mouthporn.net
#religion of totalitarianism – @religion-is-a-mental-illness on Tumblr

Religion is a Mental Illness

@religion-is-a-mental-illness / religion-is-a-mental-illness.tumblr.com

Tribeless. Problematic. Triggering. Faith is a cognitive sickness.
Avatar
I can't shake what I heard, saw once on the BBC from someone whose career in London I followed. Don't know if you know him, you wouldn't like him: Anjem Choudary. A very well-known noise maker around London, complaining about secularism, Judaism, this kind of thing, been trouble with the law a few times.
And was interviewed on BBC, went on about how nothing would change until the green flag of Islam was flying over Downing Street and Buckingham Palace, and so forth.
And was asked, I thought quite mildly by BBC interviewer, said, well if this is the way you feel about Sharia, about the total Islamic rule, wouldn't you feel happier moving to a country where they already had it?
Which is a polite question, a rather cheap one, I mean, but still. Didn't prepare me for the answer, which Choudary looked straight at the guy and straight into camera, said what "makes you think this is your country?"

In Islam, humans have the right to govern human societies and manage the affairs of humans.

... until they are offered Islam.

As far as Islam is concerned, the world already belongs to Allah. And it’s not merely the case that only Allah may be worshipped (per the shahada), but also only Allah may rule. Humans can form their little governments and make their little rules while they don’t know better. Until Islam comes to save them from the tyranny of human laws, so they can be freed to submit to Allah instead, who is already in charge of everything, the people just didn’t know.

In theocracies like Iran, they don’t really “make” laws. All the laws, everything humanity will ever need has already been given to them by Islam. These theocratic governments don’t actually create laws, they find them in the scripture. Allah has already told them whether ringtones are haram or halal, his human agents just need to be pious enough to recognize his wisdom.

That’s why an Islamist lunatic like Anjem Choudary can deadpan say “what makes you think this is your country?” He already knows that it’s Allah’s land.

Well now, just you transfer yourself to Somalia last week.
A girl of 13, probably out for the first time unsupervised in her life. Things must have been very bad if she was allowed out without male supervision to begin with. But there's enough chaos to explain that. She's immediately pounced upon by a group of older men and very thoroughly raped and sodomized and beaten.
And she goes to the religious court for redress, and the religious court knows its business. And it knows its texts very well, and it says "we don't know that it's true what you say, that men abused you in this manner. But we can tell you've had sex. In fact, judging by your injuries, we can tell you've had a great deal of sex lately. But you're not married, so you're guilty of adultery."
So now, before your wounds have stopped hurting, you're going to be buried up to your waist in hot sand and laughing men will now take part in the only other cultural activity that gratifies the male sex in that part of the world, which is stoning that young woman to death.
The people who did this knew exactly what they were doing, and they were in perfect conformity with their holy books, and they absolutely do not believe that anything happens randomly. They are not under the illusion that heaven is indifferent. They're not under the illusion that we are biologically created, that we're here because of the laws of natural selection and random mutation. They don't believe anything of the sort.
They're utterly consoled by the idea that heaven intervenes and cares about every action, otherwise they wouldn't put themselves to the trouble of raping, torturing and murdering a thirteen-year-old whose last moments you might want to take just a few seconds to imagine.
Source: youtube.com
Avatar

Question

What is the ruling on democracy and taking a leadership role in parliment or other levels of the democratical government? What is the ruling regarding voting for someone in democracy? How was the islamic state organized, and governed in the classical times?

Answer

Praise be to Allah.

Firstly:

Democracy is a man-made system, meaning rule by the people for the people. Thus it is contrary to Islam, because rule is for Allaah, the Most High, the Almighty, and it is not permissible to give legislative rights to any human being, no matter who he is.

It says in Mawsoo’at al-Adyaan wa’l-Madhaahib al-Mu’aasirah (2/1066, 1067):

Undoubtedly the democratic system is one of the modern forms of shirk, in terms of obedience and following, or legislation, as it denies the sovereignty of the Creator and His absolute right to issue laws, and ascribes that right to human beings. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“You do not worship besides Him but only names which you have named (forged) — you and your fathers — for which Allaah has sent down no authority. The command (or the judgement) is for none but Allaah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him (i.e. His Monotheism); that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not”
[Yoosuf 12:40]
“The decision is only for Allaah”
[al-An’aam 6:57]

End quote.

