Friday, September 10, 2010

Burning the Koran is Offensive and Provocative...

...but so is building a victory mosque at the site of the 9/11 massacre. The difference is, the Korans will only burn for an hour or two, but the mosque is permanent.

The Koran burnings will be used as a tool by the 'progressives' to marginalize the religious right, and win more elections this November. I know people are frustrated, but this is a bad tactic.

7 comments :

  1. It is obvious that this whole mosque issue is intended only to get the ire of Christian citizens.
    Quite honestly every religion worthy of the term including Islam is full of peaceful intent which is bent by opportunists to violence when it is in the best interests of the few to gain advantage in social power struggles. Let's not forget the holy wars.
    For every Muslim (or Christian) murderer there are literally millions of good peace-loving honest people practicing the same religion.
    To prejudice yourself against either group because of the acts of the few is to invite prejudice into your life and is ethically and morally wrong. Every Christian and Muslim should know that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I do not prejudice myself against any group. Prejudice means pre-judge. After study and research, I will draw a conclusion. My conclusion is that I reject Islamic doctrine and culture. That isn't prejudice, it is a considered opinion. And an ethical and moral determination, I might add.

    If you study Islamic doctrine, you will find many things that are incompatible (at least) with American politics, not the least of which is the separation of politics and religion.

    I cannot see how a person can be a devout Muslim and be peaceful when they are exhorted by their doctrine to kill all infidels. If it is possible, I would like an objective third party to explain it to me. The principle of taqiyya makes it impossible to trust a Muslim apologist -- that isn't a value judgement; it is a logical truth-claim.

    Finally, compare the life and teachings of Jesus Christ to the life and teachings of Mohammad. If you are not gobsmacked, then you are being willfully ignorant of the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for posting my comment. I did not say you were practicing prejudice and your opinion is your own. Let me put it another way.

    If there are over a billion Muslims in the world, and at least 5 million of these reside in the United States how could this have ever happened if they were driven by their religion to kill all infidels?

    The fact that these numbers are so large demonstrates that it is impossible for the 'typical' Muslim to prescribe to such nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Many people claim to belong to a religion, and do not faithfully practice it. That's why I said "I cannot see how a person can be a devout Muslim and be peaceful when they are exhorted by their doctrine to kill all infidels. If it is possible, I would like an objective third party to explain it to me." (Emphasis mine, after the fact.) By the way, the objective third party would need to be knowledgeable and experienced with the actual culture to be authoritative.

    To take things a step further, if someone is not a devout Muslim, why would they voluntarily continue to claim allegiance to a doctrine that can easily be shown to be violent and oppressive by Western cultural standards? I do not believe that it is possible to assimilate into our culture and simultaneously be an apologist for a doctrine that is so offensive to Western civilization. I realize that these are stark and judgemental claims. But honest dialog isn't always conciliatory.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Are you saying that although over a billion Muslims clearly clearly exist and clearly do NOT subscribe to this doctrine you believe it is ONLY because they are not devout enough?

    The only rational conclusion is that the hypothesis that all devout Muslims subscribe to this violent and oppressive doctrine must be in error.

    I think we need a devout Muslim to clarify this issue.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Many millions of Muslims live in Muslim theocracies under Sharia law. And under Sharia law, non-Muslims are not permitted to participate in society, must pay a special tax or be executed, and are generally treated as second-class citizens. Under those conditions, unless you were a committed Christian or Jew, you would become Muslim in name only, simply to get along. "Not devout enough" would be an understatement.

    I agree that we need someone authoritative to clarify this issue, but because of the principle of taqiyya, a devout Muslim would not be a reliable source of information.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous, on further reflection, I realize that I failed to address another aspect of your previous post:

    "Are you saying that although over a billion Muslims clearly clearly exist and clearly do NOT subscribe to this doctrine you believe it is ONLY because they are not devout enough?"

    Yes. Because by definition, a devout Muslim would have to subscribe to all of the Islamic doctrine. If they ignore parts of it, I would not consider them devout. There's only one caveat: There may be more than one Islamic sect. In fact, there are several. Wahhabi is the more fundamentalist (militant), found mostly in Saudi Arabia.

    I will only concede your point that

    "The only rational conclusion is that the hypothesis that all devout Muslims subscribe to this violent and oppressive doctrine must be in error."

    if one of the other sects eschews the violence and oppressiveness, and that the majority of Muslims are in fact, of that sect.

    ReplyDelete

This is a moderated forum. Please try to avoid ad-hominem attacks and gratuitous profanity. Justifiable profanity may be tolerated.

I am sorry, but due to the un-manageable volume of spam comments, I have enabled the scrambled word verification. I apologize for the inconvenience.