Democracy & Secularism

[Ducaysane_87]

Democracy is a form of government in which state-power is held by the majority of citizens within a country or a state. It is derived from the Greek δημοκρατία (dēmokratía (info)), "popular government",[1] which was coined from δῆμος (dêmos), "people" and κράτος (krátos), "rule, strength" in the middle of the fifth-fourth century BC to denote the political systems then existing in some Greek city-states, notably Athens following a popular uprising in 508 BC.[2]

In political theory, democracy describes a small number of related forms of government and also a political philosophy. Even though there is no universally accepted definition of 'democracy',[3] there are two principles that any definition of democracy includes. The first principle is that all members of the society (citizens) have equal access to power and the second that all members (citizens) enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties.[4][5][6]

There are several varieties of democracy, some of which provide better representation and more freedoms for their citizens than others.[7][8] However, if any democracy is not carefully legislated to avoid an uneven distribution of political power with balances, such as the separation of powers, then a branch of the system of rule could accumulate power and become harmful to the democracy itself.[9][10][11] The "majority rule" is often described as a characteristic feature of democracy, but without responsible government it is possible for the rights of a minority to be abused by the "tyranny of the majority". An essential process in representative democracies are competitive elections, that are fair both substantively[12] and procedurally.[13] Furthermore, freedom of political expression, freedom of speech and freedom of the press are essential so that citizens are informed and able to vote in their personal interests.[14][15]

Popular sovereignty is common but not a universal motivating philosophy for establishing a democracy. In some countries, democracy is based on the philosophical principle of equal rights. Many people use the term "democracy" as shorthand for liberal democracy, which may include additional elements such as political pluralism, equality before the law, the right to petition elected officials for redress of grievances, due process, civil liberties, human rights, and elements of civil society outside the government. In the United States, separation of powers is often cited as a supporting attribute, but in other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the dominant philosophy is parliamentary sovereignty (though in practice judicial independence is generally maintained). In other cases, "democracy" is used to mean direct democracy. Though the term "democracy" is typically used in the context of a political state, the principles are also applicable to private organizations and other groups.

Democracy has its origins in Ancient Greece.[16][17] However other cultures have significantly contributed to the evolution of democracy such as Ancient India,[18] Ancient Rome,[16] Europe,[16] and North and South America.[19] Democracy has been called the "last form of government" and has spread considerably across the globe.[20] Suffrage has been expanded in many jurisdictions over time from relatively narrow groups (such as wealthy men of a particular ethnic group), but still remains a controversial issue with regard to disputed territories, areas with significant immigration






Secularism


Secularism is the assertion that governmental practices or institutions should exist separately from religion and/or religious beliefs.

In one sense, secularism may assert the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, and freedom from the government imposition of religion upon the people, within a state that is neutral on matters of belief, and gives no state privileges or subsidies to religions. (See also Separation of church and state and Laïcité.) In another sense, it refers to the view that human activities and decisions, especially political ones, should be based on evidence and fact unbiased by religious influence.[1] (See also public reason.)

In its most prominent form, secularism is critical of religious orthodoxy and asserts that religion impedes human progress because of its focus on superstition and dogma rather than on reason and the scientific method. Secularism draws its intellectual roots from Greek and Roman philosophers such as Marcus Aurelius and Epicurus, Enlightenment thinkers like Denis Diderot, Voltaire, Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Paine, and modern freethinkers, agnostics and atheists such as Bertrand Russell, Robert Ingersoll, Albert Einstein, Sam Harris, and Richard Dawkins.

The purposes and arguments in support of secularism vary widely. In European laicism, it has been argued that secularism is a movement toward modernization, and away from traditional religious values. This type of secularism, on a social or philosophical level, has often occurred while maintaining an official state church or other state support of religion. In the United States, some argue that state secularism has served to a greater extent to protect religion from governmental interference, while secularism on a social level is less prevalent.[2][3] Within countries as well, differing political movements support secularism for varying reasons.[4]

The term "secularism" was first used by the British writer George Holyoake in 1846.[5] Although the term was new, the general notions of freethought on which it was based had existed throughout history. In particular, early secular ideas involving the separation of philosophy and religion can be traced back to Ibn Rushd (Averroes) and the Averroism school of philosophy.[6][7] Holyoake invented the term "secularism" to describe his views of promoting a social order separate from religion, without actively dismissing or criticizing religious belief. An agnostic himself, Holyoake argued that "Secularism is not an argument against Christianity, it is one independent of it. It does not question the pretensions of Christianity; it advances others. Secularism does not say there is no light or guidance elsewhere, but maintains that there is light and guidance in secular truth, whose conditions and sanctions exist independently, and act forever. Secular knowledge is manifestly that kind of knowledge which is founded in this life, which relates to the conduct of this life, conduces to the welfare of this life, and is capable of being tested by the experience of this life."[8]

Barry Kosmin of the Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society and Culture breaks modern secularism into two types: hard and soft secularism. According to Kosmin, "the hard secularist considers religious propositions to be epistemologically illegitimate, warranted by neither reason nor experience." However, in the view of soft secularism, "the attainment of absolute truth was impossible and therefore skepticism and tolerance should be the principle and overriding values in the discussion of science and religion."[

[FAH1223]

The basic idea of democracy is not incompatible with Islamic Sharia.

