Egypt Plans to Remove Qur’ân From Curriculum

[Ethel mermania]

Poor Egypt, we hardly knew ye

[Borderlands of Rojava]

So you admit you harbor irrational hatred of a group simply because they're in a group? Is this supposed to score you some kind of points somewhere?

Being an atheist doesn't mean you get a pass on being a bigot. Don't drag atheism through the mud just because of your own personal hangups.

I wouldn't call it irrational,history has proved me correct everytime...

Yeah my religious neighbors are suuuuuch a threat to me.

You understand that becoming an atheist society doesn't get rid of irrational beliefs right? Things such as racism or antivax can still thrive in a totally atheist society.

[Esperantujo 2]

As an atheist, I've read the whole Quran as well as the whole Christian Bible. I would say that the Quran should be studied in schools, because evil things attributed to Islam by its opponents and self-proclaimed proponents - terrorism, FGM and pedophilia - aren't there. However, its attitude towards women, though probably relatively progressive 1400 years ago, needs to be balanced by the likes of Mary Wollstoncraft and Alexandra Kollontai.

[Washington Resistance Army]

As an atheist, I've read the whole Quran as well as the whole Christian Bible. I would say that the Quran should be studied in schools, because evil things attributed to Islam by its opponents and self-proclaimed proponents - terrorism, FGM and pedophilia - aren't there. However, its attitude towards women, though probably relatively progressive 1400 years ago, needs to be balanced by the likes of Mary Wollstoncraft and Alexandra Kollontai.

fwiw Islam has more than just the Quran in terms of writings, stuff like the Hadith hold near equal importance for a great many Muslims and there is some really yikes stuff in there.

[Caribbean Confederation]

As an atheist, I've read the whole Quran as well as the whole Christian Bible. I would say that the Quran should be studied in schools, because evil things attributed to Islam by its opponents and self-proclaimed proponents - terrorism, FGM and pedophilia - aren't there. However, its attitude towards women, though probably relatively progressive 1400 years ago, needs to be balanced by the likes of Mary Wollstoncraft and Alexandra Kollontai.

Its attitude absolutely wasn't progressive 1400 years ago, most of the stuff they say about Pre-Islamic Arabia is historical revisionism. With that in mind, Quran isn't the only source for Islamic law and governance.

[Jarvikan]

Again, why is that necessary? I'm a practicing Muslim. Do you view Muslims and other religious people as threats to society inherently because of our faith, and our adherence to those books that you'd like to eliminate?

Yes you are right.I view each and every religious person as a threat to the society if they go about publicly displaying their religion.Why it has to be public ? Practise your religion inside your home and no one's gonna bother you,why show other people who or what you are ?
And I have no hard feelings against Muslims in particular.I hate every religious people,it doesn't matter if they are Muslims,Christians,Jewish,Hindus,Buddhists,each one of them.

Don’t forget Buddhism isn’t exactly a religion

[Esperantujo 2]

The irony is the first Prophet of the Abrahamic religions was probably Akhenaten, an Egyptian pharaoh. Moses, the founder of Judaism, was probably Egyptian also.

... What

Monotheism in a time of polytheism.

[Greater Cesnica]

As an atheist, I've read the whole Quran as well as the whole Christian Bible. I would say that the Quran should be studied in schools, because evil things attributed to Islam by its opponents and self-proclaimed proponents - terrorism, FGM and pedophilia - aren't there. However, its attitude towards women, though probably relatively progressive 1400 years ago, needs to be balanced by the likes of Mary Wollstoncraft and Alexandra Kollontai.

fwiw Islam has more than just the Quran in terms of writings, stuff like the Hadith hold near equal importance for a great many Muslims and there is some really yikes stuff in there.

Hadiths can be unreliable though, and many popular collectors of them have been shown to be unreliable sources.

[Greater Cesnica]

I wouldn't call it irrational,history has proved me correct everytime...

A very cherry-picked history I'm sure.

