DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**streMunford** · 01-05-2012, 06:52 AM

Jazakallah brother for your views,

May I pose a question then:

Here in the UK we have free healthcare (publicly funded health system), whilst in European nations it is very similar. However if there was a true Islamic system of governance anywhere in the world, then would the citizens of that nation receive free healthcare or not? Is it Islamically applicable to look after your peoples needs in this way? Would and Islamic form of governance be perceptive to the needs of the welfare of the populous or not?

Similarly; what would happen to the people who are out of work, because theres not enough jobs to satisfy demand? Would you let these people starve as we see in many 'Muslim' countries today?

1. Free healthcare is not "free". It is extremely expensive, and it comes straight out of the paychecks of people. It is also not fair. Let's say there is someone who does mujahada in his life to lead a healthy lifestyle. That person refrains from unhealthy food, exercises, etc ... Does the government have the right to force him to pay to subsidize the healthcare of someone else who is a smoker, has unhealthy eating habits, doesn't exercise, .. etc?

2. Why is it the responsibility of government to pay people's healthcare bills and monetarily support those who are unemployed? Aren't individuals in the society already responsible for their neighbors? What if someone has limited funds, their neighbor is in trouble and they want to help them out. Now, the government steps in and forcibly takes their money and decides to spend it on someone else. That money, with which someone could have helped their neighbor - to whom they have duties, is now gone and cannot be used to help one's neighbor.
On the issue of unemployment, why is the government responsible? Why isn't that person responsible for himself, and those whom Allaah has given responsibility to - his family, neighboors, etc .. ? Let's say there is someone who leads a financially responsible lifestyle, who builds savings for the future, and is leads a slim lifestyle so that he is not dependent upon anyone if there are periods of unemployment etc ... Why is he forced to subsidize, for example, someone else who was reckless with their finances and spent everything they had without saving for the future? How is it fair for anyone to be *forced* into subsidizing his recklessness? Sure, individuals should be generous and help others out when they are down - even if it was the result of their previously unwise decisions. But what right does the government have to reach into your pocket and give your wealth to someone else?

3. Even if the government is given the responsibility of healthcare, welfare, etc ... Shouldn't citizens be given the option to opt-out if they want? Essentially, anything one gives that is more than zakat is nafl sadaqa - right? If citizens want to allow the government to distribute their sadaqa on their behalf, fine - but what right does the government have to forcibly take it from everyone? Shouldn't people have the freedom to direct their funds allocated for sadaqa to whomever they want?

Is it the role of government to force citizens into philanthropy, or is it the role of scholars to encourage citizens to spend on those needier than them?

Does Islamic governance advocate socialism, and redistribution of wealth? Is it the responsibility of an Islamic Government to mitigate the risk of an individual's personal (wise or unwise) choices by taking from others?

Honestly, I don't know the answers to these questions. I need to make a thread, lol.

Note: All of the above talk about government taking from some people and giving to others is refering to that amount beyond the zakat level. Obviously the government has a responsibility to forcibly take zakat money and spend it on the needy/unemployed/etc... What im talking about is the government taking anything above the zakat amount and spending on the needy and the such. Also the problem is not government spending on the needy and deserving .. if the government has money from zakat, jizya, war booty, etc that's fine and great. My question is whether they can forcibly take wealth beyond that of zakat and decide for you on which needy persons to spend.

01-05-2012, 06:52 AM	#38
streMunford Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 479 Senior Member	Jazakallah brother for your views, May I pose a question then: Here in the UK we have free healthcare (publicly funded health system), whilst in European nations it is very similar. However if there was a true Islamic system of governance anywhere in the world, then would the citizens of that nation receive free healthcare or not? Is it Islamically applicable to look after your peoples needs in this way? Would and Islamic form of governance be perceptive to the needs of the welfare of the populous or not? Similarly; what would happen to the people who are out of work, because theres not enough jobs to satisfy demand? Would you let these people starve as we see in many 'Muslim' countries today? 1. Free healthcare is not "free". It is extremely expensive, and it comes straight out of the paychecks of people. It is also not fair. Let's say there is someone who does mujahada in his life to lead a healthy lifestyle. That person refrains from unhealthy food, exercises, etc ... Does the government have the right to force him to pay to subsidize the healthcare of someone else who is a smoker, has unhealthy eating habits, doesn't exercise, .. etc? 2. Why is it the responsibility of government to pay people's healthcare bills and monetarily support those who are unemployed? Aren't individuals in the society already responsible for their neighbors? What if someone has limited funds, their neighbor is in trouble and they want to help them out. Now, the government steps in and forcibly takes their money and decides to spend it on someone else. That money, with which someone could have helped their neighbor - to whom they have duties, is now gone and cannot be used to help one's neighbor. On the issue of unemployment, why is the government responsible? Why isn't that person responsible for himself, and those whom Allaah has given responsibility to - his family, neighboors, etc .. ? Let's say there is someone who leads a financially responsible lifestyle, who builds savings for the future, and is leads a slim lifestyle so that he is not dependent upon anyone if there are periods of unemployment etc ... Why is he forced to subsidize, for example, someone else who was reckless with their finances and spent everything they had without saving for the future? How is it fair for anyone to be forced into subsidizing his recklessness? Sure, individuals should be generous and help others out when they are down - even if it was the result of their previously unwise decisions. But what right does the government have to reach into your pocket and give your wealth to someone else? 3. Even if the government is given the responsibility of healthcare, welfare, etc ... Shouldn't citizens be given the option to opt-out if they want? Essentially, anything one gives that is more than zakat is nafl sadaqa - right? If citizens want to allow the government to distribute their sadaqa on their behalf, fine - but what right does the government have to forcibly take it from everyone? Shouldn't people have the freedom to direct their funds allocated for sadaqa to whomever they want? Is it the role of government to force citizens into philanthropy, or is it the role of scholars to encourage citizens to spend on those needier than them? Does Islamic governance advocate socialism, and redistribution of wealth? Is it the responsibility of an Islamic Government to mitigate the risk of an individual's personal (wise or unwise) choices by taking from others? Honestly, I don't know the answers to these questions. I need to make a thread, lol. Note: All of the above talk about government taking from some people and giving to others is refering to that amount beyond the zakat level. Obviously the government has a responsibility to forcibly take zakat money and spend it on the needy/unemployed/etc... What im talking about is the government taking anything above the zakat amount and spending on the needy and the such. Also the problem is not government spending on the needy and deserving .. if the government has money from zakat, jizya, war booty, etc that's fine and great. My question is whether they can forcibly take wealth beyond that of zakat and decide for you on which needy persons to spend.
	Quote