Is your faith pragmatic enough to satisfy your needs?
 

Religious faith is amorphous, changing and often practical. If a circumstance arises which confounds the then current understanding, it forces a rejection of the former concepts or at least a reformation.

Does your faith meet your intellectual, your social, your emotional, your physical, or your needs of well-being?

Why or why not?

I enjoy the practical aspects of our faith community, the general good will and desire for self-improvement, and the willingness to forgive. Those elements satisfy a lot of needs.

Knowing what we actually need is always more satisfying than satisfy the need which might not need to get satisfied.

Here's a mental health question regarding Islam from the Shia perspective. In Islam, killing seems permitted if a person threatens certain religious sensibilities, i.e., misuse of the Prophet's image and what not. And an infidel may be killed.

My analysis of those willing to kill for religious reason seems to be motivated by anger, hate and resentment.

Yet mental health specialists advise against holding grudges, retaining anger and the like.

Several of the great religions Judaism, Christianity and to the extent one considers Buddhism a religion, forgiveness and allowing an affront to be forgotten for the mental health of an individual is essential.

It seems to an outsider that holding a grudge, holding on to anger, even against one' enemies, is a core doctrine of many Islamicists. Isn't that bad for mental health of adherents?

My faith is wonderfully pragmatic like a chapel pew:

http://www.thechapelpew.com

When was the last time you checked your assumption with a Shia faghih or a Shia scholar? Who has implemented to you that is permitted to kill people over an offensive images of prophet Mohammad ( peace be upon him)? Have you ever read stories about his life and the way he would deal with the offenders?

I know very little about you. But even though,your desire to hold such a wrong assumption for all these years and keep calling muslims out on that is beyond me.

So here is my theory about why you are trying to actualize your assumptoins with almost zero fact repertoire. You are quite intrigued by what you have found about Islam. And you would probably be considering beocme a Muslim if there werenot too much social political back lash. So you are trying to delay the process by injecting the false alegations to the story in order to appase your otherwise avid soul. Which is indeed considered unhealthy for mental health.

or this:

As an artist if I drew a portrait or image representing Mohammad (peace be upon him) and published it would my life be in jeopardy?

A general question I will throw out there:

Is your wife pragmatic enough to satisfy your needs?

In case you mean repulsive images, there is a huge difference between a permision being authorized from religious leader and some hurt feeling feedbacks. And i am quite happy that i dont have to explain it to you as you are a believer yourself.

Why would a pragmatic wife wants to stay married to an internet message board addict any way.

Mindful, you're being intellectually dishonest if you refuse to admit that the realm of Islamic "scholarship" is quite broad. When the Dutch film producer was murdered our analysts interviewed many Islamic scholars to gather divergent views and many supported the killing. You yourself have made arguments favoring killing a person for doing something which is distasteful toward religious faith.

Western philosophy often states, words cannot kill, so we should not kill based on offensive words. I have researched, not as extensively as an expert, but I have done it.

In terms of emotional health, many of the attitudes by the radical elements of Islam seem to run contrary to good mental health.

You didn't answer my question. Furthermore who determines what is repulsive and by what authority?

That's rich.

You hurt my feelings.

I wish it was true, the saying, "Sticks and stones and dynamite may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

I have to confess that nothing could help me serve my cause more than having Mike say this. See people.. Sticks, Stones and Dynamite have come along side with words. These are all Weapon,yet words can harm more. So how can we not consider using dynamite as a weapon agianst whom has hurt us by words?

Enjoying peaceful quiet atmosphere in here??

I think i did answer your question. I caught your post after it had been edited,may be you have something missed out?

Marja Taghlid is the one who has the authority to pose a Fatwa and he has a team of experts who would supply his information cannals. But the last word will be said by him.

Because many of your people are pathetic and insecure and they have no respect for the beliefs of others.

A world run by Taliban and Sharia Law is women being decapitated in sports stadiums.

We will fight for a better world than that.

And what you do with women in stadiums?? Ok. i really dont want to know.

I didnot integrate the word "almost" for nothing in my post, but i have to get back to you later since i am having a busy weekend and a hectic week coming up. I will use a minute opportunity to post a proper post.

I only edited a spelling error and you still are not answering my question unless your comments are an insinuation that my life would indeed be in jeopardy unless I had the blessing of the Marja Taghlid.

Where did the Marja Taghlid get his authority? Are you or I answerable to the Marja Taghlid or to Allah?

We let them use their divinely-appointed (even in your faith Abu Hanifa affirms human qabar in the face of God's jabr) free will to do what they want to do. If they want to sit and watch the ballgame, fine. If they want to buy a beer and drink a little, fine. It's their choice, not governed by the dictates of the beliefs of those around them. So, what do we do with women in stadiums? We enjoy each other's company, and if we're lucky, they'll snuggle up close to us and put their heads on our shoulders and we'll feel a bond that makes life sweet.

Since, seemingly, you have no plan to articulate your question in a way that we could actually have this..let's say,a little reunion, in here going on...thus i would assume you were looking for an answer which would fit your agenda in order to condemn muslims outburst which happen to be authorized by religious leaders.