This has been discussed in detail in the answer to question no. 98134.

Secondly:

The one who understands the true nature of the democratic system and the ruling thereon, then he nominates himself or someone else (for election) is approving of this system, and is working with it, is in grave danger, because the democratic system is contrary to Islam and approving of it and participating in it are actions that imply apostasy and being beyond the pale of Islam.

But as for the one who nominates himself or nominates others in this system in order to join the parliament and enjoin good and forbid evil, and establish proof against them, and reduce its evil and  corruption as much as he can, so that people of corruption and disbelievers in Allaah will not have free rein to spread mischief in the land and spoil people’s worldly interests and religious commitment, this is a matter that is subject to ijtihaad, according to the interests that it is hoped will be served by that.

Some scholars are even of the view that getting involved in these elections is obligatory.

Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked about the ruling on elections, and he replied: I think that elections are obligatory; we should appoint the one who we think is good, because if the good people abstain, who will take their place? Evil people will take their place, or neutral people in whom there is neither good nor evil, but they follow everyone who makes noise. So we have no choice but to choose those who we think are fit.

If someone were to say: We chose someone but most of the parliament are not like that,

We say: It does not matter. If Allaah blesses this one person and enables him to speak the truth in this parliament, he will undoubtedly have an effect. But what we need is to be sincere towards Allaah and the problem is that we rely too much on physical means and we do not listen to what Allaah says. So nominate the one who you think is good, and put your trust in Allaah. End quote.  

From Liqaa’aat al-Baab al-Maftooh, no. 210

The scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas were asked:

Is it permissible to vote in elections and nominate people for them? Please note that our country is ruled according to something other than that which Allaah revealed?

They replied:

It is not permissible for a Muslim to nominate himself in the hope that he can become part of a system which rules according to something other than that which Allaah has revealed and operates according to something other than the sharee’ah of Islam. It is not permissible for a Muslim to vote for him or for anyone else who will work in that government, unless the one who nominates himself or those who vote for him hope that by getting involved in that they will be able to change the system to one that operates according to the sharee’ah of Islam, and they are using this as a means to overcome the system of government, provided that the one who nominates himself will not accept any position after being elected except one that does not go against Islamic sharee’ah. End quote.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Qa’ood.

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (23/406, 407)

They were also asked:

As you know, here in Algeria we have what are called legislative elections. There are parties which call for Islamic rule, and there are others that do not want Islamic rule. What is the ruling on one who votes for something other than Islamic rule even though he prays?

They replied:

The Muslims in a country that is not governed according to Islamic sharee’ah should do their utmost and strive as much as they can to bring about rule according to Islamic sharee’ah, and they should unite in helping the party which is known will rule in accordance with Islamic sharee’ah. As for supporting one who calls for non-implementation of Islamic sharee’ah, that is not permissible, rather it may lead a person to kufr, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And so judge (you O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) among them by what Allaah has revealed and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they turn you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) far away from some of that which Allaah has sent down to you. And if they turn away, then know that Allaah’s Will is to punish them for some sins of theirs. And truly, most of men are Faasiqoon (rebellious and disobedient to Allaah).
50. Do they then seek the judgement of (the days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allaah for a people who have firm Faith”
[al-Maa'idah 5:49-50]

Hence when Allaah stated that those who do not rule in accordance with Islamic sharee’ah are guilty of kufr, He warned against helping them or taking them as allies or  close  friends, and He commanded the believers to fear Him if they were truly believers. He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“O you who believe! Take not as Awliyaa’ (protectors and helpers) those who take your religion as a mockery and fun from among those who received the Scripture (Jews and Christians) before you, and nor from among the disbelievers; and fear Allaah if you indeed are true believers”
[al-Maa’idah 5:57]

And Allaah is the Source of strength. May Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and his family and companions. End quote.

Standing Committee for Academic Research and Issuing Fatwas

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (1/373).

==

Islam is explicitly anti-democracy.

As far as Islam is concerned, human input is not merely unnecessary, but unwelcome. Earth belongs to Allah, and all the laws humanity will ever need have already been created by him. All it requires is for scholars to find them in the quran.

