Rushdie calls for modern reform of islam

#1
Really good article from an author that can accpet the failings of modern islam and highlights our governments pandering to the islamic vote.

WHEN Sir Iqbal Sacranie, head of the Muslim Council of Britain, admitted that “our own children” had perpetrated the July 7 London bombings, it was the first time in my memory that a British Muslim had accepted his community’s responsibility for outrages committed by its members.

Instead of blaming US foreign policy or “Islamophobia”, Sacranie described the bombings as a “profound challenge” for the Muslim community. However, this is the same Sacranie who, in 1989, said that “Death is perhaps too easy” for the author of The Satanic Verses. Tony Blair’s decision to knight him and treat him as the acceptable face of “moderate”, “traditional” Islam is either a sign of his Government’s penchant for religious appeasement or a demonstration of how limited Mr Blair’s options really are.


Sacranie is a strong advocate of Mr Blair’s much-criticised new religious hatred Bill that will make it harder to criticise religion, and actually expects the new law to outlaw references to Islamic terrorism. He said as recently as January 13: “There is no such thing as an Islamic terrorist. This is deeply offensive. Saying Muslims are terrorists would be covered [ie, banned] by this provision.” Two weeks later his organisation boycotted a Holocaust remembrance ceremony in London, commemorating the liberation of Auschwitz 60 years ago. If Sir Iqbal Sacranie is the best Mr Blair can offer in the way of a good Muslim, we have a problem.

.
[C] Times/Salmund Rushdie
 
#2
The problem is that reformations need to begin from within as a response to either changing circumstances or internal faults. An outsider calling for such a thing is more likely to suppress the desire for change than encourage it. Martin Luther's Protest came from within Catholicism in response to what Luther saw as its faults, no outsiders influenced it, indeed if any non-Christian group had supported it it would probably not have gained the following that it did.

Unfortunately Islam is set up in such a way as to be seen prevent the sort of introspection that such a reformation requires.
 
#3
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4139594.stm


A majority of British Muslims say clerics should preach in the English language, a BBC survey suggests.
The Mori poll for the BBC found 65% of Muslims backed such a move, compared with 39% of the national population.

More than half of UK Muslims were born in the country and younger generations, backed by progressive leaders, have long advocated more English in mosques.

Many believe English-speaking imams helps break down cultural divides between Islam and mainstream society.
 
#4
Bladensburg said:
The problem is that reformations need to begin from within as a response to either changing circumstances or internal faults. An outsider calling for such a thing is more likely to suppress the desire for change than encourage it. Martin Luther's Protest came from within Catholicism in response to what Luther saw as its faults, no outsiders influenced it, indeed if any non-Christian group had supported it it would probably not have gained the following that it did.

Unfortunately Islam is set up in such a way as to be seen prevent the sort of introspection that such a reformation requires.
Well, rshdie is a muslim, albeit an infidel muslim :wink: so i guess it's a start at least.
 
#5
As an apostate Rushdie is about the last person than muslims are likely to listen to.

Which conveniently highlights another problem with Islam at the moment, Muhammed said, "There must be no compulsion in religion," but is also supposed to have proscribed dire punishments for apostates. Now I don't know about you but "believe or suffer" sounds like compulsion to me.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top