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.
For instance, Findlaw defines "assault/battery" this way:
Assault/Battery In most states, an assault/battery is committed when one person 1) tries to or does physically strike another, or 2) acts in a threatening manner to put another in fear of immediate harm. Many states declare that a more serious or "aggravated" assault/battery occurs when one 1) tries to or does cause severe injury to another, or 2) causes injury through use of a deadly weapon. Historically, laws treated the threat of physical injury as "assault", and the completed act of physical contact or offensive touching as "battery," but many states no longer differentiate between the two.
So anyone who publicly states that he is going to "behead the person who insulted the Prophet" should be taken seriously and locked up for assault.
In the US we are not (yet?) in the position of the Europeans where 12 and 13 year old girls are kidnapped and sent back to Pakistan to be married to their cousins. But our laws would (and should) prevent this from ever happening here.
Same thing with schooling females. And spousal abuse laws should apply whatever the religion of the person doing it.
We have the laws in place, but judging by the Europeans, it is the enforcement of the laws that is in question.
We tolerate satanism ... but not human sacrifice. We accept Mormanisn but not polygamy. The same needs to apply to Islam ... we will tolerate the cult (barely) as long as those who practice it become and remain NON -VIOLENT
Islam was twisted at it's inception; not after the fact.
I've searched my tiny mind for another example of a religion who's first and porimary goal is world domination, with a select racial elite at the top, and everyone else relegated to slavery.
Buddhism? No.
Jainism? No.
Hinduism? Heck no.
Zoroastrianism? No.
Greek Orthodoxy? No.
Judaism? No.
Daoism? Certainly not.
Christianity? No.
Druidism? No.
Animism? No.
Totemism? No.
Wicca? No.
Thor, God of Thunder? Don't think so.
In fact, the only philospohies (for lack of a better term) that DO envision world domination under a racial elite and the reduction of the rest of the world to slave status are: Islam, Nazism, Japanese Militarism and Stalinist Communism.
In fact, the only other books (other than the Koran, that is)I could immediately think of that even comes close to describing such a system was Orwell's "1984" and Hitler's "Mein Kampf".
Gee, Islam looks more an more like a "religion of peace" the more I think about it (/sarc).
Let's see here....
we aren't even fighting a majority of the Muslims in Iraq, a country of 25 million.
We aren't fighting even 5% of the Muslims that were in Afghanistan.
There are over 1 BILLION Muslims. If ALL of those Muslims were militant, terrorists or whatever you want to call them, WE would be in A LOT worse shape than we are now.
but don't let the stats and facts get in the way of your blind hate. Go ahead, make yourself look like the same thing you profess to be against.
"So anyone who publicly states that he is going to "behead the person who insulted the Prophet" should be taken seriously and locked up for assault."
Yup. Enforce the laws. Prosecute people who break them.
So the evidence that you give to back up your stated "fact" that most Muslims DO NOT endorse terrorism; is simply your experience with knowing a few of them. How many ?
Even if you know 100's, your personal experiences provide too limited a basis on which to make such a claim, especially since they have a well-known proclivity for saying one thing to non-Muslims, and another to the rest of us.
"We don't have to outlaw it, just take away their tax exempt status. That way they couldn't profit from plotting aganst us."
There are a bunch of fringe Christian churches that do not have tax-exempt status that do very nicely.
But if you're talking about revoking EVERY mosque's tax exempt status, you're still butting heads with the First Amendment.
Yeah. I naïvely believed that too. Until I had one screaming at me in my cubicle ON 9 frickin' 11.
Had the Towers not come down, and had he not objected to my support of the USofA in the heat of the moment of victory, I would have never know his true colors.
They are raised from birth to lie to nonbelievers, it's called al Taqqia (various spellings).
I was much happier living with my eyes closed, as you do...
They already hate us. I've listend many times to radio talk shows, in which a "moderate" muslim calls in to give his 2¢. The host will try to get them to condemn all terrorist acts, and the muslim invariably replies with "well, under certain circumstances..", or "well, it's a complicated question..."
Remember, these are the moderates.
So you're saying they're all bad then?
"We tolerate satanism ... but not human sacrifice. We accept Mormanisn but not polygamy. The same needs to apply to Islam ... we will tolerate the cult (barely) as long as those who practice it become and remain NON -VIOLENT
"
Exactly correct. So, when a Muslim breaks our laws, we prosecute. Very simple.
Sorry, I'm a dude. And Mrs. Wombat might have a thing or two to say about it.
No 'Brokeback Connection' here, bud.
but it is the best offer I've had all week. (/sarc)
*ouch*
Just for fun? O.K., it's like pornography. I can't define it, but I know it when I see it!
;^)
Corrected Reply: Even if you know 100's, your personal experiences provide too limited a basis on which to make such a claim, especially since they have a well-known proclivity for saying one thing to Muslims, and another to the rest of us.
That's it. Base an entire 1/6th of the world's population off of a telephone call that MAY OR MAY NOT have been by someone who is as they claim to be.
Makes PERFECT sense to me.
LOL!
Prove it. Everything we have seen tells us otherwise.
When they break one of our laws, we lock them up.
The law enforcement approach does not exclude the war making approach. We can and should enforce all the local laws. In addition, we may need to destroy some of their countries. But extraterritorial war is outside the rights of American citizens spelled out in the First Amendment, which apply.
If we got to the point of a declared civil war internally, I trust we could suspend the whole of Constitutional Rights for the opponents of the Constitution. Their rejection of it would make it not apply to them. Death by bullet would be fine.
In the mean time, let's not go suspending the First Amendment for certain religions.
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.