5 Problems Facing Islamic Nations

[PittsburghAfterDark]

Five Intrinsic Problems Facing Islamic Countries
Justin Hartfield

1. A lack of innovation. The lack of individualism in the Islamic religion is the direct cause of the lack of innovation in Islamic countries. Muslims are denied the ability to reason by the Koran, since the Koran itself is assumed to be perfect and not needing new ideas to improve. Merely being a Muslim implies a complete submission to Islamic doctrine. This dynamic, therefore, outlaws human thoughts outside of the teachings of Muhammad. Thus new ideas on technology, science, government, or anything for that matter are seen as distention and are rooted out immediately by the powers at be. It's no coincidence that the standard of living for citizens of Islamic countries has been stagnant, despite the fact the countries themselves are getting richer and richer from oil. It's also no coincidence that there has been an almost inconceivable lack of new technologies or ideas from a region as densely populated as the Middle East.

2. Inability to form a democratic government. Because of the incredible restrictions placed on practitioners of Islam, democracy can never effectively exist. Democracy is, after all, debating ideas against one another. In Islamic states, there are no debates because the Koran is the final word on all laws. The Koran is consulted in all matters of judgement, and being that the Koran is divine and without equal, no other laws or interpretations are necessary.

3. Abhorrence of diversification. Minorities are treated in much the same way as new ideas. Christians, Jews, blacks and women are treated as lower life-forms. Opinions of minorities or any ideas from the Western world are viewed as nefarious to the word of Muhammad. Infidels simply exist and, at best, can be tolerated. Women will always be second-class citizens in Islamic countries. They will be forced to hide their bodies and deny their femininity. This in turn provokes men to commit more violent crime toward women than in the Western world. Although, this is still speculation because actual rape numbers don’t exist in Islamic countries. So technically, there have been zero cases of rape in Saudi Arabia.

4. Inability to separate church and state. Despite being deeply religious, the founding fathers of the United States saw the need to separate religion from politics. They saw a secular government as the only viable option. Otherwise, free will is infringed upon and religions are unable to compete. The United States applied this principle brilliantly, as numerous faiths compete for public attention. This has benefitted the people; they are more drawn to religion while the faiths themselves become dynamic and appealing.

5. Inability to correct errors. Less than 100 years ago, the US government thought it would be beneficial for society to ban the consumption of alcohol. The 18th Amendment was thus passed and proved to be an utter disaster. The mistake was such an oversight that leading prohibitionists before the Amendment’s passing appeared on radio addresses admitting their err and pleading for a repeal. The government was self correcting; the system worked. Unfortunately, this governmental admittance to an obvious miscalculation would never happen in an Islamic country. There, internal problems are always caused by infidels spreading the word of the devil. No one is actually taking the reins of the government and doing the work necessary to form a developing society. They are slaves to fate, forever toiling under her yet never knowing there existed a world outside of their country.
Link (http://www.prometheusinstitute.net/opinion/jh71106.htm)

[CheesyMuslim]

Sorry bout that,

1. Nice list.
2. I agree 100%.
3. Very to the point.
4. No one can refute this.
5. You hit the nail on the head.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Nathan Brazil]

Good enough list. After all, Europe didn't start to advance until it started discarding Christianity. The link between religion and stagnation is clear.

[Athena]

4. Inability to separate church and state. Despite being deeply religious, the founding fathers of the United States saw the need to separate religion from politics. They saw a secular government as the only viable option. Otherwise, free will is infringed upon and religions are unable to compete. The United States applied this principle brilliantly, as numerous faiths compete for public attention. This has benefitted the people; they are more drawn to religion while the faiths themselves become dynamic and appealing.

5......There, internal problems are always caused by infidels spreading the word of the devil. No one is actually taking the reins of the government and doing the work necessary to form a developing society. They are slaves to fate, forever toiling under her yet never knowing there existed a world outside of their country.

As stated the problem is religion and England and Europe had the same problem, and it was the democracy of the US, the separation of state and religion that made a difference. And since the Christians could change, so can the Muslims, but only if we return to morality will Muslims have cause to be attracted to what we have. Presently, our immorality is proving both Christians and Muslims correct about the powers of evil and our sinfulness, and our liberty is on the line. The US has returned to authoritarianism, and has become very dehumanizing, as it is like the Borg of Star Trek, except for its raging immorality, and we shouldn't be patting ourselves on the back too hard.

