Although I think that's a ridiculous thing to say, there is actually probably something positive to be gained by having a firmer moral compass reflected in the way civil society is managed. However the way in which the Taliban are implementing Sharia law is not really consistent with most interpretation of the holy book,, so it's no wonder that people are escaping the tyranny of the Taliban and their "morality police". Saudi isn't much better though, nor the Gulf states, by all accounts.
My bold.
You were responding to 'ecoleman' (Elliot) who said.. "I guess they [Afghan females] can seek refuge here for a while but the way things are going we'll be under sharia law soon"
You say in the context of religious books "
there is probably something positive to be gained by having a firmer moral compass." I'd say it's vital for a properly-functioning society. I'd just ask, though. Firmer than what ?
The Holy book (a capital 'H' because it's a particular book) you're referring to is, of course, the Quran which was written over a period of 23 years, 610 to when Mohammed died in 632 and related to him from Allah through the angel Gabriel.... Not really.
We don't need religious edicts to establish the moral compass of a society which is something religionists think they have a monopoly on. They developed over millennia on a basis of self-interest and were developed through evolution to, basically, make life tolerable. It was early humans who engaged in group foraging who developed a kind of co-operative reasoning that led them to treat others as equals, empathetically and with a sense of fairness all based on an understanding of seeing others as equals. Anyway, it makes sense for individuals to help their own.. ie their kith and kin..through genes..ie.relatives ? There's also .."I'll scratch your back and you scratch mine and we'll both benefit " attitude. None of this has anything to do with religion.
Take the Ten Commandments which, as I've pointed out, weren't a new set of codes of behaviour. So, the story goes, Moses was handed down a set of moral values by Yahweh (morals later adopted by Christians) when he gave them to Moses written on two tablets at the top of Mount Sinai, so, are we to believe that prior to that encounter they thought it was fine to murder, steal.."thy neighbours cattle, land ,home or anything else belonging to him , lie, covet thy neighbour's wife etc. Anyway, it was all for nothing because one of the first things the Israelites did on entering the 'Promised Land' was to massacre the Midianites and kill existing occupants and no doubt raped,too. So, in reality, the Commandments were only to be directed at, in this case, Jews A case of ‘do not kill a member of your own tribe’ in reality. ‘Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours’ goods ...unless,of course, those neighbours are from a different tribe. Also, Yahweh directed Moses to kill any of his tribesmen/women that worshiped anyone..ie an idol,other than him and when Moses got back down the mountain to his people he found that they'd got fed up waiting ..forty days and nights..thought he wasn't returning and Aaron had organised a whip round for gold jewellry and then created an idol .. a calf..out of the melted down gold ..the Golden Calf...So, Moses ground it down, mixed it with water and made them drink it. Result ? They died.
What
are the interpretations of the Quran that you mentioned, Lindsay ? You said,..
the way the Taliban are implementing Sharia law is not really consistent with most interpretations of the holy book". As you've pointed out, many Middle East countries comply with criminal Sharia law, to the letter and civil Sharia law is unfavourable to females, to put it mildly. Re the Taliban. They see women as the source of sexual temptation. Not just them..you go in a mosque here and you won't see women and men praying in the same room..in fear the women may be a "distraction" which is why Islam insists that they cover up,too. What is it with religion and sex ? Christians don't want to believe that Jesus was conceived in the normal way..no..they create the "Virgin" Mary, for goodness sake. The Catholic church won't allow its priests to marry and we've seen the catastrophic results of that stupid, unnatural doctrine. They won't allow female priests, either, on the grounds that Jesus only had male disciples. It wasn't until 1994 that the first female Anglican priests were ordained. Only male Jehovah Witnesses can be Elders and what they call 'ministerial sevants' Women are allowed to speak to a congregation but they must wear a head covering .Oh yes..the mandatory head covering
. There are no female Sikh Gurus. Hindus allow women to be priests. They're called Panditas. Most Budhhists priests are men but there
are some women in that role so, despite them being involved in religion they are obviously enlightened to some degree.
Contemporary codes of moral conduct were originally developed by philosophers such as Socrates,Plato and Aristotle.. far better sources than religionists.
amp.theguardian.com
