Why I disagree with Muslim reformers | the lack of approach & objective
The reformers as I said are trying to give a new image and a new vision of the situation " in the society," and let us call it to the effect of the religion over the individual, the society, and the state.
Their own approach is unrealistic for a simple reason; is because each one is taking it individually without looking at the other facts and the sources of the results that we are getting.
Maajid is a purely secular and a person who dedicate a good effort on giving an insightful point of view, BUT on the same time he " can't " give further insight into the sources and discuss the text because by this he will go outside Quilliam's objective.
Islam Al Behery discusses the text, but he reaches a level that he can't pass because the consequences will be so hard as he is living in Egypt.
and so on....
So let us agree that the text can't is modified as it has been written from more than 1400 years.
NOW... what is the solution?
The solution in my point of view is to change the strategy of the " Teaching " the strategy of the space given to the religious institution, the strategy of forming a civil law within the society, and this can't be done unless you have a strong secular civil law that has to be respected and empowered by the strong law.
You see, in Morocco, they banned the fabrication and the selling, off the Burqa, and you may ask, why this thing happened without protests against that from the Islamists?
the answer is because the one who passed the law was " THE KING of Morocco " and his voice and power in the society is as strong as the power of the religious institution, and if you protest that, you gonna have a bad experience.
The same thing when we see in the History of Turkey, everyone is talking about how " moderate " is Turkey, but when we see the reality, the " reformation " of the Turkish society that came after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, came after a strong "secular/nationalist " revolution and transformation of all laws, with power that came from the first place and the higher position in the society, that's why Turkey became a secular nation.
So for me, I think the Idea of the reformation of text and of a religion, is just a waste of time, what you have to reform is the civil law and the effect of the religion inside the society, because whether we like it or not, whether we believe in this religion or not. The religious system in the modern society for a modern nation has been failed with all numbers."
To wrap it down, a few days ago I was chatting on Facebook with a group of friends, and then... I told them, that the point number one that we have to think about it as individual before calling it, is to call the middle east by its name by its geographical place and the Middle Eastern by their own countries as an identity, instead of calling middle eastern as Muslims and calling the middle east as a Muslim Nation.
The Middle East and North Africa are the only nations that are called by the religion of the majority instead of its own damn name.
Who are you? I'm Hashim, where are you from... Iraq,,,,, where is Iraq? The Middle East... southwest Asia,
What religion you follow?.... Now that's another question. and it's a personal... and not a national question "