[Nathan Brazil]

Yes, we need to return to morality, beyond all doubt.

We need to stop limiting the freedom of people, both to innovate and to be stupid.

We need to stop stealing money from the productive to fund the worthless.

We need to stop disguising infanticide as a respectable alternative to having a baby.

We need to stop being afraid to speak our minds. When an idea is both stupid and freedom limiting, we should say so.

[Athena]

Yes, we need to return to morality, beyond all doubt.

We need to stop limiting the freedom of people, both to innovate and to be stupid.

We need to stop stealing money from the productive to fund the worthless.

We need to stop disguising infanticide as a respectable alternative to having a baby.

We need to stop being afraid to speak our minds.Â*Â*When an idea is both stupid and freedom limiting, we should say so.




I think your statements are contradicting.Â*Â*In a democracy, everyone works together for the good of all, and when this happens babies are born into a safe world, but you seem to be opposed to everyone working together for the good of all.Â*Â* It seems your values leave babies to be born in an unsafe, cruel reality and you oppose preventing this hell socially or by abortion.Â*Â* This doesn't seem logical to me.Â*Â*The moral of what you are saying is lost in the contradictions.

[Nathan Brazil]

I think your statements are contradicting.Â*Â*In a democracy, everyone works together for the good of all,

Nonsense. In a democracy, everyone votes for what he thinks is best for himself. That's why there has to be limits on what people can vote to do to maximize freedom.

Remember, the goal of the US is freedom through the democratic process. The democratic part simply describes what the founders thought was the best way to ensure freedom. Democracy is not an end in itself.

and when this happens babies are born into a safe world, but you seem to be opposed to everyone working together for the good of all.

Nonsense. You simply think slavery is the best way to go. I've no objection to people freely choosing to work together, so long as those people that choose freely to do something else are neither penalized for that choice or forced to pay for the choices of others.

That's called a "cooperative society", as opposed to the compulsive society we see growing stronger around us every day as the nanny state continues to grow in power.

It seems your values leave babies to be born in an unsafe, cruel reality and you oppose preventing this hell socially or by abortion.

Yes, I don't believe the best way to prevent a miserable life is to murder the child. That's perfectly logical.

Is there some reason you think murdering babies is the best way to ensure they have a happy life?

The moral of what you are saying is lost in the contradictions.

The moral of what I'm saying is that people should not only be free to make their life's decisions, they should be free to pay for them, and free to suffer when they screw up. It's what being an adult is all about.

[CheesyMuslim]

Sorry bout that,

1. But I agree 100% with Nathan Brazil.
2. He nailed Athena to the wall.
3. I hope she had her a$$ kicking pants on is all.
4. Keep up the good work Nathan Brazil, while I keep hacking too.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Athena]

:D:D:D, someone spouting ignorance is not doing a good job of ass kicking.Â*Â*

Come on- democracy is a concept that began in Athens.Â*Â*Actually, it was an imitation of Sparta with some differences.Â*Â*You see, Athens had no treasury for war, nor any organized defense, beyond a few rich people being able to pay warriors.Â*Â*When the Persians invaded, the citizens fled, leaving only a few wealthy people to defend their private property.Â*Â*The Persians detroyed public buildings including the temple of Athena, and the people of Athens looked to Sparta to avoid this from happening again.

Sparta was the first socialist/military state.Â*Â*When men came of age, they moved into the barracks and continued to live in the barracks until retirement.Â*Â*The only thing a Spartan did was give military service.Â*Â*The state determined everyone's needs and provided them with slave labor.
These people have gone down in history for the military commitment.

Okay, Athens wanted everyone to help defend Athens, so they cut a deal with the people.Â*Â*They would get a say in government if Athens survived the Persians.Â*Â*Athens stopped short of the complete military commitment of Sparta, because it valued families and the liberal arts, and individuality and privacy.Â*Â*But everyone helped defend Athens, and in return the government of Athens began working for them.Â*Â*This government provided paid government work and public works that greatly benefited Athens.Â*Â*Athens economy boomed and the intellectual advancements is what places Athens in history.Â*Â*

Here is a quote from Pericles funeral speech, Our constitution does not copy the laws of neighbouring states; we are an inspiration to others, rather than imitators ourselves. Its administration favours the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a democracy
The rest of this speech is under history- political philosophy- that for which we stand.