I dont,however, condone this behavior, but i also dont condemn the reaction people would give when they realize their beliefs have been scruvily trashed by people whom would face no accountability neither have fear for the consequences of their deeds/words, thanks to the Giant political back up.

So Muslims get to guard thier faith in thier own way, which doesnot often sound quite pleasent for a western taste.

Muslims all around the world have come to acknowledge the fact that isnot a manifestion of art or free speech but rather a religious desensitization process which is holding higher political aims.

Marja Taghlid is the one who is responsible to alert and educate people on the matter to come up with a proper tactic to defend thier faith which isnot necessarily violent, at least not in Shia branch of Islam. The more educated people get the less they would want to try irrational approaches to protect thier religious interest.

So now if you are still asking "the question" of what would be your life like if you portray (assuming an offensive picture??) of prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him)? i would say, you better get a place to hide, becuase its what you get when you mess up with Muslims.:rolleyes:

But seriously,i have no idea what kinda picture you were trying to draw,to be honest. Does any one?

Seriously, we are right here.

Come try to kill us, in the name of your "religion of peace."

See what happens.

Why don't you condemn the violent acts?

Isn't that what being an educated, intellectual is about, to denounce irrational and distasteful acts by even our own?

If religion is strong enough to matter, it is strong enough to withstand hateful acts, bad press and distortion. Any religious movement that has to resort to violence loses its legitimacy.

We're not living in the sixth, seventh or even eleventh centuries, shouldn't we rise up out of darkness and walk forth into the light of enlightenment?

So why don't you condemn the acts which have been done in the name of art and free speech to begin with? So you don't have to deal with the consequences. There is a poster on CUF who even called to support a day of drawing Prophet Mohammad in solidarity with someone who has now apologized. What sort of intellectual concern has shadowed these appaling actions? You want an intellectually fit behavior? act like the one.

Yeah, as a country who has the best mass murder machine,let see what else you could screw up with beside Iraq and Afghanistan.

We may screw up Iran pretty nicely. But with any luck, no invasion. Just bomb it into the stone age.

Is that what you want? So satirists don't draw pictures of your prophet?

Please do without further ado.

I condemn violence in the name of religion.

If you can find violence committed by artists seeking to promote their cause, I will condemn violence in the name of art.

Isn't the purpose of intellectual pursuits to allow us to civilize the savage beast? To disagree agreeably?

I asked a sincere and honest question and now finally have a somewhat honest answer from you. And what is so frightening about an agenda? Will you be honest and admit to your agenda in this thread?

I have not created a drawing of the prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him). I will not because I cannot trust that the Marja Taghlid or another Muslim believer, based on a whim, would condemn my art as offense and therefore authorize murdering me and my family. There is precedence for my concern. Artists have been murdered and others lives are currently being threatened for their artistic expression.

This is a very sad commentary against humanity. This is what you get when you mess with human kind. There will never be a divine blessing for such irrational behavior. Only Godly sorrow and hopefully eventual divine forgiveness.

Why the tread doesnot show tooblue's answer as the last post? Dont tell me you have defineded the thread ultimate posts for less than 30.

I've said it before. Whether Islam is a "religion of peace" is not a qualitative or philosophical question. It is an empiric question.

Look at the Islamic world--the poverty, the lack of education, the dictators, the religious autocrats, the terrorism, the hatred.

Is there a people that is less likely to look in the mirror and so some self-accounting?

It is always someone else's fault. The USA. Israel. Britain (both present and old). The West.

It makes me sad that the good, reasonable people of those countries have to suffer like they do.

Poverty accounts for some of the violence, hatred, terrorism and despotism, but the religion doesn't seem to calm the natural tendencies of social forces. I wonder why.

And your point, why doesn't Islam encourage introspection?

If there's one thing admirable about this site for example, is it shows LDS tendencies to self-analyze and look for internal causes and room for improvement.

My speculation is that an Islamic self-evaluation would proceed in this fashion: Blame Israel, blame the US, and then blame any moderate Islamicists who cooperate with westerners. They would characterize the self-analysis as having been done when they blamed the moderate Islamicists.

It seems to be a religious movement incapable of self-correction.

when cell division proceeds without checks and controls, and overwhelms all the tissue around it, and threatens to destroy the entire organism, what do we call that?

a malignant cancer, as it were.

I suppose chemotherapy or excision is in order.

You two gentlemen talk like there has never been a history of west powers exploiting Iran. And there has never been a war supplied by your money and war machine less than one year after revolution and there has never been any plot to disassemble islamic government. You probably have been too busy introspecting that couldnot see what has been going on around the globe. Excision is already in order,it just hasnot worked yet.

I am no artist so i am having hard time undestanding how an artful message which comes from peace and respect in mind would translate hate and anger on the other side of the rope.

mindful, and I like who you appear to be, but you just played right into Mike's hands.

He stated you would blame the West, and accept no responsibility.

Islam never accepts responsibility.

You can find a plethora where the West criticizes its own policies as contributing the Middle Eastern mess.

Find me something from Islam which criticizes itself, except in cooperating with the West.

Again, you proved Mike's point, never accept blame only blame somebody else. Iran and Islam will never know peace until it recognizes it is both part of the problem and solution.