Islamic Sharia is NOT compatible with secularism though.

[Ducaysane_87]

The basic idea of democracy is not incompatible with Islamic Sharia.

Islamic Sharia is NOT compatible with secularism though.

democracy over securlism anyday

[Hoowle]

Islamic Sharia is NOT compatible with secularism though.

And democracy even though you like to convince yourself otherwise. Democracy is premised on the right of the voters to elect their representatives (lawmakers) who in turn make laws. But under Islamic Sharia, laws have already been "revealed". Lawmakers become redundant since all that is left to do is interpret laws which is the purview of imaams not lawmakers. So the idea of Sharia and Democracy co-existing is absurd. The so-called "Islamic fundamentalists/extremists" are more intellectually honest when they bluntly state that voting is a sin. You can't be a muslim and accept democracy.

What's more absurd is the revealed religions which try to convince us that we need religion to tell us how to make computers, cure diseases, increase crop yields and build airplanes. What can religions teach us that we can't figure out on our own? Nothing!

Secularism on the other hand is based on REASON. The bane of religious folks since time immemorial. And more recently, empiricism or evidence. Reason and Evidence are twin pillars the modern world is built on. They have done for the world than all the existing 10,000 religions combined. While religions are busy "saving souls" secularists are busy saving real lives and making the world better for future generations. Secularism cares about the future and making the world better because a central tenet of it is we only got THIS world.

[Cali_Gaab]

I love how he tries to start a intellectual topic by copying and pasting from Wikipedia

[FAH1223]

Islamic Sharia is NOT compatible with secularism though.

And democracy even though you like to convince yourself otherwise. Democracy is premised on the right of the voters to elect their representatives (lawmakers) who in turn make laws. But under Islamic Sharia, laws have already been "revealed". Lawmakers become redundant since all that is left to do is interpret laws which is the purview of imaams not lawmakers. So the idea of Sharia and Democracy co-existing is absurd. The so-called "Islamic fundamentalists/extremists" are more intellectually honest when they bluntly state that voting is a sin. You can't be a muslim and accept democracy.

What's more absurd is the revealed religions which try to convince us that we need religion to tell us how to make computers, cure diseases, increase crop yields and build airplanes. What can religions teach us that we can't figure out on our own? Nothing!

Secularism on the other hand is based on REASON. The bane of religious folks since time immemorial. And more recently, empiricism or evidence. Reason and Evidence are twin pillars the modern world is built on. They have done for the world than all the existing 10,000 religions combined. While religions are busy "saving souls" secularists are busy saving real lives and making the world better for future generations. Secularism cares about the future and making the world better because a central tenet of it is we only got THIS world.

Islam is based on reason.

And like I said, the basic idea of democracy... i.e. electing leaders, holding them accountable and letting the people have rights is not alien to Islam... its at the very core of the being

and yeah you don't need lawmakers to make new laws necesarily... as sharia is already the law of the land

[Ducaysane_87]

securlism already failed under MSB - democracy lasts longer -

[Queen_Arawello]

I love how he tries to start a intellectual topic by copying and pasting from Wikipedia

[Ducaysane_87]

^^ it was already saved on my computer why do i need to write it down all of it when i just can get it posted in secs - faster the better -

[Hoowle]

Islamic Sharia is NOT compatible with secularism though.

And democracy even though you like to convince yourself otherwise. Democracy is premised on the right of the voters to elect their representatives (lawmakers) who in turn make laws. But under Islamic Sharia, laws have already been "revealed". Lawmakers become redundant since all that is left to do is interpret laws which is the purview of imaams not lawmakers. So the idea of Sharia and Democracy co-existing is absurd. The so-called "Islamic fundamentalists/extremists" are more intellectually honest when they bluntly state that voting is a sin. You can't be a muslim and accept democracy.

What's more absurd is the revealed religions which try to convince us that we need religion to tell us how to make computers, cure diseases, increase crop yields and build airplanes. What can religions teach us that we can't figure out on our own? Nothing!

Secularism on the other hand is based on REASON. The bane of religious folks since time immemorial. And more recently, empiricism or evidence. Reason and Evidence are twin pillars the modern world is built on. They have done for the world than all the existing 10,000 religions combined. While religions are busy "saving souls" secularists are busy saving real lives and making the world better for future generations. Secularism cares about the future and making the world better because a central tenet of it is we only got THIS world.

Islam is based on reason.

