I know this is a little long winded, so apologies in advance, but if the difference were simple, we would not be fighting a war right now.
In a more structural and cultural view of Chrisitnas and Muslims, Christianity has created a not so obvious by product of institutionalism, in the Weber sense. This means that people respect the office rather than the person, which is a good thing when trying to establish organizations like religious, governments or private institutions. So, one person leaves, or dies the organization survives instead of fracturing because followers lost interest given the absence of their leader. This has given rise to the belief that many of the activites of others should be corrected by institutional means rather than personal involvement. Your neighbor beats his wife, call the cops instead of taking action yourself. Decisions on right and wrong are made top down.
Muslims contrast to this in that they do not subscribe to the idea that right and wrong can be outsourced to specialized individuals who will take care of moral infractions. A Muslim is obligated to personally intervene if a neighbor strays from the path of rightenousness. Again a Christian is more likely to outsource their indignation to the appropriate authorities.
Thanks to this, Muslims not only admonish those who stray the path, but those who allow others to fall for these more hedonistic distractions.
So, Christian countries may have lost control of people's values, and indeed think that control is a bad thing because it must involve government in their case. Muslim countries do not use government to guide values, they do it on the personal level.
So, I guess the next question would be what happens when a top down culture like the US tries to establish a top down institution in a bottom up culture like Iraq?
2006-07-29 02:41:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by bizsmithy 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
First, I need to start with some guesses.
By "christian countries" you mean the countries of Western Europe and of Western European origin (like the USA, Canada, Australia, etc.).
By "islamic countries" you mean the countries of the Middle East (like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya, etc.).
By "show more sex and money" you mean show off their wealth and act more promiscuously in public.
If my guesses are correct, then I think that the following statements are true.
1. Commoners in "Christian countries" generally have some discretionary income (that's income after taxes and necessary payments -- rent/mortgage, utility bills, food, etc.), whereas commoners in "Islamic countries" rarely have any discretionary income and generally live in poverty.
2. Sheiks and very successful businessmen in "Islamic countries" engage in just as much conspicuous consumption as those in "Christian countries."
3. In "Christian countries," although the wealthy do tend to show off their wealth, they also tend to give generously to charities and non-profit organizations.
4. In "Islamic countries," it is unusual for the wealthy to subsidize the poor. However, there are exceptions, and, because they are not the rule, they are often reported in the press.
5. I don't think that anyone knows how much sexual activity occurs in private in "Islamic countries." If Kinsey or Masters and Johnson tried to do their studies in a place like Sudan, they'd be imprisoned or put to death.
6. People in "Islamic countries" are more likely to follow the Koran with regard to sexual promiscuity than are people in "Christian countries" to adhere strictly to the Bible.
2006-07-29 05:56:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by Goethe 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because we aren't told by the government what to do based on a bible. Why do Muslims migrate to Christian countries and Christians don't migrate to Muslim countries? Because the Christians will get their head chopped off by slimy Islamists while the Muslims love it in a free country.
2006-07-29 05:19:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
How many people in these 'Christian' countries do u know that are actually christians? It's not the foundation of the country-it's the people in it.
2006-07-29 06:00:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by loving_life_maddi 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that you are very wrong in your thinking if you take the former president of Iraq for example, he lived in 8 different places, and he spared no expense on them. Each one of these places dwarf the white house where the president lives, you could fit 5 white houses into just one of Saddam's places. As for sex i don't think we flaunt it anymore than any other country does, in the end it is behind closed doors.
2006-07-29 05:29:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by sincity usa 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
- Islamic countries have laws which would probably put such activists in jail, or worse.
- So called "Christian" countries, are normally secular or civil, and have laws around freedom of speech, information, and activities such as what you mention.
2006-07-29 05:19:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
because people in Christian countries are free to do as they choose - it's not forced on them - and so christians and non-christians alike create what you're talking about.
in most muslim countries, the prople are not really free and can't.
2006-07-29 05:19:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by Kevin A 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nix the religious labeling of countries.
Maybe you'll be able to sustain an erection and hold down a job.
2006-07-29 05:19:08
·
answer #8
·
answered by jaike 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hipocrites.
2006-07-29 05:18:16
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
sex and money is considered taboo under the islamic religion as far as i know
2006-07-29 05:18:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by helena2581 2
·
0⤊
0⤋