Islam is an ideology of totalitarianism and supremacy, not tolerance or pluralism.

Source: islamqa.info
Avatar
Lars Vilks, the Swedish artist who stirred worldwide controversy in 2007 with drawings depicting the Prophet Muhammad with the body of a dog, has been killed in a car crash.
The 75-year-old died on Sunday in an accident near the southern town of Markaryd, Swedish police said in a statement.
Vilks, who had lived under police protection since the drawings were published, was travelling in a police car that collided with a truck.
The car, which had left Stockholm and was heading south, veered into the path of the truck and both vehicles burst into flames.
Two police officers were also killed.
The truck driver was flown to a hospital with serious injuries.
Police said they did not know why the car drove into the wrong lane but they were investigating whether a tyre might have exploded.
The car transporting Vilks had puncture-proof tyres, police said. However, exploded tyre remains were reportedly found on the road.
[Continued...]

Islam values its freedom to demand imposing its will onto you. If you decline, that’s “Islamophobia.”

Avatar

I would rather have free speech with people I disagree with, than authoritarian cancel culture speech-policing with people I agree with (aka echo chamber).

If I think it’s a bad idea in Xtianity where people are discouraged from looking outside of Xtian orthodoxy - and I do - why on Earth would I think it’s a good idea for everything else? How the hell would science progress if there were sacred cows that could not be tipped, ideas that are off-limits and untouchable?

The marketplace of ideas exists for a reason. Even if I disagree with someone, I may find they have a valid concern that has not been addressed or I can at least empathize with, or there may be an aspect of it that has not been considered. Or they may be convinced with a sound, reasonable argument - or I may be convinced by them, because you know what, maybe I’m wrong - rather than having their idea fester in a dark underground blackmarket of bad ideas, where they meet up with other bad ideas.

The most important part of Freedom of Speech is being able to explain why something is or is not a good idea. Cancel culture seeks to bypass this by just declaring itself the winner through harassment, doxing and de-platforming, without doing any of the work to address any points on their merits. Declare something “Problematic” or “Hate” and invoke an appeal to emotion, Whether those problems or that (purported) hate is actually there or not. Judge, jury and executioner, all self-appointed.

Because speech is dangerous. Which is why heretics must be burned and blasphemers beheaded.

A struggle session was a form of public humiliation and torture that was used by the Communist Party of China (CPC) at various times in the Mao era, particularly years immediately before and after the establishment of the People’s Republic of China and during the Cultural Revolution. The aim of a struggle session was to shape public opinion and humiliate, persecute, or execute political rivals and those deemed class enemies.
In the dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), by George Orwell, the Two Minutes Hate is the daily, public period during which members of the Outer Party of Oceania must watch a film depicting the enemies of the state, specifically Emmanuel Goldstein and his followers, to openly and loudly express hatred for them. The political purpose of the Two Minutes Hate is to allow the citizens of Oceania to vent their existential anguish and personal hatreds towards politically expedient enemies: Goldstein and the enemy superstate of the moment. In re-directing the members' subconscious feelings away from the Party's government of Oceania, and towards non-existent external enemies, the Party minimises thoughtcrime and the consequent, subversive behaviours of thoughtcriminals.

Cancel culture is a totalitarian cult of the unreasonable. And I find it bizarre when atheists, who would have been burned for their heresy, adopt the same position as the Xtian puritans and the Sharia morality police.

I’ve had plenty of Xtians, Muslims and even atheists try to dictate what I should or shouldn’t say about religious belief, because it’s “rude,” because people take comfort in it, or even that it’s spreading “Hate™.” I’ve stood up to them every time. And then I hear a small number of the same people who would cheer me on in opposing one form of thought-control claim justification for another form of thought-control based on... what was it... oh yes, labelling it as “Hate™.” Basically, the woke Satan. Not only is that boldly hypocritical, because you’re doing the same thing, it’s worse because it has dire consequences in the real world that aren’t present in a simple online slapback. And hearing that they would supposedly deserve those real world consequences simply reinforces what I’ve been saying: religion de-humanizes. You’re in a cult. You’re in a de-humanizing, othering, purity cult.

And FFS, if you expect to be able to speak freely, you have no right to expect that others cannot.

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.
mouthporn.net