The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Undermining terror: the Moroccan plan to promote moderation > Comments

Undermining terror: the Moroccan plan to promote moderation : Comments

By Shane Satterley, published 4/1/2017

Also, simply replacing one interpretation of religion with another via the authority of the imam and the Moroccan king is problematic.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
Shane has a BA in security, terrorism and counter-terrorism. Sounds like one of those correspondence courses for aspiring security guards and enquiry agents. The King of Morocco? Nothing to see here, folks.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 4 January 2017 9:08:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Never mind that one of the text books created under this program describes philosophy as perversion and blasphemy.

It thus dismisses the entire philosophical, religious and cultural heritage of the non-Islamic world, and indeed the philosophical investigations of the great classical Islamic scholars such as Al-Ghazali and Ibn Arabi. And modern scholars and/or Sufis such as Javad Nurbakhsh and Seyyd Hossein Nasr.
Posted by Daffy Duck, Wednesday, 4 January 2017 12:18:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Every faith based religion is believing without evidence!

That said Islam is almost the most contentious and medieval of them all and needs to be dragged kicking and shouting into the 21'st century! And if the book was that of the oldest least revised version and included meditation, as it does for the Sofie tradition, it can't hurt and might help?

In any event, the status Quo and the centuries old war between the Sunnis and the Shiites, along with all the bloodletting and civilization destroying constantly revised and re-edited, false doctrine, make it up as it suits the current "appointed" Imam? Simply cannot continue! There's too much at stake, including Islam itself!

Modernity is needed as is, a chapter and verse review of all the foundation beliefs relied on? If only to look at the emerging archaeological evidence that challenges some of the myths and legends that all three religions of the book rely on as foundation for unquestioning belief?

If God gave man a mind and free will, then he surely didn't give to be packed up in the old kit bag and never ever used! Change for the better is needed and has to start somewhere!
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Wednesday, 4 January 2017 12:19:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Long live King Mohammed of Morocco!

---

Dear Daffy,

«one of the text books created under this program describes philosophy as perversion and blasphemy.»

Well they do have a point there, don't they? It all depends on the context, which you did not provide and given an appropriate context, I believe that Adi Da would also agree.

Al-Ghazali's philosophy supports and promotes religion, but when a philosophy attempts to REPLACE religion, then it can be rightly described as perversion and blasphemy.

What is so important about this project, is that it teaches that even when others engage in perversion and blasphemy, one should never even contemplate cutting their throat.

---

Dear Alan,

How "enlightened" of you to want to drag other people "kicking and screaming" where they do not want to go... so much for this vision of modernity...

Nowadays, when evidence is so fashionable, believing something because it has supporting evidence does not require any strength of character. While it might have been different in previous generations, today, believing things without evidence takes courage and shows that one has more substance than to just follow the herd.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 4 January 2017 1:02:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Yuyutsu

You say –“ Nowadays, when evidence is so fashionable, believing something because it has supporting evidence does not require any strength of character. While it might have been different in previous generations, today, believing things without evidence takes courage and shows that one has more substance than to just follow the herd”.

…believing things without evidence takes courage and shows that one has more substance than to just follow the herd?

So how do you address the belief that it’s ok to to bomb/kill/behead any Westerner because their religious credo doesn’t like how we live, albeit we offer the hand of friendship, safety and a future, in welcoming all into “our house” – Australia.

Our “herd” is a nation that respects all people from various religions, colours, cultures and creeds who all wish to live in peace – I like my herd, and will stand up with most Aussies who have the courage to support our democratic right to live peacefully and respecting all who make up our multicultural nation.

If people from beliefs and cultures who don’t wish to accept/assimilate within our Western culture – we should not accept those applicants for immigration. They can join another “herd” and live in a more comfortable part of the world.

Just saying …
Posted by SAINTS, Wednesday, 4 January 2017 3:37:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear SAINTS,

Thank you for this excellent question.

One ought to adopt a belief if and only if it is good for that person to have that belief.

I think that we can agree that bombing/killing/beheading, or otherwise hurting others is a bad thing, hence a belief that leads one to perform such acts, ought not be adopted.

Here are some observations:

1. The presence/absence of evidence is irrelevant.
2. That the victims happen to be Westerners is irrelevant.
3. That the victims happen to welcome you and offer you friendship and safety is irrelevant, because even if they didn't, it still wouldn't be right to harm them.
4. Whether to have a particular belief is personal and can vary from one person to another and/or from time-to-time. All you need to ask is: "Would it be good for person X at time T to adopt a belief B?".

Now by "herd", I referred to the Western/scientific/evidence-based mob, rather than to Australia, yet since you asked:

«Our “herd” is a nation that respects all people from various religions, colours, cultures and creeds who all wish to live in peace»

And so do I, even while I don't identify with your herd.

«I like my herd, and will stand up with most Aussies who have the courage to support our democratic right to live peacefully and respecting all who make up our multicultural nation.»

I don't need to like your herd and/or believe in democratic rights in order to support everyone living peacefully, which I do.

«If people from beliefs and cultures who don’t wish to accept/assimilate within our Western culture – we should not accept those applicants for immigration.»

Well it seems that you missed the train: I for one, do not wish to accept or assimilate within your Western culture, yet I was accepted and live here.

Please have no fear as I will never hurt you, your safety is assured. I am a peaceful person and I believe in non-violence (ahimsa), I think this should suffice: please do not try to force your particular culture on others.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 4 January 2017 6:16:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy