Christian Coalition to scrutinize Islam

Washington Times ^ | 2/15/03 | Larry Witham

[kattracks]

The Christian Coalition today will hold a forum here on Christianity's clash with Islam, and already has drawn criticism from the American Muslim Council and Interfaith Alliance for failing to include "even one Muslim."

The three-hour symposium, which will highlight Islam's threat to Christianity, is expected to feature five panelists who are "outspoken" in their negative opinion of Islam, said coalition spokesman Ronn Torossian said.

[bybybill]

This is really going to help. BARF

[Mr. Mojo]

I hope they bring up the FACT that Mohammad was a terrorist and a pedophile.

[Torie]

I cringe at this sort of thing. What would be more productive is scholars from a secular point of view discussing how Islam can fits into, or doesn't, and why, and what can be done, in a modern pluralistic, and largely secular world. Having fundamentalist Christians and Muslims bash each other is highly counterproductive, thus my cringe.

[AWCreamSoda]

I personally do not see what the Christain Coalition has to be afraid of - if they understand so wholly that Islam is a threat to modern Christianity, then they would certainly be able to allow a Muslim on the board, because his arguments about his own religion would be easy to disprove. Unfortunately, this kind of incident - occuring in the U.S. - will do little to change the minds of those in the Fertile Crescent who feel that the current war is a holy one pitting Christianity against Islam. Now is not the correct time to be conducting this symposium - as it weakens what the president has said numerous times.

[secretagent]

Since so many muslims feel justified in issuing death fatwas against those who criticize Islam, I say the more critics the better.

[AWCreamSoda]

so.. you just said "Muslims issue fatwahs against those who criticize them, so let's get more critics." you do realize that by your own logic that means you're in favor of more Fatwahs?

[mcsparkie]

What would be more productive is scholars from a secular point of view discussing how Islam can fits into, or doesn't, and why, and what can be done, in a modern pluralistic, and largely secular world.

What you are describing is the modern anti-semitic and anti-Christian academic system, entirely co-opted by Islamic sympathizers.

[secretagent]

I don't favor more death fatwas, I favor more courage in the face of them.

[xJones]

Having fundamentalist Christians and Muslims bash each other is highly counterproductive, thus my cringe.

The difference is that fundie Christians don't issue fatwas. Fatwa rulings can include death penalties. Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and Billy Graham don't issue death threats, only leaders of the "religion of peace" do that.

[AWCreamSoda]

criticizing cannot be construed as courage. the only way to destroy a death fatwah is to rationally explain away the reasoning that the muslims have issued it.

anyone can have a fatwah issued against them and then say "Well, this is what's wrong about the Islam religion." That is not courage. What is courage is to have a fatwah issued against you, to find out why, and then to sit down and talk through why the reasoning behind the fatwah is erroneous.

[Blue Scourge]

I would just like to say, so what. Since when have you had to have someone of an opposing view point to discuss something of interest? I don't see many Liberals on this board but we sure talk about them all the time. :)

To be completely honest I know athiests who know more about the Bible than I do, and I'm a Christian. Yes that is sad, but some people base their entire life and studies to do nothing more than attack someone elses beliefs and views...*see Clinton's for further reference*.

[nightdriver]

"Many different opinions will be presented which discuss the nature between Islam and terror, and the implications for America of the growing Islamic population in the United States,"

Why don't they dig up the procedings of the New York State Supreme Court who, in 1892, ruled that islam was not to be included in the term "religion" in the First Ammendment, but rather "...to be harassed" in the U.S.

The ruling still stands today and has never been vacated nor overruled.

[DontMessWithMyCountry]

What is courage is to have a fatwah issued against you, to find out why, and then to sit down and talk through why the reasoning behind the fatwah is erroneous.

What is INSANE is that you actually (a) believe that ANYone should have a freaking FATWAH issued against him or her; and that (b) you think anyone would want to have "sit down and talk through" WHY people could be so UNcivilized as to presume to issue that fatway. You HAVE to be kidding, or else, you HAVE to be a fundamentalist muslim to rationalize such b.s. It's about as logical and rational as the Useless Nitwits expecting us to just keep talking and trying to 'understand' why the beasts who murdered our people on 9/11 did what they did.

The Christian coalition can have any damned meeting they want to among themselves. They can discuss anything they damned well want to among themselves. They STILL have a right to free speech while they STILL are Americans, protected by the Constitution that THEIR forefathers have died to preserve, which NONE of the muslims who NOW are whining about OUR freedom of religion have done. When THEY demonstrate THEIR respect for GENUINE freedom of religion in THEIR countries of origin, then let them DARE to tell a Jew or Christian in America what they can and cannot do.

[AWCreamSoda]

did I say that I believe people should have fatwahs issued against him or her? no, I did not, yet you use this as the first debating point against my arguments. in a rebuttal, it is usually wisest to actually adress what the person said - not what you wish they had said so that you can reason through them more easily.

and yes, it is wisest to sit down and talk through those who would do something as clearly off the wall as issuing a fatwah. diplomacy is not an issue of weak-spinedness, although that is a false belief I see perpetrated again and again. there is a style of diplomacy known simply as 'cattle-prod' diplomacy. This means those who sit down and talk with the fatwah-issuers have a 'heart-attack' up their sleeves that they will reveal to no one else but the issuers. This is a tool that allows the issuers to understand the gravity of what they've done and the repercussions if they move forward with it. It's named after an old Italian technique of cattle-prodding someone discreetly in the armpit so that they believed they were having a heart attack. When used properly, this will convince the fatwah-issuers of the futility of their arguments, and most all of these fatwahs will be forgotten.

And in closing, I never attacked the Christian Coalition's first amendment rights - I simply made a suggestion of what they could do instead of what they were planning to do - last time I checked my making such a suggestion is protected by the first amendment just as much as their symposium power. And, just so you know, those were not THEIR forefathers - those were OUR forefathers - please do not exclude my American heritage in the future.

[dennisw]

Muhammad was "a demon-possessed pedophile." BUMP!!!

[DontMessWithMyCountry]

AWCreamSoda signed up 2003-02-07.

The APPEASERS' CLUB IS OVER AT D.U.; if they're not open, you can try the Useless Nitwits. Joschka-the-terrorist could use folks like you on his team--if you're not already on it. Please take yourself and your APPEASING POSITIONS for those who would use violence against others who deign to disagree with their tyranny there; surely you'll be MUCH more comfortable with people who share your common moral relativism.

[kiras]

"Islam is a religion in which God requires you to send your son to die for him.

Christianity is a faith in which God sends his son to die for you."

--John Ashcroft

[a_Turk]

You have to stop making these inflammatory statements.. What you write about Mohammad is incorrect. Did you learn that on this forum?

[a_Turk]

>> only leaders of the "religion of peace" do that.

Fatwahs have been issued, indirectly, by "west"ern governments.. Consider the WW1 victor Brittain instructing the defeated Sultan to issue a fatwah for the head of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.

The line between good and evil runs right through the religions, not between them.

Just for clarity: I am not a religious man. I believe in God (and that man has attempted to describe Him).