Islam: Democracy vs. Theocracy

[Alex]

Democracy vs. Theocracy -- Secularism in the Islamic World
Ibn Warraq, Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Enquiry
3 August 2009, International Humanist News
www.iheu.org/democracy-vs-theocracy-secularism-islamic-world

Thomas Paine once made the brilliantly simple observation that if "something has been revealed to a certain person, and not revealed to any other person, it is revelation to that person only. [It is] hearsay to every other, and consequently they are not obliged to believe it." Thomas Nagel fleshes out that simple formulation, arguing that the reasons given for political decisions must meet a certain standard of "higher-order impartiality" or objectivity, since they must appeal to all members of society, to all citizens who participate in the process of government. One should be prepared "to submit one's reasons to the criticism of others. This means that it must be possible to present to others the basis of your own beliefs, so that once you have done so, they have what you have, and can arrive at a judgment on the same basis."

However, that standard is not met when "part of the source of your conviction is personal faith or revelation—because to report your faith or revelation to someone else is not to give him what you have, as you do when you show him your evidence or give him your arguments." If political reasons fall short of objectivity, political debate degenerates into a mere "clash between irreconcilable subjective convictions".

As Roger Scruton has expressed it, freedom of conscience requires secular government, and secular law is made legitimate by the consent of those who must obey it. Citizens participate in government, in the making and enacting of the law. ...

Freedom of thought demands freedom of expression, and freedom of expression is important in a democracy to enable citizens to criticize the government, to offer alternatives, and to find ways to improve their political lot.

...the Kuwaiti Sh’ite activist Dr. Ibtihal Abd Al-Aziz Al-Khatib, an academic and columnist, declared that a secular state is the only way to protect religious rights in the Arab World. When asked by a television interviewer if she had a problem with religion, she replied,

"Of course not. My problem is with religious coercion, when you impose a particular school of religion on a certain country... In Iran, for example, it is the Sunnis whose rights are violated, and they suffer from pressure because they are a minority. If you separate religion from state and have full civil rights... secularism protects religions and does not oppose them. When you treat all religions on the same level, you guarantee everybody's liberty to exercise their religious rights."

...Sayyid Iyad Jamaleddine, a reform-minded Iraqi Shiite cleric, who has called for an absolute separation of mosque and state in Iraq:

"I am a Muslim. I am devoted to my religion. I want to get it back from the state and that is why I want a secular state….When young people come to religion, not because the state orders them to but because they feel it themselves in their hearts, it actually increases religious devotion….The Koran is a book to be interpreted [by] each age. Each epoch should not be tied to interpretations from 1000 years ago. We should be open to interpretations based on new and changing times".