A Secular Somali State?

[Cicero]

ailamos, you are doing Islam a great service when you insist that it needs to undergo a serious reformation. It is long overdue, sxb. Muslims sadly exhibit a mediaeval understanding of religion where intellectual enquiry and rational criticism are replaced with childish certitudes and platitudes.

[Mr. Somalia]

Originally posted by Cicero:

 

 

Though the majority of Somalis are muslims, there are

many non-muslim Somalis

; atheists, agnostics, christians, buddhists, hindus, confucians.

YOU LIE!!

[poiuyt]

Good thread.

 

Here's the issue though: I think an appreciation for the rule of law -- for the necessity of a government-- must precede democratic secularism.

 

Consider the fact that nearly all European countries were monarchies for the longest time where the common man was not free at all to have a voice in the creation of laws. But the rule of law was always forced upon the non-elite so that after hundreds of years they became culturally dependent on it. It was in no one's interest to have everything devolve into anarchy. And it isn't just European countries that this is true of. Consider Japan and China. Both countries had systems of government that enforced rigid laws for, in the case of Japan, at least 1.5 thousand years and in China's case considerably longer. These sort of governments are obviously far from today's ideal but at least they were governments, and they had a lasting and deep impact on the culture of the people. There is also the issue of literacy. A significant portion of the population of these people -- Europeans and Asians -- could read and write for hundreds of years. This also had an effect on their governments and laws.

 

Somalis on the otherhand had practically never known of the concept of government (and literacy!) before the arrival of Europeans. Sure, we had our own indigious form of conflict resolution and so on, but our way of life didn't necessitate any form of central government.

 

To go from this chaotic state to a secular democracy is, simply, too much of a jump. The cultural inertia from our pre-European contact years was simply too strong against the systems the Europeans gave us and, therefore, the military dictatorships and eventual disolution of the government was inevitable. You're talking about hundreds of years of clans and tribalism. This cultural inertia is still strong today because quite frankly there remain entirely rational reasons for your average Somali to cling to it: if he or she doesn't, he or she would lose any protection that clan/tribe offers. In the olden days your possessions and sheep and camels were protected by your fellow clan/sub-clan members against other clans. How could anyone in such a circumstance forsake his tribe/clan? How can anyone in Somalia today forsake his tribe/clan? It simply isn't rational to do so.

 

And yet, the clan/tribe system doesn't really make sense in a world where people have united as NATIONS to further their interests. The nation is the ultimate tribe.

 

Somalis need to come to understand first the benefits of nationhood, and a people cannot achieve secular democracy without having been prepared in the rule of law and literacy for hundreds of years.

[Cara.]

^Good points (also don't forget the Roman empire, to whom western Europe was a collection of primitive tribes in need of civilization). Which is why this whole discussion is a bit premature. Eventually, the ideal system of governance will be secular democracy. Anyone who thinks otherwise is frankly delusional. But before we get to that point, ANY form of a stable system will be welcome. I for one would welcome some system based on shariah.

[ailamos]

Originally posted by chocolate & honey:

LOL! Ok, ? If you dont beleive they're inadequate, why are you againt Islamic states? Second, what's with this emotions you keep reffering to? Are you saying, religious people are emotional?

Yes, I am saying that religious people are emotional because of the attachment to their religion. They refuse to step out of religion for a second and see if their actions are reasonable. Instead they close down and would rather obey what God has supposedly decreed. Try to grasp what I'm trying to say here... let me illustrate with an example:

Everyday millions of Muslims rise up for the Fajr and spend their days in pious observance of their religion, they make an individual, conscious decision to involve religion into their personal lives and make decisions for themselves based on their religion <-- this is a private matter which I have absolutely no problem with.

 

Within Islam there are conflicts between different schools of thought and between Shias, Sunnis and Sufis, there are varying interpretations from the Wahhabis to the more liberal Muslims. Some Muslims are more passionate about their religion than others and use it as a weapon to demonize others for not being as passionate as they are. If you have a system of government that runs on this then you are taking this private matter and imposing it on everyone that lives in the land, whether they be Muslims, Christians, Hindus, blah, blah... and I do not think is fair. Whereas a secular system treats all these people as equals under one system of law that protects all religions without preferring one over the other. Period.

 

I'm glad you didnt fall of the chair and harm yourself. Let me slow it down for you: The Sharia laws are written in the Qur'an and the Qur'an is God's words precisely. So if you criticize or disagree with the Qur'an, you're disagreeing with God. I hope I'm clear enough.

There are several people that literally interpret these words of God. A classic example being religious fundamentalists. Rather than it being a personal choice of whether or not to take a particular verse literally you're making a grand imposition on citizenry to comply with something they may or may not think is right.

