Should Mecca be allowed to enter Muslims?

[Cheezy the Wiz]

This is a thread to discuss the nature of Islamic Law, and its tendency to inhibit the freedoms of its followers. Since Western presence in the Middle East is obviously not going anywhere anytime soon, and its quite obviously a goal of ours to promote and create liberal democracies in the area, just how compatible is Islamic Law with liberalism? Can the two blend constructively, or must one annihilate the other to ensure its own survival?

Discuss.

 

[My Pet Hamster]

No... Muslims should be allowed to enter Mecca though.

 

[Thoughtful Thug]

No... Muslims should be allowed to enter Mecca though.

What kinds of Muslims? There are many sects within the religion.

 

[Annex]

No... Muslims should be allowed to enter Mecca though.

Only if minarets are banned.

 

[bob bobato]

How on earth could Mecca enter Muslims?
EDIT: Oh, I get it.

 

[kulade]

...that would hurt. :/

 

[Whomp]

Turkey, India and Indonesia seem to be working out pretty well. I think many tenets in Islam are similar to democratic rule (equality, freedom of religion, and respect for the individual). So I think the real question is whether it's possible to change the autocratic tribal rulers? Whether it requires a cultural change or for that matter a period of reformation?

No one said it has to be a westernized style republic.

 

[plarq]

Turkey, India and Indonesia are clearly westernized style republics.

So, it has to be somewhat westernized, but it doesn't need to be western aligned.

 

[GenMarshall]

Do I smell a copycat thread, or does this thread have any serious discussion?

 

[Kraznaya]

Nothing like taking in that hot, dry, and slightly polluted dusty desert air. Allahu akbar.

 

[Pangur Bán]

There's nothing incompatible about Islam and "liberalism" or democracy, except in the minds of liberal or Islamic fundamentalists, both of whom have too much power today. Both are just ideologies, and it is the societies that underlie them, their social structures, economic relationships and distributions of power, that determine the success or failure of either system. And let's face it, whatever might have happened otherwise, the undemocratic nature of the Middle East is mainly a result of US or Western interference on behalf of dictators. They keep out communism and Isl. fundamentalism, and we back them. And if they get too uppity, if they don't give our oil merchants an easy enough time, our governments remind us and the rest of the world that they are undemocratic.

 

[Phlegmak]

Should Mecca be allowed to enter Muslims?

In the book of Revelation, the Lamb is going to marry Jerusalem. So maybe this is something like that.

 

[azzaman333]

Sounds kinky.

 

[Lillefix]

One problem with Islam is that muslims take it so seriously.

I think I've mentioned this before on the forum, but I'm saying it again. I remember a poll done in a Norwegian school a few years back where they asked christian and muslim students how important religion was in their life(atheists and agnostics where not asked in the poll). 98% of the muslims considered religion to be the most important aspect of their lives, while only 20% of the Christians said the same. When people take their religious beliefs that seriously it's easy to conflict with many western values.

 

[Heretic_Cata]

How on earth could Mecca enter Muslims?

What do you think minarets are for ?

 

[Dachs]

What do you think minarets are for ?

I was just about to post something less funny than this in the same vein.

 

[Ecofarm]

They keep out communism and Isl. fundamentalism, and we back them.

Given a choice... I would take an unsound, selfish and generally corrupt dictator over communism or islamofascism. The latter are more likely to instal institutions that would be difficult to dislodge at a later date when real revolution is possible.


Let's indict reasonable expectations!
Ok, you gottta bounce it to teh cup!


That, italics above, is the level of geopolitical condemnation of past US foreign policy in the quote; it's jeux sans frontieres, nothing more.

Please excuse my french.

 

[Bill3000]

Given a choice... I would take an unsound, selfish and generally corrupt dictator over communism or islamofascism. The latter are more likely to instal institutions that would be difficult to dislodge at a later date when real revolution is possible.

So why'd you support invading Iraq over Saudi Arabia again?

 

[Ecofarm]

Genocide.

Saddam didn't do that.

What?








That's the sound of your boat leaving the water.

 

[Bei1052]

The better question is how compatible with Islamic Law is liberalism? Remember, it's not Islamic law encroaching on liberalism. It's liberalism encroaching on Islamic law (Or, I should say, being "forced" upon Islamic law).