RE: [ALOCHONA] What is Wrong with Fundamentalism

Mr. Raisuddin:
 
There is no law that does not bind ur unbridled freedom. U have to campaign for a naturlist's nudity rights if u think law is restricting u from being naked. We r born free but we r in chains everyhere and that's for the greater goodness of the society. Religion teches morality - now which religion talks against it. Think. Allah in Quran gives logic but almost every Sura He utters 'THINK' if that is not right whhat He is commanding. Islam is the only religion that encourages dialogues. If u think a religion restricts frededom in the sense of human rights - Question what is the code of a civil society and morality. Natural Justice? It varies even door to door. Ur neighbour may think it is perfectly alright to steal from ur home as he has many more mouths to feed and u may find that to be her/his failure in judgement. No human law  can perfect the soul - Look our corrupt leaders are out and soon to engage in more vindictive political saga. Why? None of them in fact truly believes that one day he/she has to die and there will be accoujnts for every sigh a poor Bangladeshi had passed owing to their criminally insane rule. A rule that made our Parliament - a Chat Box.
 
Mufassil Islam
Human Rights Advocate

---

To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
From: Kraisuddin@hotmail.com
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:04:01 +0000
Subject: RE: [ALOCHONA] What is Wrong with Fundamentalism

Politics is for public administration and public welfare. Since the primitive era, various forms for public administrative tools have been invented and utilized for public administration, and out of those tools, some resulted public welfare and some did not. Some of the well known public administrative tools so far human societies have seen are religions, feudalism, monarchy, communism, socialism, democracy, Marshal-Law; etc. Each one has its own school of thought. Each one claims that the public benefit is achieved. However, it is controversial. Democracy is the only system where the political leaders are chosen by the public's vote. All other systems choose the political leaders by selection. The prominent feature of democracy is that everybody's personal choice of life style are accommodated as long as those life styles do not bother the others and do not incur losses in the state budget and functions. Secularism is the prime characteristics of all democracies.

When you talk about religion, the first thing the religion restricts, is the personal freedom and choice of life style. Under religion, strict codes of religion must be followed and met, otherwise s/he will be condemned. This is quite against the principle of democracy. This is the main obstacle why the democracy did not flourish in the muslim countries of the world. Muslims will be able to enjoy democracy when they can improve; leaving their view of imposing the religious codes to the general public and condemning them while not followed.

Every muslim individual under the perfect democracy and secularism will be able to observe and perform all religious activities as they would like personally but not interfering with or imposing to the others. They have to use their own premises and own congregation to perform the religious activities. In the democratic system, no religion can use the political platforms. The main reson is that the religions extremely interferes with the public freedom and wants to control them by their own codes which are totally undemocratic, because they do not allow freedom; rather all political and personal freedoms are snatched away brutally, and the society is controlled very tightly as the extreme police state. Recently we saw it in Taliban Afghanistan.

 When the islamists will grow the tolerances, be moderate, accept the principle of non-interference to other public's freedom and choice of life; they will be welcome to join the democratic fleet. They can not be accepted in democretic institutions as long as they want to come to the democracy to remain secular; and not to spread their principles, codes, and thoughts of intolerance; and cause the failures in the democratic institutions. Thanks, KR.

---

To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
From: maqsudo@hotmail.com
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 07:32:46 +0000
Subject: RE: [ALOCHONA] What is Wrong with Fundamentalism

re: isha khan
--------------

1 thing has always confused me....we say/ demand  that....we beleive in democracy...but we do not want to accept elected MP...if he/she belongs to
Jamaat??!! And we criticize them non-stop, often without any valid reason.What kind of hippocracy is that!

Someone may not have supported AL leadership and the method of our liberation process, with the help of Indians.
what is the problem with that?
That was his/her personal philosophy. attitude. Why we cant accept it...if we beleive in democratic process??

Isn't it true..without any supporting documents....that people with a big mouth,in 2008, ...talking about " anti- liberation forces "
etc.....are basically just CHAPA BAJ, striving for cheap attention and upgrading their social status? Do they actually contribute anything....to the poor... hungry...
sick...helpless people?
My experience has been that ...people shouting against Jamaat , usually are very ordinary, half-educated, shallow, chaotic,
disorganized, hollow people.

What has been your experience?

Best wishes.
Khoda hafez.

dr. maqsud omar

---

To: shahin72@gmail.com; mbimunshi@gmail.com; zoglul@hotmail.co.uk; rehman.mohammad@gmail.com; mahmudurart@yahoo.com; farhadmazhar@hotmail.com; premlaliguras@hotmail.com; dhakamails@yahoogroups.com; khabor@yahoogroups.com; alochona@yahoogroups.com; bdresearchers@yahoogroups.com; bangla-vision@yahoogroups.com; mouchakaydheel@yahoo.com; odhora@yahoogroups.com; dahuk@yahoogroups.com; history_islam@yahoogroups.com
From: bd_mailer@yahoo.com
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:14:27 -0800
Subject: [ALOCHONA] What is Wrong with Fundamentalism

