Posted on 02/20/2006 7:46:11 AM PST by Dark Skies
When President Bush gave his "axis of evil" speech he went out of his way to make the world understand that it isn't a war with Islam itself that we were joining — and I say joining because the war had been started by the Jihadists decades before. And, in observance to our Western principles, that must be the correct way to view our conflagration with radical Islam.
Let's face facts, it certainly is uncomfortable to a Westerner who has been brought up on tolerance, freedom of religion, and liberty to contemplate a war against an entire religion. But are we approaching a time when Western nations won't have a choice but to target Islam itself in certain ways to keep their own people safe. The best course of action is to make public displays of Islam and certain of its practices illegal in Western nations.
So, the question becomes are we at that time now? Are we fast approaching a time when Mosques will be closed and banned? Have we come to a time when Islamic literature is turned away from our borders? Have the childish and dangerous reactions of Muslims to this cartoon in a Danish newspaper proven that Islam cannot be trusted to be a vital, peaceful, and law-abiding segment of society?
It is looking like yes is the answer to these queries.
We are already approaching this today. In Ontario they have officially outlawed Muslim Sharia law, that law that uses religious precepts to enforce moral and society codes of conduct. And Muslim "family councils" have been stopped where local community groups may supplement Canadian law with their local custom.
Several members of the John Howard administration in Australia have spoken out against Islamic clashes with Western notions of law and societal comportment many times over the last few years.
Recently Howard himself said, "I do think there is this particular complication because there is a fragment which is utterly antagonistic to our kind of society, and that is a difficulty ... You can't find any equivalent in Italian, or Greek, or Lebanese, or Chinese or Baltic immigration to Australia. There is no equivalent of raving on about jihad, but that is the major problem."
Muslims routinely destroy property, threaten death and bodily harm to those who speak out against them, and they constantly fund terrorism throughout the world. In Syria they have burnt an embassy, in Europe Muslims have been responsible for murdering people who have written out against Islam or made movies, and other forms of art. These actions are also approved by Islamic teachers (Imams) and religious leaders, not just undertaken by warped loners claiming to represent Islam quite against the will of the majority or authority.
With this ridiculous cartoon issue, we have seen that Islam has no sense of perspective. In the west parody or satire is seen as not only common, but completely harmless for the most part. And religion is not immune to parody and satire, though even in the west most people are often uncomfortable with religious satire. Usually only people filled with hate attack religion in parody and most in the West instinctively know this. As a result, most people dismiss such parody as foolishness and bad taste.
But with Muslims overreacting — in western eyes at least — to this silly cartoon issue in the way they have, it becomes nearly impossible for Westerners to view Islam as a peaceful religion, but more as a vicious hate group itself. And that perception is justified with the actions that Muslims have increasingly perpetrated over the ensuing years. So, we find that Islam presents a danger to the safety of the populace all too often. It is violent, oppressive, and reactionary.
But, what is to be done about it? We have been raised to feel that religion should be left untouched by government. Freedom of religion is at the very core of our beliefs. And this concept is an important one to uphold. So, how can we honestly and without hypocrisy begin to look toward making Islam illegal?
There is a parallel of sorts in the USA that might be used as a template for action. The Ku klux Klan.
After the Civil War ended, the KKK arose from the ashes of war as an advocacy group for the disenfranchised white voter in the south. But it quickly became a terrorist organization bent on taking out revenge on the south's newly freed black population for having lost the war. It got so bad that even one of the original organizers, C.S. Cavalry General Nathan Bedford Forrest, denounced the organization and quit it in disgust.
But as the late 1800s rolled on and the south began to re-enter the Union as full partners in government, the KKK began to lose steam and prominence. For a time it subsided. But as the 20th century neared, it re-emerged and this time became a nationwide and powerful force taking on the flavor of religious, civic and racial duty. The KKK became invested in government and claimed millions of members nation wide.
In the 1920s, however, it became too much for a liberty loving country to allow the KKK to any longer exist. In Indiana, the entire state government was scandalized by their fealty to Indiana's Klan leader who had raped and beaten his secretary on a train trip. Violence against and frequent lynching of southern blacks became so pervasive that Congress finally acted and banned the Klan. The organization collapsed never again to reclaim the power and prominence it once had.
Now, the KKK has always based its precepts on Christianity, as well as racial identity. It also reacted with violence, rallies, death threats and killing when it was threatened. It careened far away from being a mere "idea" or religious theology and became a terrorist organization. And it became a terrorist organization even though literally millions of Americans that belonged to or identified with the Klan were not themselves violent, evil, or dangerous citizens.
The leadership of the Klan supported violence. The leadership preached violence. The leadership planned and fomented it. Therefore, it had to go because it became a danger to every law-abiding citizen, whether they agreed with the racial and religious concepts the Klan espoused or not.
Islam has become the KKK of the 21st century. The sooner we awake to this truth and take steps to ban the religion, or somehow curtail its pernicious influence the better. The west is going to have to put sever restrictions on Islamic Mosques and public display of Islam. Further, devout Muslims should not be allowed to hold public office (though it certainly should not become a racial issue — sins of the father should not be visited upon the sons).
