Who wants to live in a theocracy?

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi KAding,

That is simply incorrect. The overwhelming majority of Muslims are born Muslims. These 98+% never made the choice, yet they are still bound by it.

What is incorrect? It is true the overwhelming majority of Muslims today are born Muslims, but it is incorrect to say that means they didn't make a choice. You can see for yourself on this forum all of us who were born and raised as Muslims who love Islam and choose to follow it.

Again, I draw the analogy with Judaism. The overwhelming majority of Jews are born Jews, even moreso than Islam since they discourage conversions. It is wrong to conclude from that that they reluctantly follow their faith.

Besides, that was not my point. My point was that Fishman demands a religious government, while at the same time ignoring the fact that a religious government in the UK would have prevented him from becoming a Muslim. It would have denied him his salvation!

Not so; Fishman used to be atheist, not Christian. [post] Also from the article on Commonly Misquoted Verses and Narrations:

However, one who personally abandons the faith and leaves the country would not be hunted down and assassinated, nor would one who remains inside the state conforming to outward laws be tracked down and executed. The notion of establishing inquisition courts to determine peoples' faith, as done in the Spanish Inquisition, is something contrary to Islamic law. As illustrated by the historical context in which it was mandated, the death penalty is mainly for those who collaborate with enemy forces in order to aid them in their attacks against the Islamic state or for those who seek to promote civil unrest and rebellion from within the Islamic state. When someone publicly announces their rejection of Islam within an Islamic state it is basically a challenge to the Islamic government, since such an individual can keep it to themselves like the personal affair it is made out to be. (Main article)
​

The same goes for Muslims wanting to become Christians or atheist in Islamic states. It prevents people from choosing their own path to achieve happiness and/or salvation.

This is the fallacy I outlined above. If you want to make religion purely a private affair and personal choice for salvation, then keep it like that.

Islam-QA does not talk about harm in relation to apostasy.

But I do:
http://www.load-islam.com/artical_d...ection=wel_islam&subsection=Misconceptions#28

Peace

 

[wilberhum]

Im A Muslim But Id Prefer To Live In A Seculoar Government-because If I Was To Live Under A Country Imposing Islamic Law, Id Be Pretty Sure That Theyd Use The Religion To Control The Masses And To Enhance Their Power Over The Country. The Prob Is That Power Corrupts. At Least In A Secular Country The Governmet Isnt Using The Name Of Religion In Vein In Order To Justify Despicable Acts As The Taliban Did.

Well Nishom gets the point. Id Be Pretty Sure That Theyd Use The Religion To Control The Masses And To Enhance Their Power Over The Country. I’m pretty sure too. That is the nature of man. People will distort the meaning of the religious laws with there own interpretation. The major problem then for a citizen is that isn’t taking on the government, he is taking on god. That is an action that could cost you your life.
I do not see these problems being limited to Islam; I see them as problems with all governments that claim a state religion.

 

[Muezzin]

I think that problem is present in some way in every form of Government, to be fair. It's not right, it's just part of being human, unfortunately.

 

[snakelegs]

i wonder how much freedom would a muslim be allowed in an islamic theocracy?
would the gov't force him to pray 5 times a day?
in general, how much force would the government use to be sure a muslim is following his religion properly?

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Well if we speak of a hypotetical state that follows the rules of the shariah then there are strict rules to what it can and cannot do. It has to follow the Qur'an and sunnah. Example, it cannot force someone to pray as the Qur'an states:

Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things. (Qur’an 2:256)

 

[north_malaysian]

i wonder how much freedom would a muslim be allowed in an islamic theocracy?
would the gov't force him to pray 5 times a day?
in general, how much force would the government use to be sure a muslim is following his religion properly?

In Malaysia, the government doesnt care whether you perform the 5 daily prayers....but there are so strict with Friday prayer observation.... you can be fined for not performing the Friday Prayer in Malaysia. But as all religious officers are at the mosque during that time, thus nobody been caught for that offence.

