Talk:Religious democracy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Democracy & Islam

Iranian Revolutionary Guard Official in Tehran University Lecture (Part I): Islam Has Nothing in Common with Democracy--Patchouli 13:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

This lecture being real or fiction reflects the opinions of an extremist which is free to express his opinions. Farhoudk 12:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


  • Calling for Religious tolerance? Have you heard of Bahais?

Have you heard about "Divide and Conquer" policy of Great Britain? Farhoudk 12:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)



[edit] Khatami

Crowd: No more lies! No more lies! No more lies! No more lies! No more lies!

--Patchouli 14:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

The crowd you mention above were secular reformists present in the meeting. They are opposing Mr Khatami everywhere. Farhoudk 12:41, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Ethics?????!!!!!!!!!

Here is a specific list of Khomeini's execution orders of noteworthy people.

Many thousands of others were also executed for religious or political reasons.

In his memoirs, Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, who was himself pivotal in founding the Islamic Republic, gives gruesome details of Khomeini's 1988 Massacre of Iranian Prisoners after the Iran-Iraq War. Khomeini's fatwa reads:[1]

"It is decreed that those who are in prisons throughout the country and remain steadfast in their support for the Monafeqin (Mojahedin) are waging war on God and are condemned to execution." — Christina Lamb, Khomeini fatwa 'led to killing of 30,000 in Iran', The Daily Telegraph, 2 April 2001

I think religion has priority over ethics.--Patchouli 13:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Please be advised that most of those mentioned above were holding high ranks in Pahlavi administrartion who was responsible for thousands of lives.

Farhoudk 12:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "democratic systems" ...are liable to the most flagrant abuse and diverse interpretation[3]

[http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2003/August/Khomeini/ Democracy? I meant theocracy The most truthful individual ] Come on!--Patchouli 13:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

"democratic systems" also suffer from monopolistic interpretations! Farhoudk 13:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Iran student riots, July 1999

This article is a betrayal against all those activists and everyday people who have been tortured, lost their lives, been persecuted, lied to, etc.--Patchouli 14:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


This article has been written to show the people how to maintain their Islamic faith in this tumultuary world and still love other people who are not of the same opinion. Its aim is to show how a Muslim people can live free with their own belief, interests and values.

Farhoudk 13:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


http://www.isna.ir/Main/PicView.aspx?Pic=Pic-841745-2&Lang=P

This picture shows reaction of students to lecture of President Ahmadinejad in Amir Kabir University of Technology at Dec 11, 2006 Farhoudk 18:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Human rights in Islamic Republic of Iran

Human rights? Come on!--Patchouli 14:10, 16 October 2006 (UTC)








The human rights is an Iranian code introduced to human kind 2500 years ago by Cyrus the Great, an Iranian whos name is mentioned in Quran? See Cyrus the Great in the Qur'an.

But for American Human Rights see this one!! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6045112.stm Is there any similarity between Iranian operations in Iraq 2500 years ago with American operations in Iraq today? I do not think so.

Farhoudk 13:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Democracy is not Secularism!

We should distinguish between two contexts:

•Context of definition, which is a mental context: In the context of definition, we opt for a particular definition and say that democracy means this or that.

•Objective context which exists outside the mind: Other elements, such as secularism, coincide with it and this is a different issue.

What occurs externally is coincidence not unity.

Example: water, heat, boiled water. We do not bring in the element of heat in defining water. In the external and objective world, water coincides with heat and it boils. This is the coincidence of heat and water.

Democracy where coincides with certain things, it can be secular or religious.

Example: Relativistic liberalism and democracy are not identical.

Democracy is not violated when a faith is embraced, it is violated when a particular belief is imposed or disbelief is punished.

We do not have one democracy but many democracies from ancient Greece to today.

We have a plurality of democracies in the international community.

What emerged was that a democracy prevailed in different eras depending on the conditions of the time.


Religious Democracy / Secular Democracy Religious democracy is an example of how democratic values can exist in a different cultural elaboration than what is usually known in the EU or US– indeed.

Religious democracy means that the values of religion play a role in the public arena in a society populated by religious people.

But, in a secular society, some other characteristic is deemed important and focused on, and that becomes the basis for democracy.

Hence, what alters the hue and color of democracy is a society’s specific characteristics and elements.

Now it is also evident why secular and Islamic rules are not 100% compatible.


[edit] Islam and Democracy

Is a democratic Islamic state possible?

Cons:

• Secularists: We share the ideals of a democratic society, and a secular state. We therefore favor the firm separation of religion and state. Without such a separation there can be no freedom from tyranny. The sovereignty of the people dominates.