 

Again, I'm confused. How are you seperating Allah from his religion? And no, criticizing man-made laws and goverments isnt the same as critiquing Almight God, OK?

Let's take the verse 4:34 that is often quoted. It gives right for a husband to hit his wife "if it makes the situation better". Now, I don't see how hitting a person would make any situation better, but it being God's literal word, it can become law in a Shariah country and thus legalizes domestic violence. It all depends on the husband and what he thinks since men are the 'maintainers of women', so you have a serious problem if you have a temperamental man.

 

Yes! Once you accept they're God's laws and you cant question God, we can talk about corruption, human errors, checks and balances within Islamic states, interpertations of laws and who is in power.

That's interesting. The Quran is vague on many things. A secular system avoids this problem of vagueness and although misinterpretations do occur, they would not be at the level of religious ones.

 

If you're questioning God's laws (by the way do you believe they're God's or someone's opinion?) you're certainly questioning the competance of such laws, God. I mean you dont exactly believe they're just right?

Let's just say that I believe religion was laid down to 'civilize' people, but has always been corrupted and used as a means of oppression by the powerful. Take a look at what happened during the Christian inquisition or Islamic inquisition under caliph al-Mahdi. What if a person chooses to leave Islam in a Shariah country, s/he doesn't have the freedom to do that for fear of being put to death.

 

So, you're not exactly sure if the Qur'an is from God but you "believe"(I put this in quotations because to believe means to accept blindly the unknown) in Islam? Hm....

haha ... like I said, it's a whole other can of worms.

[Chocolate and Honey]

See, there needs to be a clear base when two people are debating a certain matter. I'm getting confused here because you dont believe the Qur'an is literally from Allah(which then makes you a non-believer) and you dont want to go the atheist route. You're mixing things because you want to argue on the basis of this religion(citing verses, certain interpretations of Imams, etc)which you dont beleive in.

Before you take on this issue, please jump the fence and admit to yourself that you're either confused about your religion or reluctant to admit to yourself that you dont beleive anymore. If you dont believe anymore, we can take a look at what irks you about this religion.

If you believe in Allah(you cant pick and choose what you agree or dont agree with. You dont have the liberty to do so once you develop faith), then we can discuss how and why secularism is beneficial to US than the Sharia Law.

[ailamos]

Originally posted by chocolate & honey:

See, there needs to be a clear base when two people are debating a certain matter. I'm getting confused here because you dont believe the Qur'an is literally from Allah(which then makes you a non-believer) and you dont want to go the atheist route. You're mixing things because you want to argue on the basis of this religion(citing verses, certain interpretations of Imams, etc)which you dont beleive in.

Before you take on this issue, please jump the fence and admit to yourself that you're either confused about your religion or reluctant to admit to yourself that you dont beleive anymore. If you dont believe anymore, we can take a look at what irks you about this religion.

If you believe in Allah(you cant pick and choose what you agree or dont agree with. You dont have the liberty to do so once you develop faith), then we can discuss how and why secularism is beneficial to US than the Sharia Law.

Whether I believe in Allah/Jesus/Yahweh/Shiva/Buddha or just a God is besides the point. This is not about me and what I believe, this is about the future of our country. If you must know, I am a Somali first and foremost. A Somali who wants a stable country that has a just government based on respecting the rights of everyone without preferential treatment for any one group. That is the base from which we should begin. If you are confused then please clear your head and come back when you have something to contribute that will make this conversation move forward.

[Chocolate and Honey]

Aww... did I touch a raw nerve? Well..hmm.. your beleifs are relevant because we're discussing a country thats 99% Muslim and when and if given the chance will likely choose the Sharia Law.

Secondly, your beliefs matter because if you are a non-believer, ofcourse you would push for secular goverment!

Well, here is my contribution in a sum: I vote for a goverment that adheres to the Sharia laws because I believe Islam is a way of life, complete with laws and governance. I believe the Qur'an we read today is the word of ALLAH. And certainly Allah's laws are far superior to man-made laws. No need to modify or improve something that has already reached perfection:

This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; Surah 5: Verse 3

[ailamos]

Originally posted by chocolate & honey:

Aww... did I touch a raw nerve? Well..hmm.. your beleifs are relevant because we're discussing a country thats 99% Muslim and when and if given the chance will likely choose the Sharia Law.

 

No raw nerves were touched, don't worry And you're prediction will remain to be seen and time will tell.

 

Secondly, your beliefs matter because if you are a non-believer, ofcourse you would push for secular goverment!

 

Perhaps a non-Muslim is more likely to push for a secular government because that would be the only way their rights would be guaranteed, but I think that a Muslim, depending on how conservative s/he is, can also choose a secular system? No?

