psyah
September 14, 2011, 12:37pm
154
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
Okay … You obviously have not read the post … but I’ll oblige here is what you have suggested:
Peace Shamraz Khan
Ok here is my response to your points:
Religion means separating religion from government - so in this point you have said
I think religion is better because it’s secular - logically you are not really saying anything … other than you like religion for religion’s sake … I can use the same reason for not liking religion … that religion is not better because it’s secular … When a factor is given that cannot substantiate what it sets out to achieve then that factor is void of mention … On this basis I reject your first reason … You will need to substantiate why religion and governance being separate is better and your other points should demonstrate this, for this reason this point is void.
It allows personal and religious freedoms
It is religiously blind - however if many people of one type who are operating in a secular fashion will subject their own biases to religious minorities … this is what has been happening in Pakistan … the lack of tolerance for minorities is due to the people imposing their biases on them that they have exercised with their secular powers. If they followed Islam those intolerances would be criminal. Religion itself is an empty shell - it becomes what it’s puppetmasters want it to become. They themselves have no rules that control them apart from one … don’t allow religion to affect your decisions.
Religion actually makes religious people subservient to government and hence religion itself is bent for the needs of those in power.
It is interesting that for a good job we look for capability and credentials, but for public office the same is stated here as though it is some sort of hinderance … besides religion does not set out to achieve this … rather this is a tennet of democracy - and democracy is not necessarily secular - this is because a majority can vote in religion as what happened in the case of Pakistan. Pure religion will not allow religion to be voted in by democractic means … !!!
Islam allows this too - and since this does not set apart religion from religion per se - I can’t accept this as a valid plus point that distinguishes it from religion.
My reason for being against religion is:
The moral qualities required for a balanced state are present in religion - they are not subject to change, but are subject to interpretation so long as the overall benefits outweigh the harms and off possible harms are reduced to elimination. This quality is not what “religion” sets out to achieve … it only sets out to achieve one thing … separation … all the other things that people say about it are what they feel religion achieves through practice …
On the other hand religion - or more specifically Islam states this:
Imam An-Nawawis 40 hadith collection:
So confused …
How does this even show the secularists perspective on “why secularism is better?” I stated that secularism is nothing - it is empty it does not set out to achieve anything good or bad … just separation … refute me and give reasons.