Everyone’s eyes are on Iraq, Afganistan, Indonesia, Palestine w.r.t. radical (violent?) “Muslim” groups. Well South Africa has their own for some time now.
PAGAD originated in the Muslim community of Cape Town with the idea to take the fight to gangsters and drug runners. In time the wrong people got in power and started doing things outside the law. Presently some of the leaders are being sentenced in court.
Due to my interaction on these boards, I have come to realize that Islam in general is a peaceful religion according to the adherents. Can’t the religious leadership ensure that these radical elements get sidelined?
Old man you should be gracious :p that i have taken time out of my hectic schedule to bless your thread with my grace :D :D.
Every country has religious fanatics. Pakistan, India, the US, Europe. The problem is that the reason they are popular are because of the inability of the states to do what they want. Nearl 7 years ago, a group of Swiss people wanted all the refugees in Switzerland expelled. The Swiss govt refused to do so under international obligations of non-refoulment. Yet now the same group of people constitute a large political party within the country. They are the ones who campiagned against switzerland joining the UN.
Also i have learnt one thing through my life, that the more conservative you are the more intolerant you are. That for the islamic right should be powered to the nth degree. The religious body consists of conservatives, some who are more open minded than others. Yet it always seems that the extreme conservatives get the top slots. As for political power of the nations. If a majorty of the Islamic leaders cant go to the tolet without a request to the US, they cant do jack about these guys
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ali_R: *
How can you complain about some religious fanatics when at the same time white racism is the major problem there!?
[/QUOTE]
It is no longer a major problem in South Africa and you can see people living in harmony (i.e., both races). However, there is a possibility that soon it is going to be replaced by black racism where in the name of black empowerment and reservations for blacks, etc. whites will find themselves at the receiving end.
It is no longer a major problem in South Africa and you can see people living in harmony (i.e., both races). However, there is a possibility that soon it is going to be replaced by black racism where in the name of black empowerment and reservations for blacks, etc. whites will find themselves at the receiving end.
[/QUOTE]
Let me emphasize only on this: RACISM. Does it make any relevant difference to you?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ali_R: *
How can you complain about some religious fanatics when at the same time white racism is the major problem there!?
[/QUOTE]
And your point is...?
BTW: I made a statement and asked a question. No complaint. Sometimes religious fanatics can be the source of racism.
It is no longer a major problem in South Africa and you can see people living in harmony (i.e., both races). However, there is a possibility that soon it is going to be replaced by black racism where in the name of black empowerment and reservations for blacks, etc. whites will find themselves at the receiving end.
[/QUOTE]
Racism will remain a problem in South Africa for hundreds of years as long as there exist differences as to culture, religion, language, etc. For that matter it will be a problem in every other country in the world.
Black racism always existed. Some "black' people of a certain ethnic group eg. Zulu/Xhosa will look down on other groups eg. Pedi/Venda.
Presently affirmative action is just another word for racism and it is even accepted as ssuch in South Africa's constitution.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by The Old Man: *
I am an extremely conservative person - so where does that put me? I believe that the older one gets, the more conservative one become.
[/QUOTE]
Old man i was refering to religious conservatives. Not people of a conservative nature. I try to make a difference between the two. I am a conservative by the religious definition and am extremely intolerant when it comes to other who discuss my religion.
But i am no where as intolerant as the islamic clergy. Heck right now in Pakistani the clergy is busy fighting over their PM nomination who doesnt have a beard. For Allah's sake, all muslim know that a beard is not a mandatory obligation then why create a fuss? I would like to add rigid to that as well. Just take the Church issue in the US. Extremely rigid and intolerant of others meddling in their affairs, even if the outsiders are right.
I also agree that one is perceived to become more conservative as one gets older, not because the said individual does actually change, but the environment around him actual become more liberal (following societies general trend over the past 20 years). But of course one can become a old stuffy windbag if they wanted to :D
But couldn’t someone be conservative from a religious point of view? For example, since i keep fasts during Ramadan, don’t date, drink, etc., that makes me a religious conservative. And yet i still consider myself not extremely intolerant - i have had Hindus, Sikhs, Catholics, Buddhists, and an atheist for friends. Not all religious conservatives are intolerant. If i being a Muslim take my religion seriously enough, then by definition i cannot be intolerant (think about Surah-tul Kafiroon: Nor will ye worship that which I worship / Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.