And yeah, hating people simply because they're in a group is irrational. You don't actually know anything about that person outside of one thing, and you've decided you hate them? Where's the logic in that? You don't know if they're innocent or guilty of anything, and yet you want to deprive them of livelihood and cause them to suffer?

Guess horseshoe theory is right. Cause that's not any different from what a Waffen-SS soldier thinks before they'd shoot a Jewish child into a mass grave.

Let's see if the self-reflection kicks in for Sann.

[Ladinacem Andia]

I think I must agree with OP here,

While a proponent of Secular schooling, even given my Catholic faith, the influence of the Qur'an on Egyptian history is too great to reduce teaching it to be tantamount to extremism. While the Qur'an is not a religious text I find incredibly thrilling to read, and in many places do I disagree with the teachings of the Islamic faith, it has nonetheless impacted Egypt in such a manner where it should, at least in my view, be taught, though purely in its historical context. One can teach how the Torah, Bible, or Qur'an impacted a nation without pushing the scripture within those texts. Erasing the influence of the Qur'an by refusing to acknowledge the historical shockwaves it created would be quite questionable. I will always argue that erasing history is never a proper response, even in the name of secularism.

[Greater Cesnica]

I will always argue that erasing history is never a proper response, even in the name of secularism.

Good take!

[Arvenia]

I think I must agree with OP here,

While a proponent of Secular schooling, even given my Catholic faith, the influence of the Qur'an on Egyptian history is too great to reduce teaching it to be tantamount to extremism. While the Qur'an is not a religious text I find incredibly thrilling to read, and in many places do I disagree with the teachings of the Islamic faith, it has nonetheless impacted Egypt in such a manner where it should, at least in my view, be taught, though purely in its historical context. One can teach how the Torah, Bible, or Qur'an impacted a nation without pushing the scripture within those texts. Erasing the influence of the Qur'an by refusing to acknowledge the historical shockwaves it created would be quite questionable. I will always argue that erasing history is never a proper response, even in the name of secularism.

That sounds good.

[Ladinacem Andia]

I will always argue that erasing history is never a proper response, even in the name of secularism.

Good take!

I must inquire, given the time I've spent on this site, and the approximately zero interactions I've had with yourself, if that response is sarcasm or your true feeling about my response. Please don't take any offense, I just genuinely wonder because my past posts seemed to garner a fair deal of sarcastic responses.

[Insaanistan]

As an atheist, I've read the whole Quran as well as the whole Christian Bible. I would say that the Quran should be studied in schools, because evil things attributed to Islam by its opponents and self-proclaimed proponents - terrorism, FGM and pedophilia - aren't there. However, its attitude towards women, though probably relatively progressive 1400 years ago, needs to be balanced by the likes of Mary Wollstoncraft and Alexandra Kollontai.

fwiw Islam has more than just the Quran in terms of writings, stuff like the Hadith hold near equal importance for a great many Muslims and there is some really yikes stuff in there.

The Hadiths aren’t even followed by Qur’âni Muslims, and Shiā Muslims often follow different ones. Of the Six Sahih (Reliable/Authentic) Hadiths Sunnis follow, the book of ibn Majah has loooooong (like, way before the modern era long) been criticized by Sunni scholars for its abundance of unreliable Hadiths; in fact, ibn Majah was only added to the list of Sahih Hadiths “for utility rather than reliability” (his Hadiths hold many that advocate for killing homosexuals, for example). Of the rest, all of them have some Hadiths that contradict other Hadiths in the same book, Hadiths that contradict the Qur’ân, and Hadiths that contradict plain reason.