Yes, democracy is everyone working for the good of all.Â*Â*Â*Â*

[Athena]

If you do not want the social responsibility of caring for our own kind, do not make laws that prevent abortion.Â*Â*It is that simple.Â*Â*We are social animals, and unfortunately too many humans are self centered rather than socially minded.Â*Â*They create a bad reality for souls to be born into.Â*Â* Your selfish attitude is the enemy of civilized living.Â*Â*

To get this back on the subject of the thread, it is the selfish, self centered thinking expressed here that leads some Muslims to feel justified in declaring a holy war against evil people.

[Concord]

Five Intrinsic Problems Facing Islamic Countries
Justin Hartfield

1. A lack of innovation. The lack of individualism in the Islamic religion is the direct cause of the lack of innovation in Islamic countries. Muslims are denied the ability to reason by the Koran, since the Koran itself is assumed to be perfect and not needing new ideas to improve. Merely being a Muslim implies a complete submission to Islamic doctrine. This dynamic, therefore, outlaws human thoughts outside of the teachings of Muhammad. Thus new ideas on technology, science, government, or anything for that matter are seen as distention and are rooted out immediately by the powers at be. It's no coincidence that the standard of living for citizens of Islamic countries has been stagnant, despite the fact the countries themselves are getting richer and richer from oil. It's also no coincidence that there has been an almost inconceivable lack of new technologies or ideas from a region as densely populated as the Middle East.

2. Inability to form a democratic government. Because of the incredible restrictions placed on practitioners of Islam, democracy can never effectively exist. Democracy is, after all, debating ideas against one another. In Islamic states, there are no debates because the Koran is the final word on all laws. The Koran is consulted in all matters of judgement, and being that the Koran is divine and without equal, no other laws or interpretations are necessary.

.
Link (http://www.prometheusinstitute.net/opinion/jh71106.htm)

In Islamic religion.. we obey Allah in every thing.. and Allah guided Muslims to be the best in every thing.. whether technology or any thing..
and as you said Quran is perfect and no need to add any thing but that is not in technology or any since but this only in some points which are related to worship not every thing..
and many things indicate that what are you said is not true.. and the testimoney is.. see how many sinetist in the world how are muslims.. actually there are many..
and what you said about the democratic government is that the Quran and Sunnah (what Mohammad said or did) guide us to be democratic.. in choosing the president.. belive me this is Islam.. but many of muslims presidents are not democratic in thier doings..
but you should know that.. a meant by democratic the right to choose the president not to leave every one to do every thing like to be naked or to be homosexual..

[Rider]

Nathan wrote- Yes, we need to return to morality, beyond all doubt.

We need to stop limiting the freedom of people, both to innovate and to be stupid.

We need to stop stealing money from the productive to fund the worthless.

We need to stop disguising infanticide as a respectable alternative to having a baby.

We need to stop being afraid to speak our minds. When an idea is both stupid and freedom limiting, we should say so.
Nathan:
1.-Who gets to decide what is moral and why should I have to abide by anyone else's morals?

2.-Like limiting the freedom of women to have an abortion?

3.-Do you consider all taxation as theft?

4.-What do you care? What business is it of yours? Who are you to say what is respectable?

5.-So who's afraid to speak in this country? Speak up all you wish, but you of all people shouldn't be telling others what to do.

Your whole post seems quite hypocritical for a libertarian.

[Labrocca]

In a democracy, everyone works together for the good of all...


I believe that's communism not democracy. Again instead of arguing your points well you have chosen to give a history lesson on ancient Athens. No one cares and it's irrelevent in this argument a society from hundreds of years ago.


The notion of communism has a history long predating Marx and Engels. In ancient Greece the idea of communism was connected to a myth about the "golden age" of humanity, when society lived in full harmony, before the development of private property. Some have argued that Plato's The Republic and works by other ancient political theorists advocated communism in the form of communal living, and that various early Christian sects, in particular the early Church, as recorded in Acts of the Apostles, and indigenous tribes in the pre-Columbian Americas practiced communism in the form of communal living and common ownership. Christian communism espouses the idea that Christianity was meant to be communist in nature.


As for what this topic is about...it's excellent post PAD. Right on the money. Even a muslim chimed in and pretty much agreed. Obviously your points are the center of our modern day conflict with the muslims.

