From: chatter@ecf.toronto.edu (CHATTERJEE Aniruddha)
Subject: Re: was SALMAN RUSHDIE
Summary: Islam and Science - how compatible ?
Keywords: Islam, Darwin, Medicine
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 15:54:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.005525.7823@twg.com> khan@twg.com (Sharaz Khan) writes:

>Islam is the only faith that the West has always feared.  Europe almost
>saw the fall of Rome at the hands of Muslims.  Why you ask?  Islam offers
>comprehensive solutions to many social and human problems that no other
>faith can combine with real and practical life (business, science, economics,

I wonder ---

Business :	The world financial system runs on lending, borrowing
		and paying and accepting interest. I don't want to
		bring up personal issues, but do you think Islam
		condones its followers from being part of this 
		western society insofar as receiving money as 
		interest from bank deposits ? How about the fact
		that most of the wealth of Arab countries earn
		interest in bank deposits in the west ? How about
		the fact that earnings from such deposits exceed
		the oil revenue for Kuwait (before the war) ?

Science :	As a follower of Islam, do you think it is possible to
		believe in the theory of evolution ? Do you
		think you could subsribe to theories of medicine and
		beliefs such as we evolved from apes/chimps ? What does
		Islam say about Pithecanthropus erectus skeletons, the
		`Peking Man' or the `Java Man' ?


>etc.) whereas the concept in other faiths is a separation of all of these
>faculties.  When the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) took Mecca, it was not by the
>sword, but by the fact that he had conveyed such a system that attacked
>at the roots of the currently running system.  He simply walked in to 
>Mecca.  The system that exists in the West today was similar in most 
>aspects than that of Mecca 1400  years ago.  Besides, my being "paranoid"
>about the West is nothing new.  I have come to this conclusion after 
>much such as:
>
>- Double-standard in the case of Kuwait when Iraq invaded it vs that of 
>  the occupation of Pelestine by the Zionists.

	Are you saying that these two situations are equivalent ?
	To me they have common elements only in the fact western
	interests of `vital' importance were involved. Beyond that
	I think Iraq's aggression was wrong and the Palestine issue
	is so convoluted and complex that it would be miraculous
	if something comes out of the present negotiations. Meanwhile
	Palestinians in `occupied' territories suffer while rich
	sheiks enjoy their time spending oil money.
>
>- Double-standard when all resolutions passed in the UN are implemented 
>  in Kuwait but not in Pelestine.
>
	I agree with your point completely.

>- Double-standard when "protecting" the Shites in Iraq, whereas neglecting
>  Bosnia's genocide as a "regional guerella warfare".
>

	I agree with your point completely.
	
>- Double-standard in asking Pakistan to sign the nuclear non-proliferation 
>  treaty whereas India is devoid from this right.
>
	This hurts Pakistan more as it gets more conditional aid from
	U.S.A. India does not get U.S aid to the extent that cutting
	off that aid could be a threat. This is the issue. Who cares
	otherwise if U.S.A asks India/Pakistan to sign it ? Its all
	realpolitik !

>...[Deleted.. Once a person becomes Muslim, it is obligatory for one
>to refuse most that operates in the current system of Government.  
>
>Sharaaz Khan
>


-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Aniruddha Chatterjee							   
  200 College Street 			chatter@ecf.toronto.edu		   
  Deptt. of Chemical Engineering