Why Islam Can't Join the Modern World

THAT ISLAM poses a vital danger to human freedom is a given. But what often remains unspoken is why it poses this danger.

Is it just a coincidence that wherever Islam rules, democracy, individual liberty, free speech, and women’s rights all go out the window?

The problem is that Islam is intrinsically opposed to the very notion of free will itself. Under Islam’s rigid moral code, human beings do not possess the slightest area in their lives where their behavior is not subject to a rigid rule. Islam takes control of every ingredient of its believer’s life - to the point where the believer becomes little more than an automaton who does not, and must not, nurture any kind of independent or critical thinking of his own.

The key here is that for Muslims, the boundaries between their spiritual and temporal lives do not exist – as they would, for example, in Christian life. A faithful Christian has the Divine on his mind throughout the day, and through this meditation he understands that God allows, and encourages, the exercise of free will, as well as the giving unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.

The Christian is aware that he will be accountable for his thoughts and actions in the Final Judgment, but this awareness exists alongside the understanding that the Lord allows compartments of privacy where humans can cherish God’s creation by nurturing their own spontaneity and innovation.

Ralph Waldo Emerson, one of the fathers of American poetry, illuminates this Christian tradition in his notion that the soul and the Divine are most active in spontaneity and in the freedom that is found in the present undetermined existence. And this is the concept on which Western civilization is based.

For Muslims, meanwhile, every single ingredient of life must represent a total submission to Allah.

Question: what kind of progress, technological advances, economic growth and open dialogue can be possible in a society where every facet of the entire culture is Islamicised?

Is this why not one Arab country is yet to produce anything even close to something resembling prosperity, social functionality or liberal democracy?

The bottom line is that Islam cannot deal with modernity. Having never experienced a "reformation" in centuries, it is intrinsically despotic and totalitarian.

I encourage my readers to sit down and actually take the time to read the Qur’an and Hadiths (the sayings and doings of Muhammad as recorded by his companions). You will find that there is not one area of a Muslim’s life that is left open for individuality, originality and creativity.

From the moment a Muslim wakes up, he has to start going through a process of rigid procedures. First and foremost, he has to wash a certain way. He even has to clean his nose in a specific manner, and he has to do repeat this procedure three times. This is essential because Islam teaches that the devil spends the night in the cavity of the nose.

A Muslim is not to touch any utensil unless he has washed his hands three times. He is also not allowed to urinate in stagnant water.

When Muslims do "number two," they are forbidden to sit and are instructed to adopt a squatting position while leaning heavy on the left foot.

I can’t help but wonder: is there an instructional Islamic video for this? What happens if a Muslim leans on the right foot?

Islam also instructs that, when you go "number one" or "number two," you have to say a certain prayer each time. This is in line with the fact that whenever a Muslim arrives, sits, or sleeps anywhere, he has to say a certain prayer as well.

When taking a bath, Muslims are instructed to wash the lower part of the body and the armpits first. Then they are allowed to wash the rest of their bodies. But it always has to be the right side first and then the left. After this, they have to immediately empty all the water and clean the bath and refill it. Then they can clean off. (I can’t help from observing that this sounds like obsessive compulsive disorder).

Muslims are instructed that they have to use their right side for all things first. For instance, if you are putting on your sneakers, you have to put your right foot into the right sneaker first. The same with taking them off. The same goes with putting on a shirt and which arm goes where etc. When entering a house, you have to enter with the right foot first.

When entering the bathroom, however, a Muslim has to enter with the left foot first, and when coming out, with the right foot first.

The times of Prayer in Islam are rigidly enforced. Islam also mandates that a Muslim has to disengage himself from all worldly occupations and resort to his prayers, even when he is most busy.

Before prayers, the body has to be washed in a precise and orderly way (right hand up to the wrist, then left hand, then right arm up to elbow, then left arm, etc). The Muslim has to wipe his head with wet hands, and it is absolutely necessary that this is done with the three fingers between the little finger and the thumb of both hands being joined together.

When a husband and a wife make love, they have to go wash every time afterwards. (Just imagine the life of a sexually active couple).

Every way in which Muslims interact with each other is also all cut out for them. For instance, Muslims are instructed to greet each other in certain ways. They have to say, "As-salamu alaikum" (peace be upon you). And in return one says, "Wa alaikum us-salam" (upon you be peace).

In one sense, this is, of course, very beautiful. But the question remains: what if someone wants to say something different for a change? Or what if someone doesn’t want to say anything at all?

When replying to a greeting, it is a big-time no-no to say, "God's peace be upon you". This can only be said when saying goodbye. Also, if a couple of people bump into each other, and one guy performs the greeting, no one else is supposed to repeat the greeting. And when another guy replies to a greeting, that is enough and no one else is supposed to reply. (Question: what if two guys reply at the same time by mistake?).