[Rider]

Athena wrote- As stated the problem is religion and England and Europe had the same problem, and it was the democracy of the US, the separation of state and religion that made a difference....
No, the problem is Islam. Christianity with its Jewish roots was intertwined with the concepts of freedom and human dignity that the founders made central to their concept of government.

Now I can agree with you to an extent, but to compare England with its Anglican church and the rest of Europe with the Catholic church to the Islamic world is inacurate. The Catholic church of the dark ages comes the closest, but after the renaissance there were tremendous improvements without throwing off the church. England's Magna Carta was (I believe) achieved under the Catholic church. And the Magna Carta was a huge part of the foundation of our American beliefs on personal freedom, no? There has been no equivalent document to the Magna Carta in Islam and probably never will be.

Islam is a religion of violence and war; conquest and subjugation. While Christians have committed similar acts, don't look for justification in the gospels of Jesus or any of his teachings passed on by the apostles.
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in the establishment of a state church, but the separation of church and state is not a part of our constitution, nor was it intended by the founders.

[AlonzoMourning23]

No, the problem is Islam. Christianity with its Jewish roots was intertwined with the concepts of freedom and human dignity that the founders made central to their concept of government.

So one of the reasons Christianity is different from Islam is because Christianity has Jewish roots?

Islam is a religion of violence and war; conquest and subjugation. While Christians have committed similar acts, don't look for justification in the gospels of Jesus or any of his teachings passed on by the apostles.


Islamic scholars overwhelmingly do not find justification for terrorist acts committed by extremists. But, just like Christians and Jews, those with very shallow interpretations can justify violence in the name of religion, and those who seek to attack Islam can pick out lines that are inconsistent with the overall message.

Though, if you want to have a count of violent passages, you really can't beat the old testament.

[Nathan Brazil]

[quote]Nathan wrote- Yes, we need to return to morality, beyond all doubt.

We need to stop limiting the freedom of people, both to innovate and to be stupid.

We need to stop stealing money from the productive to fund the worthless.

We need to stop disguising infanticide as a respectable alternative to having a baby.

We need to stop being afraid to speak our minds. When an idea is both stupid and freedom limiting, we should say so.
Nathan:
1.-Who gets to decide what is moral and why should I have to abide by anyone else's morals?

Morality = not imposing your will on persons not harming you, your family, or your property. That means you're not allowed to kill people, you can't rob them, and you can't defraud them. If, for some reason, those people decide that they like packing fudge, you have no reason to care.

Any version of "morality" that involves compulsion upon the innocent, for whatever reason, is not moral.

2.-Like limiting the freedom of women to have an abortion?

No, but limiting ability of people to commit murder is. Oh, and killing the unborn is killing humans, which is murder. If women don't want to get pregnant, they can stop having sex when they're not properly protected by contraception. It's not the baby's fault his mommy was a stupid horny broad.

3.-Do you consider all taxation as theft?

I consider taxation to finance projects not directly related to the proper roles of government is theft. That means the answer to your question is "no".

4.-What do you care? What business is it of yours? Who are you to say what is respectable?

Okay, Rider thinks sucking babies through a vacuum cleaner tube, burning them in saline solution, ripping their arms and legs off, and birthing them ass-backward, almost then stabbing them in the skull with scissors, all without anesthesia, to boot, is respectable.

Anyone else want to queue up for this program?

5.-So who's afraid to speak in this country? Speak up all you wish, but you of all people shouldn't be telling others what to do.

Phbbtbtbt! I don't tell others what to do. I tell them to quit bothering me. I dont' give a crap what they do when they mind their own business. I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat, after all. You're the one telling others what to do when you support programs that steal their money to fund social engineering programs that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Your whole post seems quite hypocritical for a libertarian.


Yeah, advocating personal liberty is completely against everything a libertarian is supposed to stand for. We're supposed to be in the "Ain't Got No Place To Go So Better Vote Republican" wing of the Slightly to the Right of the Way Far Left American Socialist Party, aka the Republican/Democrat Socialist majority.

Hate to tell you this, but while you're busy waving the flag while trying to deny people the freedom to burn it, while you're out there explaining how The Greatest Ponzi Scheme Ever must be continued no matter how much further damage it does to the country, there's people like me, who recognize that America's greatest strength was in the self-reliance of it's citizens.