Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Islam and extraterritorial loyalties

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Islam and extraterritorial loyalties

    Till now, I believed that the majority of Muslims in India, specially the educated bunch, who had internet access, would be Indians first, and Muslims later. I believed that their first loyalty would be to their nation, then to their religion, as is the ideal for any community.

    Till now.

    When even the educated, English-speaking (and therefore having a wider perspective), internet-accessing Indian Muslims, when asked in a public poll as to what comes first, overwhelmingly reply that their religion is their first priority, I just gave up trying to believe the "comfortable" but "correct" lie. I realised this when I saw the answer to this question, explicitly put, to a community of Indian Muslims on Orkut (a social networking site).

    Visual proof, if any were needed:



    For those who have Orkut access:

    Link

    The comments make fascinating, if sometimes shocking, reading.





    Why this thread?

    To put to rest the "correct" notion that Muslims, at least the majority of them, or if not the majority, at least the educated, or if not that, then at least the elite among the educated, will put the country before their religion, that their extraterritorial loyalties are their primary ones. We might as well accept that on any significant level, Muslims will put religion before country. We would do well to keep this in mind when discussing immigration.



    This is the first time in my life that I have made a generalisation regarding the behaviour of Muslims as a group, because this is the first time that I have found actual, concrete evidence. I really hope I do not find such depressing evidence in the future.

  • #2
    Why, necessarily, is this a bad thing?
    Exult in your existence, because that very process has blundered unwittingly on its own negation. Only a small, local negation, to be sure: only one species, and only a minority of that species; but there lies hope. [...] Stand tall, Bipedal Ape. The shark may outswim you, the cheetah outrun you, the swift outfly you, the capuchin outclimb you, the elephant outpower you, the redwood outlast you. But you have the biggest gifts of all: the gift of understanding the ruthlessly cruel process that gave us all existence [and the] gift of revulsion against its implications.
    -Richard Dawkins

    Comment


    • #3
      Because of the potential for exploitation by outside powers? And because of the fact that in case of a conflict of interest, the country gets screwed?

      Do I really need to explain why putting religion above country is a bad thing?

      Comment


      • #4
        No. You should explain why the country has to be the highest priority though.
        Exult in your existence, because that very process has blundered unwittingly on its own negation. Only a small, local negation, to be sure: only one species, and only a minority of that species; but there lies hope. [...] Stand tall, Bipedal Ape. The shark may outswim you, the cheetah outrun you, the swift outfly you, the capuchin outclimb you, the elephant outpower you, the redwood outlast you. But you have the biggest gifts of all: the gift of understanding the ruthlessly cruel process that gave us all existence [and the] gift of revulsion against its implications.
        -Richard Dawkins

        Comment


        • #5
          Because not having it leads to things like Partition.

          Comment


          • #6
            Surely Partition results from having national allegiance being the highest priority. Wouldn't have happened if people hadn't been so attached to the idea of having their own separate nations.
            Exult in your existence, because that very process has blundered unwittingly on its own negation. Only a small, local negation, to be sure: only one species, and only a minority of that species; but there lies hope. [...] Stand tall, Bipedal Ape. The shark may outswim you, the cheetah outrun you, the swift outfly you, the capuchin outclimb you, the elephant outpower you, the redwood outlast you. But you have the biggest gifts of all: the gift of understanding the ruthlessly cruel process that gave us all existence [and the] gift of revulsion against its implications.
            -Richard Dawkins

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by aneeshm
              Because not having it leads to things like Partition.
              For other countries it was the other way around.
              Blah

              Comment


              • #8
                Another gem:

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Starchild
                  Surely Partition results from having national allegiance being the highest priority. Wouldn't have happened if people hadn't been so attached to the idea of having their own separate nations.
                  The idea that each religious community constitutes a separate nation came from Islam and Indian Muslims. The Congress party, and the Hindu parties, both opposed it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Here's the best evidence why this is not good.

                    A whopping 12% support terrorists!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Does anybody respect you in real life?
                      12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
                      Stadtluft Macht Frei
                      Killing it is the new killing it
                      Ultima Ratio Regum

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Out of 150 votes on an internet poll.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Jesus Christ this is inane.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by aneeshm
                            Here's the best evidence why this is not good.

                            A whopping 12% support terrorists!

                            Even worse a whopping 26% want to murder people (but can't spell it)!
                            Blah

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Is this some sort of stupid joke, or what?

                              Statistical validity of the sample size, anyone? These polls all have less then 200 votes total. More importantly, the forum that these people are voting on may attract a certain type of people.

                              ....and people frequently lie in polls, especially for "romantic" ideas.

                              This information is not statistically valid in any way, or even remotley useful.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X