[Old Tyrannia]

Interesting news; it's a bit hard, really, to work Sisi out from the admittedly little that I know about the political situation in Egypt. I've read elsewhere that persecution of the Coptic Christian minority in Egypt, as well as the LGBT community, has been stepped up under Sisi relative to how things were under Hosni Mubarak, presumably in an effort to appeal to religious conservatives; but then he goes and does something like this which seems like a poke in the eye for those same people. From my reading of the sources it doesn't sound as if all reference to the Quran is being removed from the curriculum, only directly quoted verses from it and the hadiths, so it doesn't seem to me that this move would make it impossible to teach Egyptian history. It would just mean saying, "[Person X] did [Y] because they believed the Quran commanded it" rather than actually quoting the relative Quranic verse.

Perhaps I'm oversimplifying it, but I know that when learning about English history at school religion and the Bible were often mentioned and we managed to get by without ever needing to hear, read or learn specific biblical verses- and don't try to tell me, as some posters in this thread have tried to insist, that the Bible has somehow been less significant to English or general European history and societal development than the Quran has been to that of Egypt; try to tell any competent historian of the Medieval or Early Modern periods that and they'd laugh themselves to death. Overall, I don't necessarily see the policy as a good call but I'm not against it either. Mostly I just see it as hypocritical in light of the Egyptian government's own pandering to hardline religious conservatives.

Yes you are right.I view each and every religious person as a threat to the society if they go about publicly displaying their religion.Why it has to be public ? Practise your religion inside your home and no one's gonna bother you,why show other people who or what you are ?
And I have no hard feelings against Muslims in particular.I hate every religious people,it doesn't matter if they are Muslims,Christians,Jewish,Hindus,Buddhists,each one of them.

Don’t forget Buddhism isn’t exactly a religion

Buddhism has liturgies, holy scriptures, temples, clergy, ethical and metaphysical teachings, beliefs about the supernatural and life after death and deities of its own, or at the very least figures who are to all intents and purposes deities. In what way does it not qualify as a religion?

It’s no more important than the Bible was for most of European history.

Average people werent expected to memorize and sing the whole bible. The bible didnt provide literacy for millions of people.

Someone's never heard of the Protestant Reformation. Millions of people were, in fact, taught to read in order to be able to read the Bible.

[Neutraligon]

Then your history was poorly taught, there was no need to bring up verse. And no, churches did not have single churches they followed, they had predominant churches but most still had other churches within them. Some even had a every religion is accepted ideology.

I went my entire education in public school without hearing a single verse from bible or Torah and they where very easily able to tell students that wars/conflict ocurred due to differences in religious beliefs.

The only colony that had religious tolerance was Maryland for the longest time and even then they were separated into different social classes with the non-Catholics being of inferior class. He's right the colonies did only have one church or sect to subscribe to, it happens that they differ from the Anglican church at times which was one of the reasons they emigrated.

Pennsylvania.

[Greater Cesnica]

Good take!

I must inquire, given the time I've spent on this site, and the approximately zero interactions I've had with yourself, if that response is sarcasm or your true feeling about my response. Please don't take any offense, I just genuinely wonder because my past posts seemed to garner a fair deal of sarcastic responses.

Ah, no offense taken. Sincere opinion.

[Absentius]

Faith should be a private matter, as education occurs within the public domain, such as schools and universities, it should be strictly secular, however this move is not intended to create a level playing field for all Egyptians, instead it is being used to suppress religious dissidents that oppose the regime of Mr.Sisi (spell his name backwards for an awkward suprise), this plan shows that Mr.Sisi and the military still fear the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood and are trying to root out their influence by banning religious text entirely, thereby preventing the Quran from being used as an inspiration and rallying cry by extremists to attract followers. This decision has positives but also has ramifications as it will certainly alienate the religious establishment. This decision should lie with the Egyptian people, not with Mr.Sisi or his military autocracy.

[Sannyamathland]

A very cherry-picked history I'm sure.

And yeah, hating people simply because they're in a group is irrational. You don't actually know anything about that person outside of one thing, and you've decided you hate them? Where's the logic in that? You don't know if they're innocent or guilty of anything, and yet you want to deprive them of livelihood and cause them to suffer?