Just my humble opinion i’m sorry i know this is not a religious-tolerance discussion, just adding my two cents.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H:
But couldn't someone be conservative from a religious point of view?/QUOTE}
If someone is earnest about his religion, s/he will most definitely be conservative. This "old windbag" see nothing wrong in being conservative (holding dear certain practices and ideas) in one's religion. i actually are considered as a conservatist myself although I'm open for new experiences and ideas - as long as they can stand the heat of scrutiny. The problem comes in when one become radical in the extreme.
I started the thread in order to find out if there is any way that religious leaders could not help in toning down the rising wave of agression that is lately being experienced from certain elements of the Islamic community. I also wanted to point out how a very good organisation (PAGAD) can be highjacked by extremists if the more tolerant and law-abiding people don't get involved and ensure that the radicals don't win out.
i don’t think it’s about being an “old windbag” (with all respect to CM, manifestly). Although i wholly agree generally that, with age, one tends to become more conservative, i don’t think age is the only factor here. i am the youngest of three daughters in my family and by far, the most conservative out of all of them. They call me “maulvi” sometimes to tease me It’s a matter of personally knowing where to draw the line between being religiously conservative and being a radical. Regarding Muslims in particular, i think if we more closely analyzed Islamic principles, we would come to learn that intolerance has no home whatsoever in Islam. But i doubt that will ever occur.
>>I started the thread in order to find out if there is any way that religious leaders could not help in toning down the rising wave of agression that is lately being experienced from certain elements of the Islamic community.<<
But with all due respect to yourself do you believe that several Muslim religious leaders in North America have tried to condemn sentiments of aggression from members of the Muslim community? Maybe it is not true of South Africa, and/or i think the Imams should go beyond issuing statements and press releases and actively working with these particular more aggressive voices - i don’t think the latter has been attempted anywhere.
In the above context i am thinking specifically of comments that were issued after 9-11 by Muslim religious leaders, unfortunately mostly in North America.
>>I also wanted to point out how a very good organisation (PAGAD) can be highjacked by extremists if the more tolerant and law-abiding people don’t get involved and ensure that the radicals don’t win out.<<
i understand how this is a problem; what SHOULD have occurred vis-a-vis PAGAD is that, a group of local Muslim clerics should have stepped in much earlier and condemned the actions of the radical elements… even if they do this now it may be too late, i fear. But better late than never, i suppose…
With all due respect to you both, Old man is definitely an old windbag with a big stick :p , yet the only one who can keep me in line. Interesting no?
I agree with Old man's assessment, that one who follows his or her religion is conservative. You cant be a religious individual and be considered a liberal. That is a paradox. To elaborate on my point before, can you as a muslim objectively and unemotionally reply to a remark by an individual who says that Islam is a violent religion quoting statements on Jihad and the likes. Would you easily understand that and leave it be? I certainly wont. Rather an arguement or discussion will ensue. But i can very easily see "Liberals" accept this and move on. That is what i mean by conservatives and intolerance. Also the fact that were ever the clergy is located in the Islamic world, they believe they are the monopoly on the religion and are extremely intolerant to others views. It is a common refrain until now that all the leaders of the fundo groups would not pray with each other, as they are all kafirs according to the others.
[quote]
i have had Hindus, Sikhs, Catholics, Buddhists, and an atheist for friends
[/quote]
So do I. But i doubt you discuss religion to the extent that people are offended. Rather you try to avoid the subject. Lastly my point before i dash off to class is that the religious clergy in my opinion are the violent conservatives who have hijacked the PAGAD. There is nothing else to do....as they are the ones incharge. Quick statement on the old windbag part, i agree with all that old man has said. So at the age of 20 i am an old windbag as well :D
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CM: *
Quick statement on the old windbag part, i agree with all that old man has said. So at the age of 20 i am an old windbag as well :D
[/QUOTE]
....with a little stick!