Yeah... in Ramadhan, the religious officers would go to the streets and would catch any Muslims who are eating in the public .... in some states, they would be paraded around the town in funeral cars.... That's why Ramadhan observation is so high in Malaysia... even those who never pray... also fast.

 

[snakelegs]

since a coalition of religious parties MMA has been in power in pakistan's frontier province, people must pray.
steve, does this sound like the famous "let there be no compulsion in religion" to you?
do you think that they are acting unislamically?
i don't think muslims would be free to not practice their religion, in an islamic state. how can anyone be forced to pray?
and as n_m has said even in malaysia, which is not that strictly islamic as some muslim countries - you can get fined for not praying the friday prayers.
does islam believe that god values the prayers of someone who is praying because the gov't punishes him if he doesn't?
do you think the government should force you to practice your religion? would you like to live in a state with morality police?

 

[mehnaz]

Assalamoalaikum,

theocracy is fine with me as long as the state religion is Islam!!

W'salaam

 

[north_malaysian]

as n_m has said even in malaysia, which is not that strictly islamic as some muslim countries - you can get fined for not praying the friday prayers.

Actually, there was a big debate among Muslims in Malaysia regarding to Morality police. Some liberal Muslims insisted that it's personal sins and would injured no one.... so no need for moral policing around.

Currently, more than 90% of Muslims in Malaysia wants the government to keep on doing this practice, the Muslim public really behind the religious officers and some organised their own religious police groups.... that's why Malaysians have to state their religious affiliation on their ID card.

 

[Woodrow]

since a coalition of religious parties MMA has been in power in pakistan's frontier province, people must pray.
steve, does this sound like the famous "let there be no compulsion in religion" to you?
do you think that they are acting unislamically?
i don't think muslims would be free to not practice their religion, in an islamic state. how can anyone be forced to pray?
and as n_m has said even in malaysia, which is not that strictly islamic as some muslim countries - you can get fined for not praying the friday prayers.
does islam believe that god values the prayers of someone who is praying because the gov't punishes him if he doesn't?
do you think the government should force you to practice your religion? would you like to live in a state with morality police?

Sometimes laws are for the benefit of the people and not for the control of the masses.

At first glance this looks very harsh and is enforced worship.

you can get fined for not praying the friday prayers

Now let us take another view as to what else that law does.

It prevents an employer from firing a worker for taking time off to pray.

It establishes definite closing times for businesses and prevents some from unfair competitive practices by being open during prayer when most will be closed.

 

[north_malaysian]

Sometimes laws are for the benefit of the people and not for the control of the masses.

At first glance this looks very harsh and is enforced worship.



Now let us take another view as to what else that law does.

It prevents an employer from firing a worker for taking time off to pray.

It establishes definite closing times for businesses and prevents some from unfair competitive practices by being open during prayer when most will be closed.

Any employer who prevented his workers from doing his friday prayer would be fined by the government too......

 

[snakelegs]

i don't know, maybe it's because i'm a "westerner" - i just can't understand this concept about being forced to pray and how it could be a good thing. even if i belonged to the same religion as the theocratic government, i would not like government sticking its nose in to my degree of religious practice.
how is this "let there be no compulsion in religion"?
i say thank god for secularism! to each his own.

 

[north_malaysian]

how is this "let there be no compulsion in religion"?

This ONLY applicable for converting Non Muslims to Islam by force....


Actually our gov't wants to show Non Muslims that Muslims are religion-abiding people.

If a Muslim man going shopping in Carrefour during Friday Prayer time, of course the Non Muslims would say .... "You see, they says that Friday Prayer is obligatory for Muslim man, the gov't even ordered all employers to give extra times for 2 hours for them to do it.... so this man got his extra hour break but refuse to pray ... is it fair that nothing happen to him?"

 

[snakelegs]

This ONLY applicable for converting Non Muslims to Islam by force....]

i didn't know that - thanks for info!

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

i don't know, maybe it's because i'm a "westerner" - i just can't understand this concept about being forced to pray and how it could be a good thing. even if i belonged to the same religion as the theocratic government, i would not like government sticking its nose in to my degree of religious practice.
how is this "let there be no compulsion in religion"?
i say thank god for secularism! to each his own.

