Posted on 08/24/2010 6:55:58 PM PDT by CharlesMartelsGhost
keyboard
Mohammedanism is anti-rational and fatalistic, explaining why Mohammedans are impervious to Christian evangalism and apologetics --they reject rationality altogether. We share no common, non-religious language. Mohammedanism is a particularly diabolical cult in this respect.
How Mohammedans can make any truth claims at all is beyond me. If Allah is free to contradict himself, why should any Mohammedan adhere to the Koran, if Allah could choose to contradict the Koran tomorrow?
-----------------------------------------------------------
Mohammedanism poses a unique threat to our country --one which I suspect the Founders didn't consider, and that is, the existence in America of a religion that doesn't tolerate other religions.
On a theoretical level, can a State that tolerates all religions tolerate a religion that is violently intolerant of other religions? Logically, there can only be one answer to this question. So what becomes of the First Amendment?
The Founders made two mistakes with respect to the First Amendment. First, they should not have prohibited an established national church. If the US gov't was officially, Baptist, Catholic, or Lutheran, the gov't could logically restrict immigration from Muslim countries.
Secondly, the Founders should have allowed for the suppression of violently intolerant religions.
Spengler has been a longtime favorite of mine. The only thing is, reading his columns often prompt me to get a good, stiff drink - and I don’t drink! :-)
Same here Spengler and Greenfield of Sultan Knish are a daily read for me.
Hosni Mubarak’s name, Hosni, is the same name as our president’s middle name. In Arabic the consonant trigram HSN is the only thing that counts and determines the word or name. The different sounds and positions of the vowels are matters of local accent. Thus Hassan, Hosni, Hussein, etc, are all the same name just as Ian, John, Sean, Jan are all different renderings of the same name in Latin rooted languages.
Islam is a terror ideology. The war against Islam must be won.
0 going to church wont make him Christian any more than going into a garage will make him an automobile. If you really want to know if he’s Christian only one question will tell: “What think you of Christ?” The answer will out the truth.
“Robert Reilly recounts Islam’s abandonment of Hellenistic reason, and blames it for the subsequent decline of Muslim civilization and the rise of radical Islam.”
Oh c’mon. The light of Reason turned on Islam would reveal it for what it is: The usual crap perpetrated by the usual suspects for the same old reason. Anyone who applies Reason to Islam walks away from it, period.
It’s a primarily military, pseudo-religious, cult of death.
I agree. But the question wasn't, "Is Islam a terror ideology?". The question was "Is Islam a pagan religion or ideology covered by a vaneer of monotheism?". That was the question that I answered.
Look, you won't find a harsher critic of Islam than myself. I've called Mohammed a "baby raping sonofabitch" before. I called him that because the statement is true. The list of Islam's offenses to any sense of decency is myriad. However I see no purpose in making things up about Islam, i.e that Islam is a pagan religion when it clearly is not. Why make up something when the real horrors and sins of Islam are almost limitless?
Would we allow aztecs or mayans to perform human sacrifices on 1st Amendment grounds? Of course not.
But somehow we have been led to believe that a "cult" that commits human sacrifice as a requirement to enter paradise is worthy of Constitutional protection.
They almost took Europe last time around. This is a remake
of the new empire - attempt that is.
Al-Ghazali's book is called Tahafut al-Falasifa - "The Incoherence of the Philosophers". I agree with Reilly that it was the prime cause of Islam's abandonment of natural reason, and in the longer run an unmitigated disaster. You can buy an english translation from Brigham Young University (no surprise there, dear freepers). I strongly caution you not to do so.
Yep, they were big allies of Hitler, and is quite possible that the Final Solution was suggested by the Grand Mufti al Husseini, who set up shop in Berlin, in 1941, when he went on the run from the British in Palestine.
Heard some bigshot Muslim claiming on TV the other day that Islam “is more than a religion, it’s also a system of laws” - as such, by their own admission, Muslims should not be able to claim protection under the first amendment until and unless they get specific about what they consider religious elements of their credo, and then any Constitutional/legal protection they enjoy must be limited to those elements.....
Islam is the 21st centuries Nazism.
And it needs to be dealt with in the same manner.
Annihilated via total warfare.
Does anyone think if Hitler had gotten the Bomb and America had stayed out of the war, he would not have done as he said and used it to destroy and subjugate the world?
Iran and the Muslims will do the same.
Kill or BE killed.
In any case, Islam has the ability to appropriate western technology for its own purposes. The Arabs sucked the life out of the Greco-Roman and Persian cultures to create a new sort of civilization. The Turks managed to do the same in the 14th-6th century, after which their “orientalism” led to their decay. Even now, they use western technology without contributing much to the sciences that made the new technology possible. I do think that their refusal to accept “secondary causes” is their problem. Ours. on the other hand, is to try to reduce everything to such causes.
Islam is not a religion nor is it a cult. It is a complete system.
Islam has religious, legal, political, military, economic, and social components. The religious component is a beard for all the other components.
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.