Muslims are also not allowed to say hi to a Jew or a to a Christian first. If they do, they are not supposed to take the greeting back. What’s done is done. They will be held to account for this later. If a Jew or a Christian says "Salamun alaikum" to a Muslim, the Muslim must not respond the way he must to a fellow Muslim ("Wa alaikum us-salam") and only say "alaika" in return. (But what if a Muslim confuses a Jew for a fellow Muslim?)

Muslims are also not allowed to enter other people’s house unless they ask for permission up to three times. Permission has to be given for each time before they enter, and, of course, they have to come in with the right foot first. (Imagine what a Muslim party would be like).

A Muslim is never allowed to sleep in -- even if he is really tired. That’s because he is commanded to get up early to say his morning prayers.

Muslims do not even have the luxury of spontaneity or free will in their sleep. They are even instructed to sleep in certain positions. They are not allowed to sleep on their backs or on their stomachs or on their left sides. They have to sleep on their right sides. It is mandatory, meanwhile, that their heads point to the north. (I don’t want to get into the details of my personal sleeping habits, but let me just admit that, in terms of the way I sleep, I would definitely go to hell in this religion - or at least get publicly flogged every day).

In any case, this phenomenon of how Islam robs the potential for free will in every ingredient of its believers’ lives explains why, as Raphael Patai has demonstrated in The Arab Mind, no motivation exists for Arabs to take action for change or to evaluate critically their own circumstances. The result is that Arabs do not end up feeling a sense of responsibility for their own lives and, therefore, for their own failures. When a problem is confronted in the Arab world, a hidden enemy is always imagined.

Consequently, the inability of Arab countries to create democracies, let alone functional economic societies, is read by Arabs as a personal humiliation that is caused by enemies – and not by the backwardness of Islamic culture itself.

We begin to get an understanding, therefore, why the idea that problems can be solved by individuals themselves, and that citizens must actually participate in solving their own society’s problems, is an idea that is incomprehensible in the Islamic Arab world.

Arabs grow up believing that success in their societies is simply just supposed to materialize, even if no one is actually taking any individual initiative to bring it about. If problems develop (i.e. economic backwardness, dictatorship etc.), they are believed to be caused by infidels (i.e. the evil Americans).

Thus, it becomes obvious why Islam cannot join the modern world. In crushing the potential for any free will in human beings, it must annihilate the very essence of human liberty. In so doing, Islam spawns a backward and self-destructive culture that forces an excruciating humiliation on its people. These people, in turn, end up confusing their impotence and misery with their hatred of the infidels who have succeeded in every aspect in which Islamic civilization has pathetically failed.

It would not be correct to say that the Muslims MADE those strides. They simply passed them on from Greek originals to other non-Muslim peoples who did not before have them. In the case of our numerals, the originals may have been Hindu...

It is very dubious to say that Muslims ever themselves possessed or used these ideas that they passed on. They are in the position of illiterate booksellers.

he understands that God allows, and encourages, the exercise of free will,

Really?

Ever heard of Predestination?
It was all the rage with Augustine, Aquinas, Luther ...

The difference is that Islam is still a medieval religion, while most of Christianity has modified itself to prosper in the modern world.

Christian Doctrine is as strict as Islam's, but it is no longer enforced as strictly.

So9

Related Articles:

Reports of Moderate Islam's Existence Have Been Greatly Exaggerated
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: April 22, 2002;
Author: C.T. Rossi
It's time to snap out of Arab fantasy land {Steyn}
Source: National Post; April 19 2002;
Author: Mark Steyn
Islam Vs. The World
Source: Toogood Reports; Published: December 2, 2001;
Author: Alan Caruba
Will the Real Islam Please Stand Up! Source:Van Jenerette Editorial Comment, Various Publications;
Published: October 14, 2001; Author: Van Jenerette
Civilization Envy
Source: National Review Online; Published: September 28, 2001;
Author: Jonah Goldberg
Terror's Homebase, All Over The Map -- Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam
Source: Wall Street Journal-- Book Review; Published: | March 29, 2002;
Author: Adrian Karatnycky
They Live to Die (Islam Martyrdom)
Source: Wall Street Journal; Published: April 7, 2002;
Author: Reuel Marc Gerecht
20 Suppressed Facts About Israel, Islam
Source: Koenig's International News; Published: April 9, 2002;
Author: Jim Bramlett
HOROWITZ: A MIDDLE EAST HISTORY PRIMER
Source: News and Opinion.com; Published; April 10, 2002;
Author:David Horowitz
Arafat Must Go!
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: April 10, 2002;
Author: Alan Caruba
Netanyahu speaks before the US SENATE
Source: http://netanyahu.org/netspeacinse.html; Published: April 10, 2002;
Author: Netanyahu address US Senate

The problem with Islam is that it offers no distinction at all between the function of the church and the state. Christianity does, which is why conservative Christians aren't interested in a theocracy, which by definition would mean enforcing Christian "conversions" on the populace. This is patent foolishness, as conversions cannot be incited through force.

