, 07:43 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by AntiKarateKid
I don't think these results mean as much as you think. Islamic worship can be easily done at home, though we are encouraged to pray in a congregation. As opposed to Christian worship which is usually associated with visiting the Church. I myself prayed at home for a long time and didn't go to the Mosque, yet still didn't consider myself secular at all.
An excellent point! Though of course, the trend of mosque attendance is downwards, so somehow people are practicing their religion differently. I'm having a bit of a hard time figuring out reasons for that. At the very least it means a more personal religious experience? The drop in mosque attendance was after all quite significant.

On Christianity, I am not actually sure if Christians consider going to church a duty? Perhaps some Christians could comment on that?
Reply

glo
08-18-2009, 07:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding
On Christianity, I am not actually sure if Christians consider going to church a duty? Perhaps some Christians could comment on that?
I cannot speak for all Christians, of course.
Many people would consider going to church and worshipping in a congregation as beneficial, but I am not sure that it is generally considered 'duty'. (Those days when people were arrested and fined for not attending church are well and truly over! :D)

Speaking for myself, I love going to church and always consider it as a time to be with like-minded people, to worship God in a congregation, to recharge spiritually, to learn and also to socialise.

I know a number people who call themselves Christians, but who for various reasons are disillusioned with church and don't attend church services.

Some have 'house churches' or 'house groups' and meet in people's houses for prayer and Bible study, rather than going to a church.

There are also a number of 'virtual churches', which offer prayer and support, even regular services and sermons ... so there are alternatives to the traditional church service.
Reply

Muezzin
08-20-2009, 06:53 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding
An excellent point! Though of course, the trend of mosque attendance is downwards, so somehow people are practicing their religion differently. I'm having a bit of a hard time figuring out reasons for that. At the very least it means a more personal religious experience? The drop in mosque attendance was after all quite significant.
I'll use an honoured political tactic: when in doubt, blame the credit crunch! (Sorry, the 'global financial crisis')

Maybe people are trying to save on fuel costs, so rather than attending the mosque for prayer, they choose to pray at home.
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
08-20-2009, 08:09 PM
There may be several reasons why mosque attendance is low...so stats in this case I wouldn't consider accurate...
Reply

GuestFellow
08-20-2009, 08:49 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

I think this is excellent news.

Less religion equals less opportunity for conflict. I'm not aware of any exceptions to that rule.

Peace
Greetings,

I doubt it. Even if there was no religion in the world there will still be conflict. People will always find something to complain about. I'm curious what types of conflict are you referring to? I get a feeling people put all the blame of today’s world problems on religion.
Reply

czgibson
08-21-2009, 12:04 AM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Guestfellow
Greetings,

I doubt it. Even if there was no religion in the world there will still be conflict.
I agree. If you read my post again, you'll see that it doesn't actually contradict what you've said here.

People will always find something to complain about. I'm curious what types of conflict are you referring to? I get a feeling people put all the blame of today’s world problems on religion.
To do so would definitely be wrong. Human failings are all too obvious.

One conflict I'm referring to would be the never-ending Israel-Palestine dispute. Was it entirely caused by religion? No. However, I'm convinced that religion is one of the main things that makes it so difficult to end. When people are certain that god is on their side, no rational argument can convince them otherwise. And so it continues.

Take religion out of the equation, and it would be far easier to solve.

Placing the holiest sites of the three largest monotheistic religions within a few hundred miles of each other also shows a remarkable lack of foresight by the creator, but that's another issue.

Peace
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
08-21-2009, 01:46 AM
Placing the holiest sites of the three largest monotheistic religions within a few hundred miles of each other also shows a remarkable lack of foresight by the creator, but that's another issue.

Peace
Nah we humans are too stingy. We give people the opportunity for others to ridicule God, when it is but us with the shortcomings. I see it more for unity purposes..the fact that we have something in common...
Reply

Bittersteel
09-21-2009, 02:44 PM
Less religion equals less opportunity for conflict. I'm not aware of any exceptions to that rule.
Coming this from someone like you,it is very disappointing.
I fail to find the rationality in your statement or that of the thread starter.Why blame religion when people are to blame?
and besides when you provoke someone isn't it natural to get a response?After all it was an European,a British in fact,who stated "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."
Reply

Zone Maker
09-21-2009, 03:37 PM
It is a known fact that land, resource, etc are the main causes of war.
When I read the post that says "religion causes conflict" it reminds of a joke that says:
(How many eggs does a rooster lay?)
Reply

GuestFellow
09-21-2009, 04:31 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

One conflict I'm referring to would be the never-ending Israel-Palestine dispute. Was it entirely caused by religion? No. However, I'm convinced that religion is one of the main things that makes it so difficult to end. When people are certain that god is on their side, no rational argument can convince them otherwise. And so it continues.

Take religion out of the equation, and it would be far easier to solve.

Placing the holiest sites of the three largest monotheistic religions within a few hundred miles of each other also shows a remarkable lack of foresight by the creator, but that's another issue.

Peace
I disagree to some extent. I read this book: Teach Yourself the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

ISBN-10: 0340943254

It is mostly political orientated. I would avoid listening to the media since it never did portrays the true aspect of this conflict from both sides. Muslims, Jews and Christians lived very peacefully in Palestine...

Besides the problem the world face are not religious based at all. Poverty, corruption, global warming and the energy crisis. These problems even without religion shall still exist.

Forget about fighting over land. Just worry about looking after the environment otherwise we will have nothing to fight for. =/
Reply

czgibson
09-21-2009, 08:08 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Guestfellow
I disagree to some extent. I read this book: Teach Yourself the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

ISBN-10: 0340943254

It is mostly political orientated. I would avoid listening to the media since it never did portrays the true aspect of this conflict from both sides. Muslims, Jews and Christians lived very peacefully in Palestine...

Besides the problem the world face are not religious based at all. Poverty, corruption, global warming and the energy crisis. These problems even without religion shall still exist.

Forget about fighting over land. Just worry about looking after the environment otherwise we will have nothing to fight for. =/
Here's something I wrote about one of your previous responses to a post of mine:

I agree. If you read my post again, you'll see that it doesn't actually contradict what you've said here.

The same applies here.

Peace
Reply

GuestFellow
09-21-2009, 08:14 PM
^
I'm simply stating that religion is not the direct cause of conflicts. Just simply used as a motivational factor. Just like nationalism. People just use nationalism to justify war and brutality.

People will find other ways of justifying war and conflicts.
Reply

Karl
09-21-2009, 11:12 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

I think this is excellent news.

Less religion equals less opportunity for conflict. I'm not aware of any exceptions to that rule.

Peace
Less religion equals more communism, socialism, feminism and all other nasty isms imsad
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 04-09-2008, 11:00 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-22-2007, 07:20 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-20-2006, 07:33 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-18-2006, 06:44 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-22-2005, 08:34 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!