I ask because it seems that Islam is inextricably involved with civil government. In the days of the Caliphate, the caliph was a direct descendent of Mohammed, and derived his authority from sharia law. anyway, I know that there are Christians, jews, athiests , etc. in muslim countries-are they fully equal as citizens?
Here in Saudi Arabia, Islam is the State Religion. No other organized religion is tolerated and renouncing Islam is a capital crime. No person who is not a Muslim may hold a Saudi passport.
On the other hand, lots of us worship God in non-Islamic ways. As long as it is not officially noticed, it is not officially noticed.
Saudi Arabia is a special case. As the site of the Two Holy Mosques, it has to be 'More Catholic than the Pope." In other countries in the region, freedom of religion is tolerated. Iran, Iraq, Bahrain, Egypt and everywhere else I have travelled, 'People of the Book" practice their faith openly.
Even more, in Iran, religions not from Moses are permitted.
No. See Dhimmi. Jews and Christians are protected classes, although it’s second-class citizenship in comparison to Muslims. The extent that rulers and mobs in Muslim countries have abided by the Koran varies widely with time and location.
Examples, please? Zoroastrians are tolerated, as they are considered “people of the book.” I’m not aware of any other faiths tolerated there. Historically, Islam doesn’t have much tolerance for pagans and idolaters, though obviously the definition of a pagan or an idolater could expand or contract according to political necessity. The Muslim conquerors of India finally accepted Hindus as “people of the book” and consented to tolerate them only after stiff resistance and massive defiance from the Hindus.
Does Turkey count as a “Muslim country”?
I thought the primary source of friction between Sunni and Shia muslims was the fact that the Caliph was not a descendent of the Prophet. Can anyone clarify?
Malaysia has freedom of worship (though I’m not sure about the status of Muslims). Muslim citizens are subject to special legislation; not so non-Muslims.
Indonesia also has a sizeable Hindu minority who are free to worship.
Turkey is a secular state with freedom of worship for all but a vast Muslim majority.
Bahrain has an active Christian community, as well as other religions tolerated.
Iraq had a small Jewish community and at least one synagogue (prior to the invasion - I believe they’ve now fled), and a large Christian community: Tariq Azia, for example, is a Christian.
There are even Jews free to worship in Iran, though I wouldn’t trade places with them…
I’m not claiming many Muslim countries aren’t intolerant, but blanket statements such as that of mks57 are simply untrue.
Sorry, this should have read: (though I’m not sure about the status of Jews).
I thought “Peple of the Book” refered to Jews, Christians and the common Torah/Old Testament heritage.
If anyone can provide an example of a Muslim country that has Western-style freedom of religion, I’d like to see it. The Religious Freedom Page has detailed information on individual countries. Even allegedly secular states, like Turkey, ban some groups and impose restrictions on others. See the Religious Freedom Status page for Turkey.
Even if Sharia isn’t the official legal system of the state, it often has an influence on its laws and policies. For example, what do you have to do to build a church or synagogue?
What about the freedom to convert from Islam? IIRC, NPR recently had a story about how a woman in Malaysia tried to convert officially to Christianity and was jailed.
I don’t believe any of these countries, even the most tolerant (Turkey possibly excepted) allow proselytizing.
Every country is different, of course.
In Iran Islam is the official religion (it’s called the Islamic Republic after all). Others can practice their faiths to a point. First, you have to born into that other faith. To convert from Islam to anything else is a capitol offense. Likewise anyone who thinks they are going to pull some kind of missionary stunt there can forget it. A few years ago three Iranian Christians suspected of leading people to convert were taken from their homes, killed and their bodies were left in the streets as examples to anyone else who might want to try the same thing.
The Baha’i are just not cool in Iran. They (well, what’s left of them in Iran) are under serious harassment.
Jews are sort of tolerated. Traditionally, the Iranian media runs lots of positive stories about its Jewish population. Stuff like how much they miss Khomeini and how they reject the “Zionist regime” is pretty typical. This, of course, is just the state speaking on behalf of the Jews (there are tens of thousands of them), but at least it’s quasi-positive. There have been negative incidents too. Twelve or so Jews were accused of being Zionist spies because they had visited Israel a few years ago and former President Khameini was slapped with a lawsuit yesterday (which he will ignore) by families in America whose Jewish relatives were arrested-tortured-disappeared while he was the nominal head of state.
Ahmadinejad adds another wrinkle to the story, however. The man seems to have an obsession with Jews. Iran hosted a holocaust denial jamboree last week. So far things have not gone completely to hell for the Iranian Jews, but one needs to be worried about them.