This is no religious purge as in centuries past. In the past religions were banned to be replaced by the state sponsored sect and believers of the banned religion were mistreated, tortured, unduly taxed, and terrorized. This is absolutely not the model the west would follow by banning aspects of Islam today. No religion is replacing Islam and no one is suggesting that Muslims be mistreated. But the creed to which they hold is fast becoming the most dangerous one in the world today. It is a fine line that we walk to consider banning Islam, but the safety of society is at risk not to do so.
This is not an easy conclusion at which to arrive. But if we continue to turn a blind eye to the danger that Islam presents to the west, we are signing our own death warrants.
The KKK was put down in the USA and made powerless for the same reason. Communism was destroyed for the same reason, as well. Islam is a danger to the world.
Unfortunately, it is just that simple.
To paraphrase Patton: I can attack with ten cartoons in an hour!
If such can be found.
but at the very least we need to call Islamic terrorism what it is and wipe it out.
Agreed.
We need to kill as many as it takes until the survivors permanently [no hunda here] forswear violence. How many is enough? N can be anywhere between 1 and 1.3 billion. They can stop any time they want. We daren't.
Having someone fly a plane into an office tower full of people is also an affront to western ideals.
In the end, the only "civil right" that counts is the right to keep breathing. The Bill of Rights is not a suicide pact.
I wonder how long the marriage of convenience will last between the leftists and the muzzies?
lol...I get your message and will obey.
I don't sdvocate destroying the Constitution (or rather, what's left of it). I don't see this a s a constitutional issue.
I see it as a matter of the survival of western civilization, which is being confronted by a virulent ideology totally inimical to all secular, rationalist, Western society stands for. You know, things like 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'.
The Constitution, it's been said, is NOT a suicide pact. From time time we have bent the rules in the name of national security or national survival.
It's my belief that the same Federal Government that can be used to incinerate 80 Christians in a Church in Waco (after 51 days of armed siege), or kidnap a child on live television so that he can be shipped back to Cuba, is perfectly capable of acting in the same fashion against a REAL threat. And that threat is not going to be squashed with touchy-feely plattitudes or ethnic studies.
When the right to practice a religion becomes illegal the terrorists have won.
""The US government is an abomination that must be overthrown"."
Do a Google search for "Christian Reconstructionism." You've described it exactly.
OK,
So we decide to outlaw Islam.
And we have soldiers, citizens, politicians, lawyers, Doctors etc who are all Islamic. All who see themselves as Americans..... And are.
So what happens then? Do they have a "OK! I just think I'll mosey myself down to the First _____ Church of the Boondocks and learn how to sing gospel music." moment.
What would YOU do?
I know what I would do if someone told me what to do or not to believe....tell me that I am evil and my religion is too...... I'm a damn good actress when I have to be....you'd think you had the bestest little convert you ever had!
But I'll hate you forever if you take away my right to believe.
Understand. ;)
Well said.
http://www.comm.uiuc.edu/helle/Whitney.htm
The 1st Amend. isn't absolute, as some of you seem to suggest. The Communist party was a state religion to many in the last century and a "clear and present danger" to Americans.
Mebbe we newbies are too extreme or not protective enough of the Bill of Rights, in your opinions. You old timers `cut your teeth' in the late `90s on a philandering, native jack-***. (Bad comparison, sorry)
I would say maniacs threatening to behead us, after having done so, or threatening to re-visit 9-11, after having done so in England, is a real danger to us today.
Maybe some one has later cites re application of the 1st to our current problem with this problem but I would say `split the difference' and outlaw the Wahhabism variant. There's nothing good there for anyone.
We cannot be deceived by the handful of mudslime you know who may or may not be Trojan horses within our country.
One only has to look at the thousands of stone age people, with fire in their eyes, jumping up and down like the jungle maggots they are, over a truthful cartoon. We have to ask ourselves:"Why have not these very same animals protested after all the terrorist attacks over the last 40 years?" Where were all the street protests after 9/11?
Their silence tells us they approve of koran (comic book for retards) motivated killing against any non-mudslime. The up side is they are so stupid they seem to kill more of their own. Mudslime apologists have lost their argument based upon the actions of the very people they try to lie and protect.
Charles Yee, muslim chaplain at Guantanamo. I don't know what the status of this case is, though. ISTR the treason charges were dropped, but I could be mistaken.
OK....
Have at it hun.
But to me, it's an equal evil.
Well let's see how clever you are in coming up with something legal to stop this spiritual cancer.
You haven't actually read the koran, have you?
I just think I'll mosey myself down to the First _____ Church of the Boondocks and learn how to sing gospel music." moment.
Back Off Boy!People can believe what they want..Just don't step on my Moms' Grave.!!
I never thought I'd see so many supposedly rational people allow a violent hate group determined to destroy you, your way of life and your constitution use it as a shield to protect their jihad.
How would we outlaw a religion? Would we demand that all religious entities be registered? Would we require all citizens to profess belief only in approved religious entities? Would we have a special "religious police" looking for unregistered "house churches?"
Amazing how many "conservatives" here want to replicate something straight out of the People's Republic of China...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.