Posted on 11/17/2004 2:44:30 AM PST by kattracks
The slaughter of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh on the streets of Amsterdam, in broad daylight, by a young man of Moroccan origin bent on jihad, has at last dented Dutch confidence that unconditional tolerance can be on its own the unifying principle of a viable society. For tolerance to work, it must be reciprocal; tolerance appears to the intolerant jihadist mere weakness and lack of belief in anything. Unilateral tolerance in a world of intolerance is like unilateral disarmament in a world of armed camps: it regards hope as a better basis for policy than reality.Like most people in Western democracies, Van Gogh, by all accounts a brash and combative man, took his freedom of expression for granted. Most of us most of the time do not reflect much on the fact that such freedom is an historical exception rather than an historical rule, a reversible achievement rather than a free gift of God. There are still many who would rather kill than brook any contradiction of their opinions or beliefs, even while they live in the most tolerant of societies.
But why kill Theo Van Gogh, of all the people who have expressed hostility to radical Islam? Perhaps it was mere chance, but more likely it resulted from his work’s exposure of a very raw nerve of Muslim identity in Western Europe: the abuse of women. This abuse is now essential for people of Muslim descent for maintaining any sense of separate cultural identity in the homogenizing solution of modern mass society.
In fact, Islam is as vulnerable in Europe to the forces of secularization as Christianity has proved to be. The majority of Muslims in Europe, particularly the young, have a weak and tenuous connection to their ancestral religion. Their level and intensity of belief is low; pop music interests them more. Far from being fanatics, they are lukewarm believers at best. Were it not for the abuse of women, Islam would go the way of the Church of England.
The abuse of women has often, if not always, appealed to men, because it gives them a sense of power, however humiliated they may feel in other spheres of their life. And the oppression of women by Muslim men in Western Europe gives those men at the same time a sexual partner, a domestic servant, and a gratifying sense of power, while allowing them also to live an otherwise westernized life. For the men, it is convenient; interestingly, but perhaps not surprisingly, almost the only openly hostile expressions toward Islam from British-born Muslims that I hear come from young women, some of whom loathe it passionately because they blame it for their servitude.
Religious sanction for the oppression of women (whether theologically justified or not) is hence the main attraction of Islam to young men in an increasingly secular world. This explains why a divide often opens between brothers and sisters in the same European Muslim family; the sisters want liberty, but the brothers enforce the old rules. They have to, or the whole gratifying system breaks down.
This, I suspect, is the source of the rage against Theo Van Gogh.
bttt
The advocates are muslim men and non-muslim liberals, with the liberals advocating it as part of their politically correct mindset.
Leading the opposition are muslim women. They see it not as a cultural value but rather as a means of oppression.
They know that even though testing issues against sharia law is only lawful if both parties agree, the fact is that social and societal pressures will deny muslim women any real choice in the matter.
It will be dangerous for a muslim woman to reject Sharia when she finds herself a party to litigation against a muslim man.
You first must ask yourself, "Is the group, sect, culture, what ever tolerant of me and my culture?" If you do not do this, you are unbelievably stupid.
Many if not most Muslims fail this test when is is applied by non-Muslims.
OMG!!! You don't say? Eureka!!! Perhaps they are onto something here. Tolerance is not working.
Earth to Amsterdam and all you Euro-weenies: live and let live is not the way they operate.
If they just shut out the Mooses, they could keep their "tolerant paradise" for quite a long time. I don't think anyone else who would dissent would even want to BE in the Netherlands.
Tolerance????....It appears the Dutch are so blinded by the idealism of socialism that they cannot see the enemy at their door......
DUTCH JOKE:
there was a dutch immigrant from North Africa, recently arrived in the netherlands.
he was so happy. the netherlands gave him a free apartment to live in, free health care, hundreds of euros to spend.
in fact he was so happy he just wanted to thank someone, so he walked up to the nearest Dutch person on the street and said "Thank you Netherlands!".
but the person he said this to replied "Sorry, I'm not Dutch, I'm from Morocco".
so he goes up to another person and says "Thank you Netherlands!".
the second person says "Sorry, I'm not Dutch, I'm Jamaican".
undeterred, he goes up to a third person and says "Thank you Netherlands!".
the THIRD person says "Sorry, I'm not Dutch, I'm from Kosovo."
our immigrant friend was very surprised. so he asks the third bystander "I talk to three people in a row and they are not Dutch - WHERE are all the Dutch people ??"
the third person says "Well, it's 4.45 pm. they should be coming out from work in about 15 minutes."
I have said for some time, that I will be tolerant of Islam, when there are churches and synagogues in Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Islamabad, Karachi, Cairo, Khartoum, and similar locales, and the locals aren't trying to burn down the structures and kill the attendees.
Islam is a mafia that rules by the force of a small percentage, and as Travis says, "Moderate Islam is the Trojan Horse."
<< Religious sanction for the oppression of women >>
You know, what I really can't understand is we don't hear a peep from likes of the NOW gang and other prominent women's organizations against this oppression. Seems it strikes at the very core of their organizations.
The reason is blah, blah, blah, blah, kill the infidels, blah-blah, blah.
One of my high school teachers, a Roman Catholic, said religion is communicated to the next generation by mothers.
Islam must be an exception. Or maybe it isn't. If Islamic women ever achieve any sense of personal safety, the religion will die or be massively reformed, or both.
Yup.
And, are many folks aware of what the future portends for Europe has it merrily Islamizies itself? In S. Arabia, the ration of men to women is 125:100.
25 extra men, with nothing to keep them .... shall we say, occupied. Now, what on earth is going on there such that so few women are available??
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.