Hi Snakelges,
I don't know if you saw one of my earlier posts in this thread on the issue of compulsion for Muslims:

the state doesn't care about what they do in private so long as they are not harming society physically or morally

Wait. Are you implying that in a country run by Shariah law, if you commit adultry in "private" the so called "religious police" will not judge you according to religious law? I was under a major impression from many Muslims here that Shariah law intrudes in your private affairs as well as public. Could you please clear up for me if Shariah law enforces religion in ones private life or not.

The punishment for adultery requires 4 individual witnesses. There is a purpose for this massive burden of evidence. As Shaykh Abdul-Wahhab At-Turayri, former Professor at Al-Imam Univeristy [Riyadh, Saudi Arabia], writes:

The punishments for fornication and adultery are designed more to protect society from the open practice of licentious sexual behavior than they are designed to punish people.

It is nearly impossible to get a conviction for adultery except in a case where it is carried out in public for all eyes to see. With this threat of severe punishment, people will keep their evil deeds concealed and society as a whole will be protected.
​

So if someone commits a sin in private, they will be held accountable before God for that sin. But the function of the Islamic state, in terms of penal law, is to protect the society from harm. If people practice immoral deeds publicly then they are not only sinning themselves, but they are harming the society by spreading their immorality, and it is the latter action that requires the intervention of the state.

We can also look at the same issue from the opposite perspective. It is very easy for a person to skip one of the daily prayers without anyone knowing. It is very easy to break the fast in the middle of the day, sneak a bite, while everyone else thinks you are still fasting. If someone sins in private then God will hold them accountable for it but there is no way the state can get involved in the personal private affairs of the people.

The Islamic state preserves both the security and morality of its society. At the same time it is not there to police the personal commitment of individuals before God. It is God alone who will deal with those who sinned against Him and did not fulfill their obligations. If someone skips his prayers in private, or violates his fast, or drinks alcohol hidden away from society, it is of no concern to the state so long as it is not affecting the society. God alone will punish the perpetrator of such sins. But if someone's sins enter into the public domain then it is obligatory for the state to step in and prevent the spread of sin and this is where people are compelled to abide by the laws. This is why a person has the opportunity to repent before their sin becomes public but if it comes before the state the punishment is given to function as both deterrence and denunciation of the sin so as to prevent it from spreading. Did you know that if a Muslim sees another Muslim commiting sins he is actually to conceal that? The Prophet said: The Muslim who conceals the faults of another Muslim, Allah wil conceal his faults on the Day of Resurrection. (Sahîh Muslim). One is to follow the Prophetic method of correcting the other person privately and advising them kindly. Also, a Muslim is forbidden from spying on another Muslim; Qur'an 49:12 And do not spy nor backbite one another. Islam is not about digging out the defects of people and dragging them into public to be disciplined. Nor is it about monitoring one's relationship with God. These are things for which each individual is accountable for.

how can anyone be forced to pray?

Concerning prayer, Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips provides valuable comments on this issue, paraphrased from an audio lecture as follows:

There is no compulsion to join the religion. This is the point...
Also, there is compulsion in the society - as we spoke about earlier - where hijab is obligatory. There is compulsion there. Salat is obligatory. There is compulsion there: people have to close their businesses down, people are obliged to go to the prayers.
Some people raise objection to that also. "Why?" [they ask]. "You're forcing people" - like in Saudi Arabia when the time comes to pray, shops are closed, people have to go to prayer. [...]If you consider the issue of a person who goes and [prays because they are forced to], some will say, "What kind of prayer is this? There is no value in his prayer. So why drive him in the Masjid? Let him go by his choice." Well the point is that in an Islamic state you will have this principle that people will be obliged to go to the Masjid, even if they don't want to. And if they go and they pray a hypocrites prayer - they're praying but they don't really believe in it, they're just going through the motions - still from the Islamic perspective it is better that they do that than that they stay outside and not pray and then become a fitnah for other people whose faith is weak. So for the protection of the society as a whole, the Islamic law doesn't have a problem with some people going in and praying as hypocrites. Because some people will object ot this issue saying, "Why should you force people to pray?" So the point is that if they don't pray outside because they dont have the motivation to pray, [then] they dont get any reward, they're in sin. If they go inside and they pray because they were forced, they didn't have the intention, [then] they don't get any reward and they're in sin. It's the same. Relative to themselves and to Allah it is the same, in that sense. However, relative to the society as a whole it is better. (Philips, Contemporary Issues, CD 8, track 4, 2:02-4:48)
​

