• Croquette@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    But it seems that when religion is intermixed with politics, it inevitably leads to dictatorships or regressive government.

    At one point, where is the separation? I get that dictatorships also happen without religion, but it seems that religious parties in power inevitably bring a regressive agenda with them.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’d say that this is an example of correlation vs causation (nowadays the conditions that are likely to produce religious governments are also exceedingly likely to produce dictatorships), but either way that’s not what I’m talking about.

      The point is: There’s nothing in Islam justifying the shit they’re doing in Iran. At times like these people tend to forget that Middle Eastern cultures themselves are quiet sexist, and are many times actually held back by Islam, speaking as a Middle Eastern guy. That aside, this is a dictatorship that’s using Islam to give itself legitimacy; Islam itself doesn’t support this kind of behavior in the slightest, and most Muslims don’t either.

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I understand that Islam doesn’t support anything like that in the scriptures, just like many other religions.

        But religion has been used for milleniums as a cover for atrocious actions. At this point, they are not separable. So when is it enough?

        Religion is inherently conservative. And we see everyday what conservatism does to the planet and the society.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          But religion has been used for milleniums as a cover for atrocious actions. At this point, they are not separable. So when is it enough?

          But don’t non-religious dictatorships also commit atrocious actions? In the end a cover is just that: a cover.

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            But don’t non-religious dictatorships also commit atrocious actions?

            Just because people die from heart attacks doesn’t mean cancer does not kill.

          • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I am not talking about dictatorships only. Religion has been used to cover so many atrocities that it’s impossible to dissociate the actions from the religion itself.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The USSR was atheist and was easily as terrible as Iran is now.

          • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I am not saying that being a secular person stops that person from being shitty, but religion has been used to cover so many atrocities that the actions taken in the name of the religion cannot be disassociated from the religion itself.

      • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is nothing inherent in Islam (or any religion) either way. You can present it as moderate or extremist depending on what parts of it you emphasize more, not unlike reform vs ultra orthodox judaism.