What is Wrong with Fundamentalism Abid Bahar Is there anything wrong with fundamentalism? The answer is both yes and no. First, what is fundamentalism? It is the official practice of the basic principles of a religion and very importantly, as the dominant religion, imposing them to control the politics of a country. When that happens in a multi religious country, the rights of minorities are violated. Fundamenta lists do it with their claim of ownership of the country and by implication, see the other religious groups as foreigners. So primarily,  it is a question of intolerance associated with fundamentalism. Is fundamentalism a problem only in Islam? Let me start by saying that contrary to Western propaganda, fundamentalist movement is there in every religion. It is even present in its most dangerous manifestations in Buddhist countries such as in Burma, Thailand, Sri Lanka and in Cambodia, the latter even carried out a genocide against minorities. These are Theravada fundamentalist Buddhist countries. Here the innocent looking monks are very much active in politics even in the destruction of religious sites of other religions, namely, Muslim and Christian. In India and Pakistan minority rights were being denied by the fundamentalists claiming as in India as the Rama Raja, or Pakistan as a Muslim country. Given the right mood, we see that the manifestation of fundamentalist outbeak can take place anywhere. We see this even in India, a country officially calls itself secular. In India, before  1992, the most unpopular party, BJP could only win two seats in the parliament. But in 1992 it took up the issue of Babri Mosque and claimed that it was the birth place of Rama, a Hindu God. But surprisingly  Rama was not a historic figure. However,  the claim by the BJP satisfied the Hindu majority and on the open day light Hindu fundamentalists marched to the Mosque site and destroyed the Mosque. About 10,000 people were killed in the carnage. Instead of putting the criminal leader Advani in jail, in Indian democracy this fundamentalist leader formed the government and became the Home minister; shaming a country claims itself as the world's biggest democracy. This is an issue of using religion in politics.  The worst part of fundamentalism is to display anger toward its enemy and its attack of civilian sites. In 2001 some alledgly fundamentalist followers of Osama bin Laden attacked the World Trade Centre buildings in New York city killing approximately 3000 innocent people which led to the release of huge anger among American people and leadership led by Protestant fundamentalist leader George W. Bush. Bush identified himself as the Christian zionist found an excuse to attack Iraq and even before attacked Afganistan causing the death of approximately a million people. Are the terrorists of the trade centre true Muslims? Most Muslims believe no. Is George who led an illegal war in Iraq a true Christian, the answer would be no. Therefore, the problem with fundamentalism is its show of anger and retalliation against its perceived enemy and its use of violence in the name of God. In India the attack on Babri Mosque followed counter attacks in bombay and more counter attacks are going on in almost all the Indian cities. Here Hindus are killing Muslims and Christians and Muslim killing innocent Hindus. Only lately, some Pakistani fundamentalists entered India and attacked Bombay, killing close to two hundred innocent people and injuring many others.  In addition to the above, the biggest problem with most fundamentalist movements is, it does not allow diversification; it resists change. It demands a society to remain stagnant. It resists the growth in art, music, business, women's rights and in the other areas. It forces human spirit to die down. Fundamentalist movements in certain religions discurages women to not work outside their homes, thus allowing half of the population and the country to remain backward. It has been a lingering problem in Muslim countries thus helping the countries to stagnate allowing more powerful countries to attack them. This is very much a problem in Muslim countries. The deadly fundamentalist movements in Muslim countries, however, seem contrary to what the Prophet of Islam advised to his followers and said: "For knowledge even go to China." Education is essential for every Muslim man and woman." Contrary to the Talibans, in the days of the Prophet, Muslim man and women could pray together. Khadija, the wife of the Prophet was a business woman. Ibn Rusd, who was opposed by the fundamentalists of Cordova to be the chief advisor to the Caliph, but his ideas were known to have helped in the European Renaissance.  Thus, he was recognized as  one of the masters of European Renaissance. Strangely though, the Taliban's primitive practices in the rapidly changing economies of our time made Islam laughable to the humanity that is responding to the demands of global change.   Is there anything wrong with fundamentalism? Yes, it is against change. It is against development, against human rights. It is against development because the fundamentalist leaders interpretation finds change to be  wrong. As opposed to this, human history shows that change is the most unchanging thing in the world. Is there anything wrong with fundamentalism? Yes, because it brings religion into politics. It kills innocent people. Finally, is there anything wrong with fundamentalism? We can also say no, but only if religion remaines the personal belief of its followers as the sufis in Islam do. Sufis are very religious people but stay away from politics. There is nothing wrong in being religious, to observe the basic tenents of one's religion such as doing salat, fasting, going for hajj etc. Fundamentalism in that sense is not wrong.  Then, is there anything wrong with fundamentalism? The answer is both yes and no. Bangladesh to develop has to resist both the forces of Fascism and fundamentalism; because both preches violence. These two are as if like the same body of a poisonous two headed snake. They take every opportunity to kill their prey only to get to power. What is at stake is to help save innocent lives from these angry primitives justifying their killings in the name of God and with the holy book in their hands reciting the lines of their choice and the Fascist leaders violating the rule of law, resort to control the country by controlling the streets.

---

Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! Try it!

---

Great search results, great prizes. BigSnapSearch.com Search now __._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___