Guess horseshoe theory is right. Cause that's not any different from what a Waffen-SS soldier thinks before they'd shoot a Jewish child into a mass grave.

Let's see if the self-reflection kicks in for Sann.

Sorry brother,but it seems like Cesnica didn't quite got my argument.You see,if no religion existed,then there would have been no difference between the Jews and the Christians.The atheists are fighting exactly for this....a society based on equality.
And it's no cherry-picked history.There are literally thousands and thousands of examples of religion causing violence.Ok let me give you just 2 examples:
1.Nazism
2.Spanish Inquisation under Ferdinand III and Isabella I.
I can give you many more examples,as religious violence is occurring almost everyday....

[Washington Resistance Army]

1.Nazism

what

[Greater Cesnica]

Let's see if the self-reflection kicks in for Sann.

Sorry brother,but it seems like Cesnica didn't quite got my argument.You see,if no religion existed,then there would have been no difference between the Jews and the Christians.The atheists are fighting exactly for this....a society based on equality.
And it's no cherry-picked history.There are literally thousands and thousands of examples of religion causing violence.Ok let me give you just 2 examples:
1.Nazism
2.Spanish Inquisation under Ferdinand III and Isabella I.
I can give you many more examples,as religious violence is occurring almost everyday....

Because atheists can't be racist

Give me a break.

[Farnhamia]

There is nothing wrong with your web browser. Do not attempt to access this thread while it is being inspected.

[Farnhamia]

So I have 2 guesses as to your take on the Uyghur genocide:
1.It's fake news
2.It's necessary to enforce atheism and crack down on religion

You are an American,if I am not wrong.Well...I support the 2nd reason,and no matter in what bullshit way CNN or BBC has presented this thing to you,I whole heartedly support this 'genocide'(another term invented by the Western media outlets,it is probably fake news too,but since no matter what I say,Americans will not agree with me,I am 'assuming' that there a genocide is indeed happening in that place.) because it is FUCKING effective and necessary.Do not forget,that an incident like 9/11 occured in the US and not in China.Infact,not a SINGLE incident of religious violence has occured in China during after the CCP took power.Is it harsh,yes definetely....but is it neccesary,yes quiet necessay...is it effective,hell yes....Religion should never...ever be allowed to mix with the State,and if it requires brutality to ensure this,then let there is no harm in being brutual.
And American government is no angel....do not forget....

*** Warned for trolling *** ... take this warning to cover your other posts here, unless their accumulated weight leads to an escalation.

[Greater Cesnica]

Faith should be a private matter, as education occurs within the public domain, such as schools and universities, it should be strictly secular, however this move is not intended to create a level playing field for all Egyptians, instead it is being used to suppress religious dissidents that oppose the regime of Mr.Sisi (spell his name backwards for an awkward suprise), this plan shows that Mr.Sisi and the military still fear the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood and are trying to root out their influence by banning religious text entirely, thereby preventing the Quran from being used as an inspiration and rallying cry by extremists to attract followers. This decision has positives but also has ramifications as it will certainly alienate the religious establishment. This decision should lie with the Egyptian people, not with Mr.Sisi or his military autocracy.

Sisi is a snake only looking out for himself. It's a shame, really, that this move will be celebrated by people without them knowing the full context.

[The Alma Mater]

I wouldn't call it irrational,history has proved me correct everytime...

A very cherry-picked history I'm sure.

And yeah, hating people simply because they're in a group is irrational. You don't actually know anything about that person outside of one thing, and you've decided you hate them? Where's the logic in that? You don't know if they're innocent or guilty of anything, and yet you want to deprive them of livelihood and cause them to suffer?

Guess horseshoe theory is right. Cause that's not any different from what a Waffen-SS soldier thinks before they'd shoot a Jewish child into a mass grave.

To be fair, if you self identified as "a member of the group known as "Waffen-SS soldiers" one could make some assumptions. Same as e.g. with being a member of the KKK.