As someone who doesn't believe in any of the Abrahamic religions I am completely impartial in this area.
I do think it's a bit rich for Muslims to insist that they are allowed on everyone else's holy ground and then cry "Foul" when someone else steps on theirs.
I think that all religious sites should be divided up by seniority :
The Jewish faith gets first dibs on religious sites, Christianity gets second dibs and Islam gets whatever is left. Then they all agree to keep their hands off other faiths' sites.
Of course it will never happen but I think it would be the fairest way.
2007-12-10 02:21:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by skywise012000 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
As a muslim the etiquette in Islam is that the sexes don't usually unecessarily touch (exept close family/partners children), which includes handshaking etc. I am usually reluctant to shake a man's hand (regardless of faith) but will if someone offers his hand to do so as i know it is the norm in the UK. I have no problem shaking a woman's hand. The reverse would be true for muslim men to shake other men's hands but again would be reluctant to shake a woman's hand. i think personal preference also comes into account as some are more strict about this rule than others, i wouldn't take it personally though
2016-05-22 05:24:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Religious segregation at it's best. One must remember that they are still living as if they were primitive Bedouins living in tents of the past.
It is absolutely ridicules as to say that the other two main religions who are actually worshipping the same Omnipresent God, albeit, if it be Marduk, Jehovah or Allah there should be a sharing of the holy places just as the same with Jerusalem.
I really glad that I have become an agnostic person when it comes to religion these days. I don't take sides.
2007-12-08 21:46:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Drop short and duck 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course it's not "fair" but Islam is notable for being quite asymmetrical about all sorts of things and accords little reciprocity for the demands it makes on others.
It's also unique among religions in having a secular component that seems as important as the theological one. That is, they want the entire earth to be ruled by Shar'ia law and be under the domination of a universal Caliphate. Also, the very Koran specifies that Muslims do not have to keep their words to infidels ( i.e. all non-Muslims ).
2007-12-09 14:34:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by LucaPacioli1492 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's very fair. What would non-Muslims be there for? Those are the holiest places in the world. They're not some tourism hot spots or a place any curious person can just check out. Price of admission is being a Muslim. If non-Muslims were allowed, then those places would lose their sanctity because they just can't respect them the same way we do. Therefore, they're kept out.
If any other religion has a place or city that is exclusive to their religion and they do not allow others in, I would completely understand. Plus I wouldn't really want to go anyway.
2007-12-08 12:33:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by yo189 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
Entirely fair
I have been to Mount Athos, and they do not allow women, the only female animals are chickens who produce the eggs to make the paint (tempera) for the icons.
I don't see why they can not have some private place in Islam, It would be nice to see other religions doing similar practises, instead of turning the Holy Sepcular and Western Wall into a tourist attraction.
2007-12-08 12:17:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by DAVID C 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Actually, I think it's not that strange. When I'm in Rome, I sometimes feel like I'm allowed to intrude to an extreme level. Saint Peter's is really more of a tourist attraction than sanctuary. And I chose not to visit the Scala Santa, the holy stairs (which supposedly were steps which Jesus climbed carrying the cross), but I could have and I'm sure many people do, just out of curiosity. I understand that the catholic church's strategy is to be easily accessible, but I can sympathise with having your standards a bit higher. Many things in Saudi Arabia are very hard to understand, but keeping nonbelievers out of the holy cities, it maybe harsh but it's certainly not incomprehensible. I wonder though, how does the Saudi police confirm that somebody is indeed a muslim?
2007-12-08 10:08:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by Ray Patterson - The dude abides 6
·
3⤊
3⤋
Can someone that has reverted back to Islam set foot in Mecca?
2007-12-08 10:01:26
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, it is not fair. Islam is an arrogant and biased religion. There are several mosques in Rome, but churches or any other competing religious institution are forbidden in this Muslim area. Makes you think what would happen if Muslims ruled the world.
2007-12-08 10:10:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by jalapeno_kolobok 2
·
5⤊
2⤋
You'll be wanting to set foot on Mount Athos next. If the owners of Mecca and Medina want to keep them as Muslim only areas, that's their business.
2007-12-08 10:03:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
3⤋