Hello!
This is a question I have been pondering for some while, not least because I have .. accidentally .. done this, once.
It is a common myth that in religious debate, nobody will ever change their mind. Sure, if you are confrontational enough, it may be close to reality, but with my softer style of "questions, thoughts, and answers" that is demonstrably not true.
Now, let me give you a bit of context for this question if you are not aware of the situations ex-Muslims face: their life, even in the west, becomes significantly harder. not only will they be shunned by their family and community, there is often violence and damage to property that is done years, if not decades, after. Losing your faith as a Muslim basically turns your world upside down, and if you aren't interested in a revolutionary struggle against Islam, is going to make your life much less enjoyable.
What do you think?
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
hi Nodater
I don't quite understand the question you have posed and the OP that follows it. If an ex muslim faces trouble from his ex community, that's a moral issue within Islam... why would you be in any kind of a moral ambivalence over converting a muslim?
Converting a muslim to what?
Into a potato
I think Nodater's post may imply some responsibility on the person "doing the converting" of the Muslim?
Chimp makes the important point that (like secularism and atheism, in a way) "converting" is a theological term. No non-believer I know is "converting" anything or anybody.
Non-believers argue that there is no evidence an Abrahamic god of any description even exists. Even if that particular myth contained some grain of essential truth there is still no justification for religions or for worshiping "god" (or gods). The problem for any believer, (Muslim or otherwise) is that their "beliefs" are delusional in that they aren't supported by facts, evidence or sound reasoning.
So, to answer Nodater's question: the problem of what is true and what isn't is the same for us all. Religion isn't relevant. A hundred years ago there were "Western, Christian, advanced" countries where disbelieving there is an Abrahamic god (atheism) could exclude you from family, friends and community. Frankly, Muslims have a particular problem because they tend to come from less developed societies where human rights are less well understood and freedom of speech and expression are less highly valued. They also often lack democratic institutions or have low literacy levels.
In short: gods and fairies don't exist and religion causes more trouble than it solves, whatever problems those facts cause certain individuals.
http://www.jesusandmo.net/comic/fake/
https://paulbraterman.wordpress.com/2017/02/01/libertys-falwell-to-lead-...
Is the OP also suggesting that because a muslim might face persecution by becoming an atheist that we should protect them by not having rational discussions? Is he suggesting that they are not intelligent enough to solve their own dilemma?
I agree that a belief in an Abrahamic God is not logically justifiable. Indeed, I have yet to encounter any God or supernatural being worthy of belief, let alone worship. This isn't about whether their beliefs are correct - seems nearly certain they are not - but whether it is right to undermine those beliefs, given what they may face if their belief crumbles.
"Convert" is indeed a religious term, and one I probably subconsciously borrowed from the Islamic world, who do, if I recall correctly, consider any outside influence leading to the loss of Islamic faith a conversion.
The moral dilemma is the following: by posing a challenge to a person's faith, that person may be harmed greatly by that challenge. The question follows:
Can one justify posing that challenge, knowing that the challenge will, on average, harm the person in question?
I think most of us can agree that if one meets a North-Korean person, one should do one's best to keep them in their cult-like beliefs. They are objectively happier that way, and deprogramming a few that leave the country for business will not in any way help topple the regime that produced them.
With Islam, it's less clear-cut: making apostasy less of a taboo is objectively a good thing, and real change could come. But is it worth the damage to the individual? Can one be considered responsible for that damage?
I hope this works to clarify the issue here..
"if one meets a North-Korean person, one should do one's best to keep them in their cult-like beliefs"
Best to leave them alone. If they're even suspected of harboring anti-Kim thoughts, they and all of their relatives to about three degrees of separation will end up in labor camps or a soccer stadium.
The answer to your question, which I believe is "Is it immoral to get a muslim to convert FROM being muslim?"
No, it is not because ultimately the decision is theirs and theirs alone. It would be immoral to forcibly convert a muslim.
Each person must weigh each decision they make in life and suffer the consequences accordingly. Whether those consequences are just or unjust.
That's definitely a compelling argument, but the trouble is that it isn't really a choice they are making, is it?
Once the faith is broken, it can be almost impossible to build it back up. Of course, it is their decisions to go public with it, but even then, what one is giving them is a choice between persecution and a lifetime of living a lie. A lie they don't believe themselves, to be precise.
@Nodater(silly name)
It IS their choice. No one can be converted unless they want to be. Brainwashed christians are either indoctrinated at birth or are weak minded and want to believe in the bullshit.
If by ''convert'' you mean to discuss or to make muslims aware there is no proof that gods exist, the answer is that religions are not sacred and I don't care if anyone thinks discussions about the nature of reality and theism are immoral.
@Nodater: "there is often violence and damage to property that is done years, if not decades, after."
That's where the immorality comes in.
But realistically, can anyone ever convert an adult with a functioning brain to anything against their will? People make their own choices, and any persuasion you offer is merely a catalyst. I've never known anyone to change their world view, either religiously or politically, except through an inner personal journey.
Nodater seems to confuse the truth with what to do about it.
Denial may work for some of the people, some of the time but it isn't any individual's right to encourage denial or ignorance in any other individual. Nor is it usually helpful for any individual to withhold what is true from another. The farthest it makes sense to go is to avoid controversial discussions in the workplace where it may interfere with efficiency or performance. 'Time and place'.
The only good that can come from supporting an oppressive regime is self-preservation. It doesn't matter whether the regime is political (N Korea) or that of one's own family or community, religious or otherwise. Freedom of speech and expression isn't dispensable and shouldn't be negotiable.
It seems to me that one of the biggest problems humanity faces today is false news and lies. The truth is inherently valuable and our ability to discern what's true from what isn't keeps us safe. One of the biggest causes of conflict in the world is people holding conflicting beliefs as sacred. How can one compromise with a person who is certain a particular ideology (religious or not) must prevail?!
Apparently, in some languages in Iraq there is no direct translation for the English/American word "compromise". According to one translator I read the arabic words used in translation in Iraq carry connotations or nuances of defeat or 'giving up'. Compromise itself isn't seen as inherently good and as free from dishonor in all cultures as it is (I think) among all English speaking peoples. Some can cultures seem to value conformity or maybe a twisted view of honor above freedom of expression or what is true.
Immoral to islam though lol