JALLEN wrote:The Annoyed Man wrote: So, how does the term "infidel" fit into this? Is it non-accusatory, the same way I use the term "non-believer," or is there an element of judgement of the other in it?
"Infidel" is English for the Arabic "kafir."
According to what I have gleaned from Muslim clients, there are three types of people, Muslims, People of the Book, and infidels. "People of the book" include those who are Christians and Jews, believe in one God, whether denominated Allah, Jehovah or God, as their custom and habit may be, all of which religious roots descended from Abraham. Muslims recognize Jesus as a prophet, kind of a Latter Day Saint perhaps, but Mohamed is the last and final word.
I get that, but the part I am having a hard time understanding is why, as Purplehood asked, under an Islamic theocracy, all non-Muslims, including presumably any "people of the book," would be required to A) pay a dhimmi tax; or B) comply with any of the
other restrictions of Dhimmitude:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi.
I ask this question because it highlights the importance of the 1st Amendment—that Congress shall make no law establishing a religion, nor prevent the free exercise thereof—and to the secular value of equal protections under the law. It would seem to me that any Muslim living in our country would have greater liberty than any "person of the book" would have in an Islamic theocracy. I'm not trying to criticize the religion, but rather the concept of a theocratic state. It does me no good if, in exchange for being left alone to practice the religion of my choice, I have to pay as special tax because I'm not a member of the state's officially sanctioned religion; that I cannot enter into a legally binding contract with a Muslim unless I convert; that I cannot marry a Muslim unless I convert. (Actually the Bible says we should not be "unequally yoked" also, but there is no
legal stricture sanctioned by the state which forbids it. Under Sharia, it would be forbidden.)
So I guess one of my questions to Beiruty and any other Muslim members of the forum would be, "even though this is a secular state which does not adopt Islam (or any other religion) as the official state religion, are you not better off living here, than you would be in a nation which does not recognize that all citizens have exactly the same rights, regardless of their religious affiliations? I think that this is one of the main reasons we are able to coexist peacefully.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"
#TINVOWOOT