Islam, however, when it gains the upper hand in government always goes baout enforcing Islamic law and outlawing other religions. This has resulted in some truly wicked policies, such as the state-sponsored murder of Christians in the Sudan, and of course world-wide terrorism.

If Bush's war on terror results in the end of the Islamic state as a potent force in the world, it will have done everyone a favor.

What nonsense! Similar things were written about Orthodox Christianity -- after all they never went through a Renaissance or Reformation. And the same was also said of Judaism when Orthodoxy dominated. But how many Jews keep all 613 commandments today?

There may be impediments or stumbling blocks that prevent Islamic societies from "joining the Modern World," but simply dredging up religious books to find commandments and injunctions tells us little or nothing about the real obstacles to modernization. This article presumes what it claims to prove. Modernization means a loosening of such elaborate codes for regulating daily life. Describing the traditional code tells us nothing about how far Islam has moved in the direction of modernity, any more than describing traditional Hindu rituals of purification tells us about how modern India has become or will become. The article also ignores evidence to the contrary in the real world. Indeed, there's a lot of talk in the article of theological rules, but very little consideration of how Muslims actually live in the West or in Islamic lands.

I am sure that if he discussed Mosaic law or the Laws of Manu he would have us convinced that Jews and Hindus also couldn't join the modern world. But any real discussion has to get beyond such obviously stacked arguments.

PSYCHOSIS [sy.KO.sis] (n).

“The inability of a person to distinguish between what is real and what is imaginary.

"Psychosis is a term used to describe a severe mental illness. Psychotics are characterized by a variety of symptoms that most people consider abnormal. These include experiencing delusions, such as the notion that one is being persecuted or conspired against. Psychotics may see things which don't actually exist and hear voices (i.e. God) when no one is around. They often exhibit compulsive, irrational, ritualized behavior, esp. when such behavior serves no purpose or is even harmful or disruptive to those around them. They show no concern for others but may exhibit total self-centered behavior. Includes schizophrenia."

DSM-IV

And we're trying to _understand_ these murderous lunatics?

I have to laugh over this hatred of Islam on this board.

I so love FreeRepublic!

But, I digress.

I live in an Islamic country.

As a caucasian, I am FAR safer here than in my own country.

At least 3,000 people are maimed or muredered each year due to the "multiculturlait experiment" being played by our leaders. Yet, votes and endorsements they receive.

911 was rung many years ago. That nobody listened is the fault of all.

That we look at Islam as our scapegoat is wrong.

Liberalism, The UN, and The NWO equal, if not excel, a greater destructive power against freedom loving people.

Islam can join the modern world.

The agenda will not allow it.

Gotta be careful here--

This is true IF coupled with the understanding that those "compartments of privacy" are still under the dominion of the Lord, that it is the Lord's good plan and pleaseure to allow us freedom, because only with freedom (despite its risks) can we become that which He created us to be.

However, there is no area on which God has no claim, where we are "out of school" as CS Lewis put it. To suggest otherwise is a dangerous heresy. Our freedoms are part and parcel of God's plan, and do not represent an exemption from it.

Islam's problem is that they cannot deal with the tension of freewill versus predestination, and have opted to do away with free will rather than worry about multidimensional mysteries that look like contradictions to limited human eyes.

I think that the Founding Fathers have something to answer for on this issue . . . the First Amendment, at least as interpreted post-14^th Amendment. The Framers ridiculed the idea that religion had anything to do with government, and we all grew up believing it. But in Islam (of the existence of which the Framers were in fact not ignorant) we have a counter example of a "church" which insists on controling the state. We cannot read the First Amendment as accepting religious control of the state, but the alternative is necessarily some government contol of militant religion. And in the case of Assassin sects such as OBL's there really cannot be effective government "religious toleration."

"Using mental illness as a context for Mohammed's activities and teachings, this whole Islam thing begins to make sense."

Permit me to paraphrase; Using mental illness as a context..things begin to make sense".

One of my pet theories to help me understand that which makes no sense.

I think that about 20% of humans are 90% to 100% mentally impaired. Conversely, the other 80% are affected mentally for about 20% of their life. I don't exclude myself from this.

Satan may live in the nose while we sleep, but he moves upstairs upon our wakening.

Liberalism, The UN, and The NWO equal, if not excel, a greater destructive power against freedom loving people.

That's odd, I don't remember the UN or the NWO or even liberals hijacking planes to be used as missiles. No the only ones I recall doing that were the islamics.

Islam cannot join the modern world because islam itself forbids it. Read the koran and the rest of the mohammedan writings. They are commanded to kill unbelievers where ever they find them. This is not a modern world behavior.

Everywhere islam rules, non-islamics get murdered by islamics. This is not civilized. Islam by it's very nature transforms its followers into seventh century savages.

God Save America (Please)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.