One may say, "Well, why are there people of weak faith that may be influenced by this?" Again the response is that Islam is about helping to strengthen our brethren who may be weaker than us in their commitment to God. It is not about abandoning them to the tricks of Satan to fend for themselves.

i don't think muslims would be free to not practice their religion, in an islamic state.

The fact is that Muslims would much prefer the support to come closer to God over the freedom to run away from Him. We would rather be free of such false freedoms. The greatest freedom is to be liberated from the imprisoned confines of earthly desires and satanic whispers to the vast expanse of devotion and submission to God.

17:15 Whoever is guided is only guided for [the benefit of] his soul. And whoever errs only errs upon himself. And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another. And never would We punish until We sent a messenger.

Peace

 

[glo]

In Malaysia, the government doesnt care whether you perform the 5 daily prayers....but there are so strict with Friday prayer observation.... you can be fined for not performing the Friday Prayer in Malaysia.

I'm assuming that only applies to Muslims??? :?

But as all religious officers are at the mosque during that time, thus nobody been caught for that offence.

lol
That's quite funny! :giggling:

 

[glo]

Sometimes laws are for the benefit of the people and not for the control of the masses.

At first glance this looks very harsh and is enforced worship.

Now let us take another view as to what else that law does.

It prevents an employer from firing a worker for taking time off to pray.

It establishes definite closing times for businesses and prevents some from unfair competitive practices by being open during prayer when most will be closed.

I respectfully disagree, Woodrow.

These things could be prevented through employer's rights laws without enforced worship!

My main issue here is that (I've said it before, and I'll say it again) enforced worship is meaningless worship!

God wants us to seek him and spend time with him willingly and joyfully - not because we have the threat of fines, imprisonment or worse hanging over our heads. :heated:

Peace

 

[snakelegs]

hi ansar,
i've read your post. i understand what you are saying. what i don't understand is the mindset that would like the government to keep them from sinning - and the concept that people's relationship to god is so weak that they might be dragged into sin because the guy who owns the coffee shop doesn't close his shop to pray, or how this is a threat to the society.
but this is exactly why i do not ever want to live in any kind of theocracy.
god bless secularism!

 

[Mohsin]

hi ansar,
i've read your post. i understand what you are saying. what i don't understand is the mindset that would like the government to keep them from sinning - and the concept that people's relationship to god is so weak that they might be dragged into sin because the guy who owns the coffee shop doesn't close his shop to pray, or how this is a threat to the society.
but this is exactly why i do not ever want to live in any kind of theocracy.
god bless secularism!

I dunno, maybe I can explain this. Snakelegs, I have several friends right, who you can say aren't practising Muslims. When just one of them on his own is with me, they won't swear, backbite, listen to music, and of course they'll come pray with me. BHut as soon as another one of his friends comes and makes a rubbish excuse and says he can not pray, then my friend, who is clearly weak in faith, will go off with him and chill put with him rather than come pray etc, and he'll also start doing stuff he wouldn't do infront of me like swear backbite etc.

So if you read Brother ansar's post in light of what some weak minded muslims like my friend for example, it is better that people are forced to pray as then society as a whole will benefit

 

[Keltoi]

The idea of being forced to pray by any government entity is actually quite frightening to me. I don't care if it's a Christian theocracy or an Islamic one, the thought just makes me cringe. Perhaps it is the American in me. Too many people have died for the freedoms I hold sacred.