Just imagine you being a windbag at 20 and how much wind you'll have when you are my age.....
BTW: What must we do with these sticks? :)
Nadia_H, don't you like the improved "civilised" CM? "With all due respect to you both...". May we be able to keep the young man on the straight and narrow......
It is a fact that the clergic of the main Afrikaans Churches in South Africa were silent on the wrongs of Apartheid during the old government. If they have spoken out sooner, things might have changed sooner. I believe that it is the duty of religious leaders to be the talking conscience of government in pointing out wrongs. I am sure that there are many reputable Muslim leaders being outspoken against the things done by so-called followers. And I am sure this board do a lot in getting people to think before they act.
>>Nadia_H, don't you like the improved "civilised" CM? "With all due respect to you both...". May we be able to keep the young man on the straight and narrow......<<
:) :) i never thought i would see the day when CM made that opening. Must be some of your influence rubbing off on him, Old Man. :D
(Not to tarnish his reputation or anything, but CM is pretty respectful off of Gupshup - a real helpful chap). That's all the praises you get from me this year CM :D
>>can you as a muslim objectively and unemotionally reply to a remark by an individual who says that Islam is a violent religion quoting statements on Jihad and the likes. Would you easily understand that and leave it be? I certainly wont. Rather an arguement or discussion will ensue. But i can very easily see "Liberals" accept this and move on. That is what i mean by conservatives and intolerance.<<
You are accurate, i will not move on and accept it. i won't become hysterical either and jump down the other person's throat because that will play into his stereotypes of how all Muslims are. Yes you are right, as much as i would strive to, i wouldn't be able to give an unemotional reply.
Going on The Old Man's last post regarding religious leaders being "the talking conscience of government in pointing out wrongs", i think this is where the ordinary Muslim tends to falter. We don't maximize all the opportunities we have to portray an accurate image of our religion nor do we support those who do. In North America we have some excellent Muslim organizations and leaders doing commendable work, they mobilized rapidly subsequent to 9-11, sending press releases, faxes upon the hour, arranging interviews, etc. -- but based upon my own personal experiences i personally know very few ordinary Muslims who volunteer to give their time to such orgs. The active handful of Guppies on Gupshup (Muni and others like her) are the exception, not the norm, in my humble opinion.
Good grief, one sentence and the both of you blow it out of proportion. I can expect that from a woman, but et tu Old man? :p Well the thing is if you burp and other things, the wind is let loose, so its all good :D What do we do with these sticks? No clue. The Pakistani women with sticks tend to hit anything that walks period, 2 legs, 4 legs or on its knees. I dont we could do that, copyright violations and all. Hmmm....we could play pool :D Plus i have always been on the straight and narrow, just depends in what way you look at that :D
The clergy that has spoken out in the Islamic world is quickly silenced permanently or declared a heretic. So there is a no win situation if yo are vocal about it. Rather you have to change the society itself in the Islamic world for the true form of the religion to emerge. However this is a catch 22. The govt wont do anything so it is up to the clergy to reform society. However the clergy is all conservative, and they need reforming themselves, and only societial changes can reform the clergy which is needed to reform society. I think i just gave you a headache. But you get my drift. I agree it is the duty of the clergy, but in many cases they do not. Heck the example in the US is sickening, but they protect their own and they do it without an interference from anybody.
[quote]
(Not to tarnish his reputation or anything, but CM is pretty respectful off of Gupshup - a real helpful chap
[/quote]
Now isnt that an oxymoron? :p Anyway forget the sentence. Making a mountain out of an ant hill. I have said my bit now off to kill some animated evil creatures in a computer game. :D
:
i’m sorry i know this is not a religious-tolerance discussion, just adding my two cents. 
It’s a matter of personally knowing where to draw the line between being religiously conservative and being a radical. Regarding Muslims in particular, i think if we more closely analyzed Islamic principles, we would come to learn that intolerance has no home whatsoever in Islam. But i doubt that will ever occur.