People who take care of mosques in Saudi Arabia and other countries where there are mosques use loudspeakers to call for prayer.

The idea of not using loudspeakers to call for prayer, because it was not in the tradition of earlier Muslims, so it is more normal and better without loudspeakers.

I think Christians and Jews don't use loudspeakers, and it's smarter and wiser that way.

!

Moderator Note

This is not a personal blog. Topics should encourage some form of discussion and not just be random declarations of opinions. Otherwise, this is considered soap-boxing.

 

 

May be you just keep your pov to yourself. If it's not contributing any good to society

On 9/10/2023 at 6:19 PM, Skyscrapers said:

People who take care of mosques in Saudi Arabia and other countries where there are mosques use loudspeakers to call for prayer.

The idea of not using loudspeakers to call for prayer, because it was not in the tradition of earlier Muslims, so it is more normal and better without loudspeakers.

I think Christians and Jews don't use loudspeakers, and it's smarter and wiser that way.

Christians use church bells, though. 

 

The idea of not using fire alarms in churches, mosques, and temples, because it was not in the tradition of earlier Muslims, Christians, and Jews, so it is more normal and better without the fire alarms.

I agree with the OP. One outstanding feature of Islam, both historically and today, is the undercurrent of compulsion. There is compulsion exercised in Christianity too, but less overt. Historically, Christianity was forced down the throats of people. Today, it's more subtle, but it's still there. And most religions, nearly all, employ compulsion.

But I don't know of any religion that employs as much compulsion as Islam. The the loudspeakers are the most obvious bit of compulsion. You are EXPECTED to pray, not invited. And why do it together? So that everybody can see who's praying, and who's NOT praying. 

Most of the compulsion happens to children, it gets a little bit more subtle as people get older, but it's still there. 

The difference is less in the religion, more in what is that nation's form of government.  Anywhere you have a theocracy, you might have loudspeaker or other methods of making the State religion as dominant and all-encompassing as possible.  Nowadays, the most visible theocracies are Islamic so we are more aware of the compulsion there.  There are almost no Christian theocracies left, so we aren't as aware what that would be like.  Mohdi would like India to be more Hindu, so it could happen that he or someone like him in the Right Wing party could push India towards theocracy and try to suppress Islam and other faiths.

15 minutes ago, TheVat said:

The difference is less in the religion, more in what is that nation's form of government.

Moreover, the government does not have to be a theocracy or even to be religious. Examples are USSR, NK, etc.

7 hours ago, TheVat said:

The difference is less in the religion, more in what is that nation's form of government.  Anywhere you have a theocracy, you might have loudspeaker or other methods of making the State religion as dominant and all-encompassing as possible.  Nowadays, the most visible theocracies are Islamic so we are more aware of the compulsion there.  There are almost no Christian theocracies left, so we aren't as aware what that would be like.  Mohdi would like India to be more Hindu, so it could happen that he or someone like him in the Right Wing party could push India towards theocracy and try to suppress Islam and other faiths.

You could spin it around, it is more that the in democratic countries you are legally protected as part of some variant of freedom of religion and/or expression. I.e. compulsion has to be executed wither hidden or at least not in violation of such laws. There obviously are religious areas where one would be a social outcast if one does not go to a particular church, but there would be legal protection if they forced you to attend (whether that helps, is another matter).

And actually I am not so sure whether one would need a lot of imagination to see what a modern Christian theocracy would look like. The ultraconservative theocratic movements in USA demonstrates what they like to have enshrined by law, for example.

Having spent 4 years complaining about the "Screaming Spires of Oxford", I wonder what Saudi Arabia has got to do with it.

The faithful have alarm clocks...

23 hours ago, TheVat said:

Mohdi would like India to be more Hindu, so it could happen that he or someone like him in the Right Wing party could push India towards theocracy and try to suppress Islam and other faiths.

Why do you say so?

It is said that Indian Muslims are certainly better off than Muslims in several Muslim countries due to India’s liberal Constitution.

To pay a tribute to Modi's second term ruling, a group of Muslim women dedicated a congratulatory song for PM Modi for bringing the triple talak bill.

Out of 13 highest civilian honours to PM Modi so far, 6 are from Muslim dominated countries.

 

4 minutes ago, DanGonzal said:

Why do you say so?

It is said that Indian Muslims are certainly better off than Muslims in several Muslim countries due to India’s liberal Constitution.

To pay a tribute to Modi's second term ruling, a group of Muslim women dedicated a congratulatory song for PM Modi for bringing the triple talak bill.

Out of 13 highest civilian honours to PM Modi so far, 6 are from Muslim dominated countries.

 

Yes, my scenario is unlikely.  My point was that unexpected shifts can happen when constitutional guard rails are dismantled.  In the West, we see many reports of Modi inflaming anti Muslim sentiment.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/08/narendra-modi-anti-muslim-strongman-global-leader-india-bbc

 

@ TheVat :

While I do not agree with your above post, I would not comment anymore on this here, since it would be off-topic.