69 million page views

Reply to Hassan part II

Reader comment on item: Recruiting Soldiers Against Radical Islam
in response to reader comment: No wonder Lucas

Submitted by Lucas (Ireland), Apr 13, 2007 at 14:14

There are two parts to Islam:
There is Islam as a personal religion - I've no significant problem with most of this.

I've mentioned before that I was seeing a Muslim girl - she was a good person, who believed she was a devout Muslim. (She was from Pakistan - which meant that she had never been to a Mosque, as women are not allowed in Mosques there. I believe that it was for this reason that her views were not necessarily in sync regarding Sharia, and the Muslim answer to the Platonic Question "Is something good because God wants you to do it, or does God want you to do something because it is good". [BTW, as a Muslim you must answer with answer "a" - submission to God's Will etc.].

She felt that though Sharia was God's Law, man was too corrupt to implement it, and so it should not be implemented. Of course, this is actually illogical position to hold and technically blasphemous - but it allowed her to believe she was Muslim and also be a good person at the same time.)

But there is also Islam as an Ideology:
This is composed of wishing to impose Sharia Law on the world, abolishing democracy, abolishing human rights etc. I personally have some difficulties with this aspect.

Secondly, the reliance of Muslims on divine Revelation rather than Reason is EVIL - why? Because it does not allow for evolution of a religion.
I'll give an example: In Pakistan, the reason most women are in jail is because they were raped.
Since Pakistan has imposed Sharia law, there have been no successful prosecutions of rape (as they require 4 male witnesses). The Muslim girl I was seeing was a doctor - as were a couple of other members of her family. As both she and her sister were Gynaecologists, they dealt frequently with women who had been raped - but these women could never come forward to the authorities as they would be imprisoned, and could never tell their families. Thus rape in Pakistan is actually quite common, and the problem cannot be addressed.
There was one (non-Pakistani) case where there were 7 female witnesses to a rape - this was insufficient as women are regarded as equivalent to 1/2 a man for the purposes of testimony. (And secondly a man must be present as a witness).
Note Pakistan is not actually as harsh as is actually required under Sharia Law: women should not be imprisoned, but rather either (according to the Haddith), stoned to death, or according to the Quran lashed.

If you believe that these aspects of Sharia are incorrect, then please develop a coherent theory of Islamic theology, publish them and perhaps you will convince some of these Muslim countries to renounce some aspects of it. I suggest that you read up on Islamic theology - in particular read the theological works of the Asharite School, and the works of Al-Ghazali - as these will be the biggest obstacles to your development of theological basis for believing that raped women should not be stoned to death.

P.S. - If I were you, I believe that you should start with the works of Derrida - using deconstruction, it is possible to prove that anyone who attempts to exclude a meaning of the Quran is commiting shirk - and thus following Divine Revelation is impossible. I'll expand more on this if you wish.

P.P.S. If you do write some books and have success with them, you might pass on 10% of the royalties to me.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Reply to Hassan part II by Lucas

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2022 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)