4 ms·
But Christianity does not have an equivalent of Sharia (Pakistan has Sharia courts) nor does it have much to say about statecraft in general. Saying "not all Mu
by ng12 10y ago
But Christianity does not have an equivalent of Sharia (Pakistan has Sharia courts) nor does it have much to say about statecraft in general. Saying "not all Muslims" or outlining oddities from other religions does not do justice to Islam's role as a geopolitical force.
- PhasmaFelis 10y agoYou should absolutely acknowledge and resist the efforts of fundamentalists and bigots of every stripe. Islamic fundamentalism is dangerous and toxic and kills people. What bugs me is how many people refuse to admit any difference between Islamic fundamentalists and all Muslims. This is not a petty nitpick in an America where violent attacks against Muslims are skyrocketing. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/politics/fbi-hate-crimes-muslims.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/politics/fbi-hate-crim...
- ng12 10y agoPakistan implements Islamic law which includes a death penalty for blasphemy. Nobody's talking about Muslims in America.
- PhasmaFelis 10y agoThe post that I was replying to in the first place said "blasphemy is indeed punishable by death in Islam," full stop. All I'm trying to do is make it clear that no major religion is a unified monolith. We both know that the crimes of terrorists and fundamentalists are used to condemn peaceful Muslims in the US and Europe.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> But Christianity does not have an equivalent of Sharia Christianity absolutely has, in each of it's iterations, bodies of behavioral norms which believers seek to have instituted by the State, or institute by themselves (sometimes through violence) independent of the State. > (Pakistan has Sharia courts) The UK, for example, doesn't need the Christian equivalent (ecclesiastical courts, which, also, the established Church has) for blasphemy, because blasphemy against Chritianity has, for over 400 years, been cognizable as an offense against the common law, so the regular courts deal with that. [0] > nor does it have much to say about statecraft in general. Christianity has quite a lot to say about statecraft. Thanks to the success of European colonialism, much of what powerful branches of Christianity has said about it have been influential in shaping international law, both customary and treaty. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_the_United_...
- ng12 10y agoThere are key differences though and for what it's worth I would feel the same about a medieval-era Catholic monarchy as I do about an Islamic state. Islam has many unique concepts -- Sharia, jihad, the Calpihate -- that make it fundamentally difficult to compare to most other world religions. Mohammad was a prophet first, but he was also a conqueror and a statesman.
- dragonwriter 10y ago"Sharia" is just religious law. It is not particularly a unique feature to Islam, though religious law and religious courts have declined in the West over the last few centuries and now mostly are confined to dealing with members of their own religion, and usually lack the backing of the State or State-like power (though that's not universally the case, and is more a regional diffference that correlates with religion than a religious difference.) "Jihad" has a close parallel in "Crusade", in both the violent and non-violent senses each term has within their respective religious communities. I'll give you caliphate as somewhat unique, and at least without a close parallel in mainstream modern Christianity.
- devdas 10y agoPapacy?
- dragonwriter 10y agoNot really the same thing, which is kind of the central point behind the Holy Roman Empire.
- PhasmaFelis 10y agoSpeaking as a Christian, people will jump through all kinds of hoops to exempt Christians from the horrible bits of the Bible while insisting that all Muslims are bound by the horrible bits of the Koran.
- MichaelGG 10y ago
- wavefunction 10y agoChristian sharia is called 'the law' in much of the Western hemisphere, which is pretty much what 'sharia' means. Americans (and others in the liberal democracies of the West) forget about things like 'blue laws' or attempts to prohibit gay-marriage, 'miscegenation' and other moral policing primarily because we have moved away from those practices. So while the current Christian version of sharia is somewhat limited to things like whether folks can buy beer or get their car fixed on a Sunday, it's still there exerting its influence. I mean, swearing on a Bible? heh
- ng12 10y agoSure, but these are laws which were the result of shared beliefs of it's constituents. They were not laws because the religion says they should be laws.
- devdas 10y agoThe shared belief rose from them being laws first, and people growing up with those laws as normal.
- fellellor 10y agoIslamic laws are also from the shared beliefs of their constituents.
- flukus 10y agoSo if the beliefs change then islamic law can change? What makes it Islamic law then?
- dragonwriter 10y agoReligions change when the beliefs of people in religious communities change. Christianity, including both beliefs and ecclesiastical legal systems (which Christianity has, and which have historically been enforced with State power, or State-like power by the Church.) Consider, in the Roman Catholic Church, the modern Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, as compared to its early 20th Century predecessor, the Congregation for the Holy Office, and it's predecessor, the Supreme Sacred Congregation for the Universal Inquisition, both in terms of the body of law applied, the beliefs underlying that body of law, and the practical methods applied and the persons subjected to the jurisdiction of the Congregation.