• Legalists: Democracy may be accepted in a Christian society but it can never enjoy a general acceptance in an Islamic society. Christianity is devoid of a Shariah or a comprehensive system of life to which its adherents should be committed. Anything outside of the rigid, but pervasive, interpretation of the Shariah is rejected. The sovereignty of God prevails; there is no role for the sovereignty of people. The concept of free will is not recognized.

It is almost certain that legalists do not represent the majority of Muslims.

Pros:

•Ayatollah Khomeini: The concepts of time and place are essential in Dynamic Fiqh (Saheb Javaher Fiqh). All of the modern societies rules such as social security, insurance, labor’s law, municipality systems etc can be considered as state authorities of Islamic state. These types of rules which are outcomes of human experience and understanding are categorized as state commandments, beside primary commandments and secondary commandments in Fiqh. And the Islamic state has absolute and not limited nor bounded right to enact state commandments at all, even if it violates the primary or secondary commandments of Islam. The basis is the people’s vote. Muslim people not only have right to build their own Islamic state in absence of infallibles and it is not against Shariah, but also they must do it.

•Former president Khatami: "I, as the proponent of religious democracy, believe that no one in the world accepts anything other than democracy. Democracy has been inevitable so that it should comply with religious, ethical and moral values in our society." "Every work we may do to put aside Islam or democracy, it would be an attempt to torpedo the basic goals of the Islamic Revolution." "Today, two groups are the two blades of a scissors, preventing the genuine reform movement seeking religious democracy: One group consists of those with backward mentality who think the less freedom a society enjoys, the stronger religion will be. They oppose the democratic process and want to put down expectations of the youth. The second blade of the scissors is the group including those who believe that religion should be put aside from the scene of life in order to establish democracy and freedom."

•Dr. Soroush: There is a crucial distinction between religion and religious understanding by emphasizing that religious understanding is merely a variety of human understanding. Religion remains constant, while religious understanding changes. Fiqh is the religious experience of religion. God reveals religion, but it is up to us to understand and realize it. Secularism, democracy and other human understandings do not threaten religion; they merely help to increase the understanding of religion. Human understanding of Islam does not necessarily have all the answers. There is always room for improvement. Religion’s most important function is ethics. In other words, if we were to change religion, one should put ethics in its place. A religion in which this element is lacking is no longer religion.

•Professor Mehmet Aydin,Turkish Minister for Religious Affairs: Democracy is based on ethical values and of course Islam agrees with these values. Islam teaches us to love and respect our fellow human beings, so human rights are not incompatible with Islam.

Democratic religious circles in Iran

These groups are characterized by the followings: • Support for Islamic republic as the best form of government • Calling for Religious tolerance • Calling for democratic values • Rejecting liberalism • Rejecting secularism • Calling for the rule of law and civil society • They believe that ethics has priority over politics.

The main thinker and theorist of this circle is Mohammad Khatami, former president of Iran. They are mainly under the influence of ideas of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

[edit] Official website of Khatami

http://www.khatami.ir/

[edit] Ethics in American Democracy !!!!!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6067958.stm

[edit] Bush accepts Iraq-Vietnam echoes

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6045112.stm

[edit] Cleanup

This page is in bad need of a cleanup. Currently it reads like someone's essay, not an encyclopedia article. Much of the article seems to take the form of a debate, which should not be what we write here. Also many statements are make while attributed to 'Legalists' or 'Secularists' as though these were some organised and well-defined bodies.

  1. We need to write from a neutral point of view
  2. We need to attribute statements
  3. we need to cite our sources

DJ Clayworth 19:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear DJ Clayworth,

Thank you for your attention. Please let me know your opinion about new version of the article. Farhoudk 09:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] about 655,000 people have died in Iraq as a result of the 2003 invasion

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6045112.stm


[edit] Deletion

I tried to put this article up for deletion a few weeks ago, but I'm a little inexperienced with editing, so I did it wrong. Could someone who knows what they're doing put it up for deletion again? This article seems hopelessly propagandist. It should not be recreated without specific quotes from Iranian or other scholars defining religious democracy. Makerowner 05:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


This article has been written not to propagate a wrong picture from existing real condition. But tries to make a clear underestanding about what main thinkers of this context were trying to introduce to humankind and without considering what is or what was their real action. Otherwise theory and practice will become confused and no results will derived. So please be aware that the writter (being an Iranian) made his utmost effort to remain unaligned and neutral to personalities but only reflect the main idea introduced elsewhere. Also please note the references made by the author about Iranian scholars such as Dr. Soroush who is lecturer in the various universities in the US now. farhoudk 25 November 2006


I made some modifications. farhoudk 25 November 2006

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/l/Talk%7EReligious_democracy_1ce5.html"