 

Well, here is my contribution in a sum: I vote for a goverment that adheres to the Sharia laws because I believe Islam is a way of life, complete with laws and governance. I believe the Qur'an we read today is the word of ALLAH. And certainly Allah's laws are far superior to man-made laws. No need to modify or improve something that has already reached perfection:

This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion;

Surah 5: Verse 3

Thank you I suppose the only way to resolve this would be through consensus

 

Let me as you though, since we're on the matter of percentages and consensuses. What do you think of the recent Swiss ban on minarets? And the French ban on the hijab? What if the US, or rather the Minnesota, where you are, would vote for a ban on all forms of the Muslim veil since it's a majority Christian state/country and that's not what they believe in? What do you think? Would that be fair? or would it be an infringement on your rights?

 

I'm just curious.

[Chocolate and Honey]

Let me as you though, since we're on the matter of percentages and consensuses. What do you think of the recent Swiss ban on minarets?

I don't believe the minarets add or take away any value to the legitimacy of Masjids. So I care less.

And the French ban on the hijab? What if the US, or rather the Minnesota, where you are, would vote for a ban on all forms of the Muslim veil since it's a majority Christian

Since both the French and the U.S. boast freedom and democracy and preach individual freedom, I think it is hypocracy at its best that the French goverment concerned itself with such trivial thing as how a woman should dress. Also, you assumed that I believe the veil to be an obligation: I dont!

Would that be fair? or would it be an infringement on your rights?

It would be violation of my rights as the constitution makes it clear. However, If I moved to say,Vatican city(where there were clear laws put in place stating that I couldnt wear a head scarf, I would certainly either abide by the laws or move). There isnt really a double standards when it comes to following rules as the West would have you believe. It's all about social contract. For instance, if a certain Muslim country dictates that you must wear a head scarf as a non-believer to enjoy that country and they dont promote individual choice, then thats what must be done.

 

To you be your Way, and to me mine.

chap. 109, verse 6

[ailamos]

The example of the minarets ban illustrate how a group can be demonized by the majority even in a secular country. But the difference here is that the secular courts will over-rule this referendum because it is an infringement on the rights of a minority.

 

I agree that it is hypocrisy that the French government involves itself in such a matter. The problem I have with the French government is that they grab their secularist value very rightly, which is also not right, I have a similar disagreement with people who grab religion too tightly.

 

I for one am for a system like in the US that uploads one's individual liberties and rights.

 

Anyway, we're not talking about the veil (that's Ibti's department ) but I'm curious... you don't believe that it be made obligatory, but many other Muslims do, what if the majority of those Muslims, as per their view, decide that it be made mandatory on all women in the country?

 

But wait, you said "if a certain Muslim country dictates that you must wear a head scarf as a non-believer to enjoy that country and they dont promote individual choice, then thats what must be done."... that's what I don't want in a future Somalia, no one should take away one's right to choose.

[ailamos]

It's interesting that you quote Surat Al Kafiroon.

 

A system based on that "you have your religion, and I have my religion" with everyone living in peace and harmony under one secular system of law is what I advocate.

[Chocolate and Honey]

Anyway, we're not talking about the veil (that's Ibti's department ) but I'm curious... you don't believe that it be made obligatory, but many other Muslims do, what if the majority of those Muslims, as per their view, decide that it be made mandatory on all women in the country?

I dont believe it's obligatory. And the beauty of Islam is neither MAJORITY nor MINORITY RULES: what rules is the already written and decided upon rules. So you see, NO ONE can decide for me. I have a choice to either wear it or not. I also have a choice to decide what I consider Hijab(is it a shaal, big garbasaar, cabaayad, Pakistani style or the current one you see on Somali women?).

And yes! Live and let live,that's fundemental in Islam.

[Ibtisam]

lool @ This thread.

 

Shariah rule will not work Somalia or any other place at this time without a whole new Islamicly educated, honest sincere, faithful people who apply the laws of sharia generally, fairly and across the community regardless of the circumstance.

 

Islam as a rule of law works perfectly, we know it does because history tells us that during the time of the prophet and the four following generation it worked. The question is can the same system be replicated in today’s conditions and environment and still produce the perfect society (for its time) it once did. I think not, because there is too much corruption, dishonesty, sins and murders who have not paid for their crimes. Let’s try a different system: I’m up for the rise or Araweelo in Somalia.

[ailamos]

Has any of you read "The Law of the Somalis: A Stable Foundation for Economic Development in the Horn of Africa" by van Notten. I found it in a B&N and read about a quarter of it. The author bring interesting concepts to the table. Here is the introduction http://home.arcor.de/danneskjoeld/X/Som/Introduction.html Would love to know what everyone thinks.