Replies

Absolutely correct. Years ago, when I first started reading about the history and tenets of Islam, I was intrigued by many of its ideas and its connection with Judaism and Christianity. The more I explored, however, the more alarmed I became at the differences between Islam and other major faiths.

Some might say I could've saved myself the time and just examined who has been responsible for most of the terrorist actions of the last few decades. Unfortunately, it hasn't been the work of a "just a few extremists". A huge percentage of the Islamic world agrees with people like Osama bin Laden, and has no problem with the murder of non-Muslims and fellow Muslims alike.

I've heard the same arguments before: Every religion has its radicals. All religions have periods of violence and oppression. Passages from the Bible seem as bad as those in the Koran.

My answer? All of the above may be true, but Islam has, far and away, the largest number of hard-core radicals. (How many Buddhists have hijacked jetliners?) The Catholic Church had the Spanish Inquisition, but later came reform and a return to the core beliefs of Christianity. (Is Islam capable of reform?) As for Islam...well...they haven't changed that much since the 7th century, now have they?

The Koran? Far more than a "few passages" advocating violence and death for non-Muslims. In fact, if you edited out the most bloodthirsty verses from the Koran, you might eliminate half the text!

As much I hate to say it, I think the roots of that particular tree are rotten. Trying to "reform" Islam would be like trying to "reform" Nazism. Pluck out the "anti-Semitism" from National Socialism, and you've plucked out the heart & soul of the ideology. Unlike most religions, Islam doesn't seem much concerned with heart & soul, matters of the spirit. It's main focus is political, legal and militaristic.

Among other things, I think this is what makes Islam so different from Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism or other faiths --- instead of trying to achieve union with God, Islam (like Nazism or Communism) wants to make the world into its own utopian vision --- a nightmare for the rest of us.

Perhaps you know more about Islam than I, but from what I have learned, there are many "versions" of Islam, much like there are many versions of Christianity. The statement posted is from the most extreme radical sect of Islam, well, perhaps not the most, Osama was/is a student of an even more extreme group.

Still, this group in Saudi Arabia is the one that has provided the majority of financial support for extreme fundamentalist teaching and recruiting for "jihad". It is from this group that most of the 911 hijackers came.

But it is also the threat from this group that caused Bush to cut and run from the US bases in Saudi Arabia after 911. Half a century ago the House of Saud cut a deal with them to secure their rule by giving them complete religious authority. And with Bush cutting a deal with Saudi Arabia to supply the world with oil, Bush has implicitly cut a deal with these wonderful religious leaders.

But Bush is hardly the first. I can't recall reading anyone who has written "supporting and aiding the Taliban to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan is/was wrong because they are a radical fundamentalist group", and the fact that Saddam had nothing to do with 911 and was as much an enemy of religious fundamentalists, relying instead on tribal/ethnic devisiveness to maintain power didn't produce a "whoa, do we know what we are doing in Iraq - will we give power to a religious fundamentalist minority in a secular society if we treat the factions in Iraq as religious?". We certainly have done much to promote to power the religious authority in Iran by our policies, and brand of Islam in Iran is condemned by our friendly Saudi jihadist allies.

To really understand the nature of Islam, I think one needs to compare what you know of Islam by using the same sources of knowledge of Christianity. I think that you will agree that the picture of Christianity taken by the same method as your picture of Islam is far different from what you know of Christianity among your family, friends, and neighbors. How many times do you find yourself discussing religion when the subject of assasinating a world leader or crediting a storm to God retribution for toleration. Of course, how often do you find yourself discussion religion; I suspect the discussion is much more about dealing with the leaky roof, the cost of college tuition, the price of gasoline, what to do about jimmy to make him spend time reading instead of watching TV.

I grew up hearing about terrorism. But the terrorism I heard about, and I'm not Irish in any sense, was of Christian terrorists. Christian terrorists who planted bombs in London, England for England trying to stop the violence in Northern Ireland. I've tried to understand that situation, and I can't. Where in Catholicism and where in Protestantism is the ideology that justified the killing and hatred that still lives on in that region, and that colors feels half way round the world.

Religion is and has been the tool of politics. The English colonies in the Americas were by and large intolerant, just as the Church in England was intolerant. The Bay Colony executed several Quakers, including Mary Dyer, for teaching her faith. The memory of such things were codified in the Constitution, first in the matter of oaths and religious tests, and then, as that was not consider sufficient, in the first of twelve amendments sent to the States.

American conservatives seem to be divided on this issue, with some adamently opposed to religion in government, either knowing history or from the experience of disagreement on fundamental matters of Christian faith, especially on church authority. Others, however, believe that religion was once integral to US government and blindly seek to introduce religion in the US government. With Bush either being in the latter camp, or beholden to him, he does not speak out clearly on the need for "separation of church and state". Thus he finds himself trapped by his position on church and state, and the matter of support for a state that is Jewish, the support for another state that is Islamic, the formation of another state that is tending to Islamic even as those who do not want it to be Islamic protest, and then the situation where one of Bush's allies has a state church issues the above declaration, and the law that calls for the execution of a Muslim for denying his religion, and being very open about it. Of course, execution for failing to adhere to the state religion has a long history, from the romans who executed Jews and Christians, to Spain that over time executed Muslims for not converting to Christianity, and executed Christians for failing to convert to Islam, to executing Jews for failing to convert. Execution has always been easy to avoid, repudiate the offending religion, sacrifice to the Roman god, leave the country. It is the religous group that the House of Saud put in charge of Islam that has taken the most extreme stand.

But to say that Islam is far more dangerous than any other relgion is to ignore history, recent history. Look at the speeches given by Hitler. He was leading Germany to the greater glory of a Christian God. He could not stand by as non-Christians exploited the Christians of Germany. The uncomfortably fact is that the attempt to exterminate the Jews was done in the name of a Christian God.

In the name of a Christian God, but not for a Christian God. Just as Osama is doing things in the name of Islam, but he is certainly not doing things for Islam, but for his vision of a world shaped to his will.

I think that Rumsfeld got it right in a different context when he placed blame at the feet of a "few bad apples". The things that you see evil about Islam are the result of the statements and actions of a few bad apples. Depending on who you count as Christian, the number of Muslims exceeds that of Christian, or is second to Christians. Are Catholics Christian? How about Mormons? Are Shia Muslim? The Dervish? And of what religion are the Kurds? Do not condemn all Muslim by judging them by a few, lest you define Christians by Jim Jones and his followers. Or the Dividians.