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.
But you see it took the belief of the Son of God for the New Testament to take hold. All it would take is the belief of a Son of Allah. Remember, before the New Testament, God said put no other gods before me. It took a few deciples to convince people that Jesus was the Son of God. Many Christans were put to death over it but it finaly took hold.
Atheists have been hell bent on destroying this nation for over sixty years. I suppose one shouldn't be suprised that they would welcome Muslim extremists as brothers in arms.
Point conceded.
However, I can't help but notice that Western Civilization is a much friendlier environment for innovation than a "culture" in which everything is "allah's will" and changing an old bad way would be viewed as an act of apostasy.
Hrmpt,
Smartazz. :)
"And yet we don't read about you exterminating muslims in your spare time."
Indeed. It's pretty much one of those "Let's you and him fight" things, isn't it.
In the meantime, our troops are over there in Iraq and Afghanistan, fighting the terrorists and helping the Iraqis and Afghanis establish a rational government...more like the one Turkey has had for many decades.
So, the troops are killing those that need killing, and helping those that need helping. That's action. The rest is rhetoric.
It appears that 10% is about the tipping point for violence. At 10%, there are usually areas where it's 50% muslim, and those areas become unsafe for others. This is what's happening in both Europe and Australia. They are a fast growing minority. The point being made is that we cannot let them become a sizable minority, or we will have demands for us to assimilate to them. Like giving up our free speech rights to avoid their wrath.
Change Islam to Judaism in your statement and what famous leader no longer with us pops into mind? It's almost word for word.
This country made membership (you were likely to have an FBI tail for just belonging) in the mafia a crime because of their criminal actions. Why should islam be any different?
see post 455, times up.
Well said, complete agreement.
If there was going to be emotion driven hate it would already have happened. People were more upset by 9/11 then anything else I have seen in my lifetime. The restraint by the Americans has been phenomenal don't you think?
The only thing we did in response was go after a very bad man to free Iraqis. But....if our freedoms are taken away there will be new laws made to protect us from Islam and people of the Muslim faith may come under more scrutiny before they can come to our shores.
Wrong. Being a member of a crime family has never been a criminal offense. Criminal actions that members of crime families are criminal offenses. No one has EVER been tried for being a member of the mafia, EVER.
La Cosa Nostra is not a religion. Islam is, albeit a sick one. The First Amendment doesn't distinguish between religions we like and ones with which we disagree.
And exactly when did the Branch Davidians call for the forcible overthrow of the government? This is a red-herring argument.
If the laws had been enforced as intended, Waco would never have made national news.
three are law in the united states. Three.
I wasn't aware that
there are three left.
Take me back to the days of Thou Shalt Not Covet thy Neighbors Wife.At least it still exists where we live.If I didn't follow that one I would be opening a ,,,let's just say I might as well expect retribution.
We got laws like,,do not cross yellow line.
"So let me get this straight: There is a muslim school that I pass on my way to work all the time. It's the Brighter Horizons academy in Garland, Texas if you want to look it up. I see children playing out in the playground there all the time as I drive past it. Are you seriously advocating that we murder these children? If so, then you're no part of a human being."
James, they are badguys BECAUSE of "their religion".
Their "religion" is _more_ than mere religion, as we of The West regard religion to be. It is an all-encompassing theocracy which seeks to control not only one's religious beliefs, but worldly behavior. And it tolerates NO non-believers or dissenters.
One of the most famous dictums of The Bible is the refrain that we must "render unto Caesar what is Caesars, and unto God that which is God's". This makes a clear distinction between our material world of existence, and the afterworld promised to come.
Islam MAKES NO SUCH DISTINCTION. To Islam, the world of "Caeser" (read: "Mohammed", the worldly prophet) and "God" are inseparable, one and the same. To live under Islam is to live under Mohammmed. It's his way or "the highway". But - there is no highway in Islam. What do they do with dissenters and openly displayed symbols of Christianity in Saudi Arabia?
So long as Islam exists, there are going to be more and more of your "badguys". And hundreds of millions who either openly support them or, silently, accede.
- John
This is getting tiresome - please Google 'Shinto' to read a little bit about US precedent dealing with a religion masquerading as a government engaged in war against the US.
Hint: the issue isn't about religious belief - it's about the primacy of the Constitution. Guess which one comes out on top?
"The only way Islam can continue is for a new Islamist Prophet to come on the scene and denounce this violence."
That, unfortunately, is impossible. According to the Koran, Mohammed was the last prophet. There will be no more.
The second reason as to why it isn't possible is the nature of Islam itself; Islam is the only major 'religion' in which self-improvement is NOT an either implicitly stated objective for the believer, nor is it even implied.
I'll give ya an explanation of what I mean; In Judeo-Christianity there is a belief in a Savior who will either a) come and usher in an age of peace or b) will return to do the same. Inherent in that belief is an idea that it is the duty of the individual believer to not only prepare (spiritually)for that day, but to make an effort to make the world a better place (in terms of civilized, humane society) than it currently is. It is one of the driving forces behind innovation; the thought that something might exist beyond the present.
Therefore, Judaism and Christianity are inherently FORWARD-LOOKING religions. The believer has something to dream about beyond his daily drudgery, and a responsibility to that futre world.
Islam, on the other hand, has nothing of the sort. To a Muslim, the greatest event in the history of mankind HAS ALREADY OCCURRED (Mohammed ascended into heaven). There IS no future. There is only the fulfilment of 'prophecy' (i.e the Koran and it's plan for world domination), as the "Prophet" commanded.
It is one of the reasons why the Middle East has been (psychologically) mired in the 7th century. There literally is no tomorrow for them, and with that thought goes all impetus for scientific inquiry, philosophical arguments, progressive forms of government, etc. Anything of that nature tends to direct one away from the fulfilment of the Prophet's prophecy. Hence, Khomeini's pronouncement of America as the Great Satan.
Satan does not have the same connotation in Islam as it does in Judeo-Christianity. Satan is not the embodiment of evil ,rather, he is the huckster and trickster that deceives and lures the true believer from the proper path.
When fundamentalists rail against western society, what they really hate is the outward, material signs of it that tend to deal with distraction and seduction or that which can give the impression that there is a viable (and perhaps more rewarding) system (either of government, ethics or life) than Islam. It is why the first targets of Islamic nutjobs happen to be the cinema, televsion and radio (especially MTV variants), print, and other means of communication with the OUTSIDE world. The Fundamentalists are more than happy to welcome such western "weapons of mass deception" when they prove useful to controlling their own masses in an Islamically-approved way(case in point, Al Jazeera).
Until the typical "Muslim in the Street" can be educated in the westrn tradition (i.e. based upon Judeo-Christian notions of the future and personal responsibility to community) and the means exist by which that typical Muslim can translate and communicate this cultural change, there will be no reformation of Islam. The means and methods by which these would be achieved, are both anethema to anything "Islamic", and are tainted for having been created by "infidels".
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.