Skip to main content

The Basis of Religious Liberalism

Liberalism is a popular political movement. It is mainly secular in nature. However, a new breed of liberalism is on the rise that is based on the same good principles of secular liberalism. That breed of liberalism is religious liberalism, and I'm going to tell you more about it.

Whenever you think of religion and government at the same time, the only brand that comes to mind is theocracy. You think of nations like Saudi Arabia and Iran. You might also think of the ancient kingdoms ruled by David and then his son, Solomon. Repressive rules come to mind: men and women are probably segregated as much as possible. Gun control is enforced, drugs are regulated (I hate drugs, because of what they do to your body, but regulating medicinal drugs is ridiculous), modes of entertainment are almost completely prohibited in public, among other things. Also, women are forced to cover their entire bodies. You feel that such a conservative society is close-minded and not open to principles of freedom and multiculturalism.

Such a government would be authoritarian in nature, and, like most authoritarian governments, would seek to control your life and what you do bit by bit. You could say that such a government is "playing" the role of a higher power, ultimately God. Regardless of religious beliefs, God is the Ultimate Authority, and no human being can usurp His Majesty and His position. And it is our job as believers in God to usurp and turn the tables on anyone who seeks to take that position. That's initiating a religiously liberal rule.

Hang on... what about the code of religious liberalism? That is, what is it and what's the basis of it? The idea is that God is the Ultimate Authority, and that He created us so as to test us and see if we follow His Word or not. It is not up to anyone else other than a certain person to define his/her own actions and carry them out; in the end, God will judge the person for his/her actions. Gun control is abolished: whether the person decides to use it for good (defense) or bad (murder) is up to him/her. Drugs shouldn't be regulated, but, again, everyone has a choice on whether to use it or not. Abortion should be met with the same perspective. Also, privatization should be maximized: the government should not seek to practice unnecessary authority and intrude into fiscal efficiencies. Affirmative action and other racist policies should be erased, because in the eyes of God, we are all equal. Taxes should be minimized, as giving from the less able (citizens) to the more able (government) is akin to stealing, and we all know how God views this crime.

Well, there's more to religious liberalism, but I'm going to be dealing with it in parts, this time in accordance with Islamic teachings (and I assume henceforth that they are also compatible with teachings from other religions). I will be covering abortion, drugs, fiscal matters (namely taxation), affirmative action, and other things. The series will also get you deeper into my political philosophy, and will help you learn more about it. I know that many of you don't believe in God, but if you think that religiously-minded people can't become liberals... think again.

Salaam,
Saracen

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What "Culture Clash"?

I hear this all the time, and yet I still have yet to not only materialistically comprehend this prospect, but to philosophically grasp it. There are so many cultures and races that dot this earth, and yet we have seen them come and go as well. But how can cultures themselves clash? To answer this question, one should take a look at the definition of culture. The word culture , from the Latin colo, -ere, with its root meaning "to cultivate", generally refers to patterns of human activity and the symbolic structures that give such activity significance. Different definitions of "culture" reflect different theoretical bases for understanding, or criteria for evaluating, human activity. Note the definition: patterns of personal activity. Patterns by themselves are immeasurable and also immaterial. However, the only material object encountered in the definition is the set of "symbolic structures" that represent these patterns and give them significance. Cult

حول قرار حماس تشكيل قوة مشتركة من الفصائل

هذا النص يتحدث عن التشقق في الحكومة الفلسطينية, وكيف استغلوا القوات الصهيونية على التفرق بين حماس ومنظمة التخريب " فتح" التي خانت الفاسطينيون لخدمة نفسها ولخدمة "إسراءيل". تأليف د. إبراهيم علوش قرار وزير داخلية السلطة الفلسطينية، القائمة على مرجعية اتفاقية أوسلو، بتشكيل قوة مشتركة من الفصائل العسكرية الفلسطينية المقاومة، وقرار محمود عباس رئيس سلطة أوسلو بشطب قرار وزير الداخلية سعيد صيام بتشكيل تلك القوة المشتركة، أثار الكثير من التكهنات واللغط حول مغزى تلك الخطوة وأبعادها. ومثل كل قرار سياسي، هناك دائماً واجهة خارجية وأجندة خفية، خاصة عندما نتعامل مع قوى قررت أن تكون جزءاً من الواقع السائد بدلاً من الانقلاب عليه. فالانضمام لركب أوسلو، على أساس مشروع "تغييره من الداخل"، يترك المرء بالضرورة أسير مساومات لا يمكن إلا أن تمس بالثوابت وبالمرجعيات التاريخية لصراعنا مع الحركة الصهيونية منذ أكثر من قرن. وبالمقابل، فإن قرار محمود عباس بشطب قرار وزير الداخلية يرتبط بدوره بحسابات التنافس الداخلي، ليس فقط على الصلاحيات، بل على كل دوره التاريخي هو وفتح. المهم، يمكن أن ت

Book Review: "The Crusade through Arab Eyes" by Amin Maalouf

The bulk of modern history regarding the Crusades has an unashamedly Western slant to it. Even a cursory search of the word "crusade" on Amazon Books reveals a plethora of books written by authors from the U.K., the U.S., and elsewhere in the Western world, but a severe (emphasis) paucity of books from a more Arab perspective. One book that stands out is Amin Maalouf's "The Crusades through Arab Eyes", a book I believe is much-needed given the overall bias inherent in the gestalt of Western history books on this topic. The gold standard for history on the Crusades is currently the "The Oxford History of the Crusades", another book I will review in the not-so-distant future (and expect comparisons to this book given that I have completed reading it). The too-long-didn't-read version of this review is the following: if you're interested in history, buy it, read it, and keep it. Nevertheless, my full review follows. For those who are un