And like I said, the basic idea of democracy... i.e. electing leaders, holding them accountable and letting the people have rights is not alien to Islam... its at the very core of the being

and yeah you don't need lawmakers to make new laws necesarily... as sharia is already the law of the land

What's the point of holding the elected responsible if the elected are toothless? If elected lawmakers can not change the laws of the land, then their election was a facade. The whole purpose behind elections is to elect lawmakers who MAKE changes in the existing laws or enact new ones.

In Sharia, laws have already been revealed and laid down in stone eons ago. You can not change them even if reason and evidence require it. You must accept and enforce them as per religious dogma. In democracy nothing is written in stone. Nowadays in liberal democracies we hear of legalizing of same-sex marriage. Who legalizes it? Lawmakers. Can the same happen in sharia? Of course not. This is why democracy is anathema in Islam. This is why the West had to go through a process of secularization before it arrived at liberal democracy.


The essence of democracy is that humans are in charge of their destiny. The essence of revealed religions is God/Allah is in charge of human destiny. These are two irreconcilable positions. Attempts to reconcile them will amount to squaring a circle.

[FAH1223]

What's the point of holding the elected responsible if the elected are toothless? If elected lawmakers can not change the laws of the land, then their election was a facade. The whole purpose behind elections is to elect lawmakers who MAKE changes in the existing laws or enact new ones.

In Sharia, laws have already been revealed and laid down in stone eons ago. You can not change them even if reason and evidence require it. You must accept and enforce them as per religious dogma. In democracy nothing is written in stone. Nowadays in liberal democracies we hear of legalizing of same-sex marriage. Who legalizes it? Lawmakers. Can the same happen in sharia? Of course not. This is why democracy is anathema in Islam. This is why the West had to go through a process of secularization before it arrived at liberal democracy.


The essence of democracy is that humans are in charge of their destiny. The essence of revealed religions is God/Allah is in charge of human destiny. These are two irreconcilable positions. Attempts to reconcile them will amount to squaring a circle.

See you got it all wrong and you are looking at it from a secular perspective...

same sex marriage is a big no no

alcohol no

all the other haram stuff no

democracy basic tenet of electing and holding people accountable is not alien to Islam

Humans are not in control of their destiny... wtf you on? You don't know when you going to die, you don't know the future... shid

[Alphamander]

Islamic Sharia is NOT compatible with secularism though.

And democracy even though you like to convince yourself otherwise. Democracy is premised on the right of the voters to elect their representatives (lawmakers) who in turn make laws. But under Islamic Sharia, laws have already been "revealed". Lawmakers become redundant since all that is left to do is interpret laws which is the purview of imaams not lawmakers. So the idea of Sharia and Democracy co-existing is absurd. The so-called "Islamic fundamentalists/extremists" are more intellectually honest when they bluntly state that voting is a sin. You can't be a muslim and accept democracy.

What's more absurd is the revealed religions which try to convince us that we need religion to tell us how to make computers, cure diseases, increase crop yields and build airplanes. What can religions teach us that we can't figure out on our own? Nothing!

Secularism on the other hand is based on REASON. The bane of religious folks since time immemorial. And more recently, empiricism or evidence. Reason and Evidence are twin pillars the modern world is built on. They have done for the world than all the existing 10,000 religions combined. While religions are busy "saving souls" secularists are busy saving real lives and making the world better for future generations. Secularism cares about the future and making the world better because a central tenet of it is we only got THIS world.

Couldn't agree more.

[Alphamander]

Islam is based on reason.

No, it's based on faith and the ugly dogmatism of a revealed truth.

[snoop12]

Democracy is full of flaws and anyone one can shape it to favor themselves, secularism has a decreased amount of flaws and cant be shaped as easily as democracy

you may say democracy is in denial of its flaws whereas secularism is in terms with its flaws

Islam is beyond both of them, it can neither be shaped nor compromised... it is a perfect way of living and has zero flaws, depending on how much of Islam you enforce.

i would sincerely advice each President of the world to have the Quraan to guide them.

[Alphamander]

Democracy is full of flaws and anyone one can shape it to favor themselves, secularism has a decreased amount of flaws and cant be shaped as easily as democracy

Every system you can possibly conceive of has its flaws. Only in pure mathematics can one have a flawless system; but where human behaviour and social dynamics is concerned, the best you can do is to choose one system with less flaws over the other; elimination does the trick. That concerned, democracy is the best system we humans have so far came up. Secularism is just safeguard from religion which often proves to be the ultimate poison to order, peace, and progress.

Islam is beyond both of them,

Wow!

it can neither be shaped nor compromised...

I doubt that.

it is a perfect way of living and has zero flaws,

How could you possibly back that up?

depending on how much of Islam you enforce.

Er,...

i would sincerely advice each President of the world to have the Quraan to guide them.

I can imagine how dangerous the world would be.