I suspect, mks57, you’re overextending the phrase “freedom of religion”, or at least interpreting it differently to me. While the practice may be different to the law - but where isn’t it - the constitution of Malaysia, for example, states in Article 11:
So in fact the law is stricter there towards Muslims than to adherents of other religions.
Therefore I feel your simple “no” is something of a blanket statement.
jjim,
I worked with a Malaysian woman in the 1980’s. She was Hindi; she related that they were required to produce their marriage license staying at motels on their honeymoon. She also assured us that Jews would be arrested upon arrival “becasue of the Palestinians.”
Were we being whooshed?
As I said, I don’t know de facto what the situation is in Malaysia if you are Jewish. That said, a great number of western companies do business in Malaysia - as have I - and I never got a travel advisory or was quizzed as to my religion (I’m not Jewish), and I’ve certainly met Israelis travelling in the country.
As to the marriage license, that certainly isn’t the case today, but that used to be a requirement throughout the whole of Asia: Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Communist or whatever. It was traditional and cultural, AFAIK, not to do with religion.
I only know a little about Turkey’s modern history: it’s a secular state, and making it so was not 100% problem-free. I’m not sure which way to take your statement:
-
as written: everyone has freedom to worship except the Muslim majority, which has restrictions (like no veil / no headcovering).
-
imagining a comma between “all” and “but”: everyone is free, but since they’re all Muslims, it’s kind of a moot point.
Not trying to be snarky, I’m honestly not sure which way you mean it, though I’m guessing #2.
If by “Muslim Country” you mean a nation that embeds Sharia or other elements of Islam as the basis for Law, then, no, Religious Freedom is not present, at least not as is recognised in the US, Canada, … Europe.
There are countries with sizable muslim populations, but where secular law is in place, where some form of official religious freedom is present. But effectively, in those countries, there are practical limits to such freedoms when put into practice.
The problem is that traditional Islam never went through a major reformation a la the Catholic versus Protestant thing, and Islam never really embraced a central authority, and Islam never really embraced the idea of separating religion and state.
As for the other points … “People of the Book” refers to adherents of religions using the chain of prophets beginning with Abraham, proceeding through Noah and Moses. This basically means only Jews and Christians are in the club, but they are viewed dimly … or, rather, Dhimmli.
The tolerance of Zoraostarianism in Iran follows from the facts that Z preceded Islam as the religion of Iran nee Persia, and in the fact that the traditional Z’s are a closed club: no conversions are allowed.
As for the tolerance of Hindus in certain majority muslim countries, it must be a pragmatic matter.
In those countries that embed Islam in their governments, there is typically state support of mosques (as well as government intereference as well), and government interference with non-muslim houses of worship, which are frequently not supported by state funds (unlike the mosques), are delayed via bureaucratic interference (permits required to build new houses of worship, or to repair existing houses are frequently denied or delayed). It simply is not an imperative of an Islamic country to tolerate non-muslim faiths. Hell, if an Islamic Country is Sunni Muslim, then even the Shia are in for it. Ditto for Sunnis in a Shia Islamic Country.
In my own opinion, Ba’Ha’i is an object of special scorn for Islam, as the Bab and Bahalluah came from Iranian Islamic traditions, and violated the tenets of Islam by departing from the primacy of Muhammed as the final prophet, and essentially viewed all the prophets with equal status, with Bahalluah as the most recent prophet, with the proviso that God will likely keep on throwing prophets at us indefinitely.
So Islam views Ba’Ha’i as some sort of super-offensive apostate religion, and views the Jewish and Christian faiths as being erroneous, damaged, incorrect views of the faith perfected as Islam…Rather how the Roman Catholic Doctrinals view all of the other Christians, and how some Christians view the non-Messianic Jews.
Well that tells ya something doesn’t it?
In Western countries, which are predominantly Christian, anyone is free to worship whatever god they choose…even Satan if they feel that way inclined.
Free to worship any god at all…without fear of persecution
Does that demonstrate that this is a Western trait? A Christian one? Both? Neither?
The religious freedom bit in Western nations isn’t a feature of Christianity, but rather a consequence of the separation of church and state in the Western nations. This followed in part from the Reformation, which broke the exclusive power of the Roman Catholic Church, and the formation of a bazillion Protestant sects, which diluted the ability of the Christian church to leverage political control.
Add to that mix the Renaissance, and the Age of Enlightenment, and you have the evolution of a political/state model that divorces the religious control of governments: that is, the idea of a modern secular government is a Western idea.