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.
And you are showing a singular inability to read my post.
I didn't say anything about outlawing religion. I asked if it would be okay to "allow Aztecs to practice human sacrifice". If the answer is no because it is already against the law - then why do we allow American muslim leaders to commit acts of treason and sedition - which is also against the law? Banning religion has nothing to do with my question.
Well said.
Sad. True. But well said.
*click* Another puzzle piece falls into place...
If 911 "changed everything," then let's just repeal the Constitution and be done with it.
Ummmmm, the Joooooooooooos?
*ducking* and running for cover...
I don't know if that's true.
Let's find out...
OK,
My attitude is I want to fight for freedom for anyone to believe anything they want, as long as it doesn't interfer with other's rights.
You wanna believe in Jesus? Great, have at it.
Allah? Sure, go for it.
When it becomes a war of "our god is good yours is bad" I'm outta here. If you've never been under the thumb of someone who has total contempt for you, wants to do you harm and believes God is telling them its OK, then you haven't a clue.
Been there, done that...I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. Yet I see FR full of those who want who have JESUS LOVES YOU in their tag lines and "KILL THEM ALL!!" in their posts.
I refuse to be part of something that corrupt and evil. And I will fight til my last breath for everyone's right to be free. Especially those under the thumb of arrogant cruelty...no matter what the religion.
I want this to be a love driven fight....love of freedom, country, right to believe or not to believe. When it becomes hate driven, we are damned. Period.
"Hitler's Willing Executioners" a book that spells it out clearly. Although there was little-to-no German resistance to Hitler and his devastating policies against the Jews, the German public willingly went along, said nothing and by doing nothing, allowed the policy. The Muslims are much the same. They claim they represent the religion of peace, but say little or nothing about the Muslim terrorists. They openly favor the murderous Pali Hezbollah and Hamas, both terrorist organizations. I think Muslims are an enemy among us to be very concerned about and watched. Our friend Jack Bauer knows that well. OOPS! Dang! He's a TV personality and not available for the mission.
I wouldn't be the slightest bit bothered if we had to drill through glass to recover oil.
I'll break my usual near tea-totaling ways and pop the cork on a champagne sparkling wine bottle when islam and the threat it represents are gone.
I view the the worst Japanese as much more noble than the best møøselimb.
A Japanese kamikaze pilot (And BTW my dad's first introduction to a 'Jap' was when a kamikaze flew feet over his gun emplacement at the base of the 3rd turret on the USS Maryland and polished three gun crews, 12 men total, off the top of that turret) was a noble exercise in defense of country and home.
Whereas a jihadist who sneaks into a pizza parlor to murder children? Not even human.
bttt
Bump for a good post on a good thread.
This is not about my religion. I haven't once said Jesus
wants to kill Muslims. I haven't been to Church for many
many years. It has everything to do with the destruction
of society as we know it.
When it becomes a war of "our god is good yours is bad" I'm outta here. If you've never been under the thumb of someone who has total contempt for you, wants to do you harm and believes God is telling them its OK, then you haven't a clue. ...Been there, done that...I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
Read what you wrote again. Your statement is about Islam!
Can't you see that? The Muslims have shouted to the four
winds from their highest minarets that they believe this
is a war of "our god is good, yours is bad!" They wish to
put us all "outta here."
I refuse to be part of something that corrupt and evil. And I will fight til my last breath for everyone's right to be free. Especially those under the thumb of arrogant cruelty...no matter what the religion.
I want this to be a love driven fight....love of freedom, country, right to believe or not to believe. When it becomes hate driven, we are damned. Period.
Mrs. Chamberlain, you may love them as they cut at your
neck with a scimitar but I don't want my Grandchildren or
my Nation to become Muslim by the Sword!
Then I must assume you are willing and prepared to LOSE.
War is not - let me repeat that: NOT - something that is "love driven" (in your words. War is war, plain and simple: a violent struggle to vanquish your enemy.
The Islamics know this. Plainly spoken, it is a part of their beliefs (read: jihad).
Do you honestly claim that it was wrong to "hate" the Nazis, and what they represented?
Can you truly believe that it was wrong to "hate" the Japanese in World War II, for their sneak attack on Pearl Harbor and their horrible mistreatment of their victims (including American soldiers, such as my uncle who survived the Bataan Death March)? This doesn't mean we "hate the Japanese" NOW. But - during the struggle - that so-called hatred was a necessary component of the national resolve to see that struggle through to victory.
Hate, my dear, is a vital, and I dare say, NECESSARY, component of war. We have to "hate them" enough to want to WIN above all else.
The Islamics certainly "hate" us.
It's so beautiful "to love" (speaking as a guy who was at the first Woodstock festival). Yes, right. Even Christianity preaches that one should turn the other cheek. But Christianity is not (as has been said about our Constitution) a suicide pact. Before one can love, one must LIVE. And that means defeating enemies - and RELIGIONS (or Islam's pernicious excuse for one) that would defeat, dhimmify, convert and KILL us (and that includes YOU, my dear, unless you are Islamic).
We ARE NOT "damned" by being "hate driven" towards as foul an enemy as Islam. We _must_ hate them to create the fire within that drives us, as a nation and culture (and must also drive the West) to vanquish THEM.
When we have won the victory, then - and only then - we will be able to "put the hate away into its proper place", and enjoy the peace - and "the love".
- John
Dear John,
You missed the point.
I hate evil under the guise of any belief system. Again, get a clue.
I can separate the religion from the people. I can separate Jihadists from Jr. Miss's. I again, refuse to hate because it would make you get all gooey orgasmic.
Damn, the more of these posts I read the sicker I get. Seems there is nothing good to save here....
Or no one. Just a bunch of people I wouldn't want in a 100 miles of me.
If we give up the Constitution, then we deserve anything that they could throw at us. I'd rather be dead.
Give up the Constitution to ban the ideology of islam???
Please explain to me what other religion we allow in the US that call for the killing of others? Islam infringes on the basic right afforded in the Constitution, life, of those who do not chose to become muslim. Even more dangerous than other religions that kill, because the koran teaches muslims to bide their time until they are capable of overthrowing the non-muslims. They pretend to be normal law abiding humans for a while until they are strong enough for their power play.
How is enslaving women even allowed under the Constitution?
Where are we not allowed under the Constitution to defend ourselves from people who's religious goal is the destruction of our Constitution and our freedoms. Islam is not only a religion it is also a government, neither is compatible with the Constitution.
Sorry, but the only way to defend our Constitution and our freedoms is to not allow this ideology here. We have refused to allow other religions to grow and remain that endanger our rights and freedoms this is no different.
This religion is not about some peaceful hippies worshiping the sun bothering nobody that can coexist with the constitution, but a sleeping army waiting to slit our throats and impose sharia law over the US when they feel strong enough. Only fools would allow it to flourish in their midst once they had learned its teachings.
Just a bunch of people I wouldn't want in a 100 miles of me.
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.