Posted on 10/08/2010 8:30:16 AM PDT by nolongerademocrat
I know this sermon has been fawned over and recommended by Dennis Prager.
But what good is it, if the Rabbi proclaims proudly that he didn’t vote for George Bush, even though he commends his moral clarity with regard to the issue he is declaiming ?
Rabbi, YOU are part of the problem.
Well, considering that radical Islam is an ideology, a thought process, a ‘meme’ if you will, which is carried in the minds of otherwise ordinary human beings...
And considering that as such, there is no physical structure to destroy in order to remove the ‘meme’ from the world...
...how else would you go about removing it from the world?
There are no weapons in any nation’s arsenal throughout the world that can remove a thought process, a ‘meme’ from another human’s mind. So the best the world can do is to eliminate the carrier of the ‘meme’ from the realm of the living.
And we do know who has been nurtured with this thought process. Those who have are called Muslims. Not all have this ‘meme’ controlling their actions, but all have been exposed to it from birth.
If our goal is to remove this ‘meme’ from humanity, you WILL have to eliminate it from their minds... or eliminate those who are carrying it. (in other words, kill the carrier)
(And as an aside, I really wouldn’t want to live in a world where the state has the power to control one’s own thoughts.)
for later reading
The question on the table is, though -- is the only way to deal with radical Islam to kill all Muslims, as knarf apparently recommends?
I don't know about you, but I don't see genocide as being a particularly rational or moral approach to dealing with a certain ideology. Indeed, if you really want to talk about toxic 'memes,' it's difficult to conceive of one more morally repugnant than the sort that relies on genocide as a solution to human problems.
The real path to dealing with radical Islam, is to drag the rest of the Islamic world into modern times and modern morality; and that especially applies to freeing Islamic women. Christianity offers a splendid means by which that can occur, but even just plain western entertainment and television is probably fatal to the more barbaric aspects of the Islamic world.
And, in fact, that is exactly what is happening -- which is what animates the essentially reactionary radical Islamofascist movement.
I guess the real question is whether Western civilization has the time and money to follow your suggestion... or whether Islam will force us to use quicker, but ultimately much more bloody methods to remove the 'Islamist way' meme from the world.
That's nazi talk. Just so you know where we stand.
Yes, nazi talk...
Just how many more 9/11s or worse are you be willing to absorb before you judge the costs we have to pay to not be worth the time, money, and suffering?
How many dead, how many billions/trillions?
Honestly look inside and see. There is always a breaking point. We haven’t reached it yet... and hopefully we won’t.
You're asking how many attacks by radical Islamofascists, before I'm willing to support a wholesale genocide of all Muslims?
I'm not surprised you were unwilling to ask such a stupid question directly.
Well? How many? How many dead? 1 million? 10 million?
Or would you willingly have every man, woman, and child in America die? Would you willingly see the destruction of America?
Life isn’t pretty, and sometimes one is forced to do nasty things in order to stay alive. I hope we don’t ever reach this point. But you’re arguing that even if we did, we should just take it - again and again.
And I say that human nature doesn’t work that way, self-preservation even at the expense of the ‘other’ will always kick in.
LOL! Get a grip, son.
Life isn’t pretty
Especially when you spend it in the grips of irrational hysteria.
---
Especially when you spend it in the grips of irrational hysteria.
---
All I've argued is that should push come to shove, that we should do whatever necessary, *WHATEVER* necessary, to end this scourge.
And I've argued that there is no need at this time to go as far as mass killings to end this.
But, I have made it clear that should there be a situation that would necessitate it, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
You're basic argument, as I take it, is that *no matter what*, we should never, EVER, resort to mass killings or genocide.
Which, in essence, boils down to the notion that you'd die for your beliefs... and I'd be willing to kill for mine. One salves your conscience until you die, and the other lets you live so you can atone afterwards.
There isn't a way to meet in the middle on this.
Worth reading this thread again and again....
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.