Posted on 02/20/2006 7:46:11 AM PST by Dark Skies
When President Bush gave his "axis of evil" speech he went out of his way to make the world understand that it isn't a war with Islam itself that we were joining — and I say joining because the war had been started by the Jihadists decades before. And, in observance to our Western principles, that must be the correct way to view our conflagration with radical Islam.
Let's face facts, it certainly is uncomfortable to a Westerner who has been brought up on tolerance, freedom of religion, and liberty to contemplate a war against an entire religion. But are we approaching a time when Western nations won't have a choice but to target Islam itself in certain ways to keep their own people safe. The best course of action is to make public displays of Islam and certain of its practices illegal in Western nations.
So, the question becomes are we at that time now? Are we fast approaching a time when Mosques will be closed and banned? Have we come to a time when Islamic literature is turned away from our borders? Have the childish and dangerous reactions of Muslims to this cartoon in a Danish newspaper proven that Islam cannot be trusted to be a vital, peaceful, and law-abiding segment of society?
It is looking like yes is the answer to these queries.
We are already approaching this today. In Ontario they have officially outlawed Muslim Sharia law, that law that uses religious precepts to enforce moral and society codes of conduct. And Muslim "family councils" have been stopped where local community groups may supplement Canadian law with their local custom.
Several members of the John Howard administration in Australia have spoken out against Islamic clashes with Western notions of law and societal comportment many times over the last few years.
Recently Howard himself said, "I do think there is this particular complication because there is a fragment which is utterly antagonistic to our kind of society, and that is a difficulty ... You can't find any equivalent in Italian, or Greek, or Lebanese, or Chinese or Baltic immigration to Australia. There is no equivalent of raving on about jihad, but that is the major problem."
Muslims routinely destroy property, threaten death and bodily harm to those who speak out against them, and they constantly fund terrorism throughout the world. In Syria they have burnt an embassy, in Europe Muslims have been responsible for murdering people who have written out against Islam or made movies, and other forms of art. These actions are also approved by Islamic teachers (Imams) and religious leaders, not just undertaken by warped loners claiming to represent Islam quite against the will of the majority or authority.
With this ridiculous cartoon issue, we have seen that Islam has no sense of perspective. In the west parody or satire is seen as not only common, but completely harmless for the most part. And religion is not immune to parody and satire, though even in the west most people are often uncomfortable with religious satire. Usually only people filled with hate attack religion in parody and most in the West instinctively know this. As a result, most people dismiss such parody as foolishness and bad taste.
But with Muslims overreacting — in western eyes at least — to this silly cartoon issue in the way they have, it becomes nearly impossible for Westerners to view Islam as a peaceful religion, but more as a vicious hate group itself. And that perception is justified with the actions that Muslims have increasingly perpetrated over the ensuing years. So, we find that Islam presents a danger to the safety of the populace all too often. It is violent, oppressive, and reactionary.
But, what is to be done about it? We have been raised to feel that religion should be left untouched by government. Freedom of religion is at the very core of our beliefs. And this concept is an important one to uphold. So, how can we honestly and without hypocrisy begin to look toward making Islam illegal?
There is a parallel of sorts in the USA that might be used as a template for action. The Ku klux Klan.
After the Civil War ended, the KKK arose from the ashes of war as an advocacy group for the disenfranchised white voter in the south. But it quickly became a terrorist organization bent on taking out revenge on the south's newly freed black population for having lost the war. It got so bad that even one of the original organizers, C.S. Cavalry General Nathan Bedford Forrest, denounced the organization and quit it in disgust.
But as the late 1800s rolled on and the south began to re-enter the Union as full partners in government, the KKK began to lose steam and prominence. For a time it subsided. But as the 20th century neared, it re-emerged and this time became a nationwide and powerful force taking on the flavor of religious, civic and racial duty. The KKK became invested in government and claimed millions of members nation wide.
In the 1920s, however, it became too much for a liberty loving country to allow the KKK to any longer exist. In Indiana, the entire state government was scandalized by their fealty to Indiana's Klan leader who had raped and beaten his secretary on a train trip. Violence against and frequent lynching of southern blacks became so pervasive that Congress finally acted and banned the Klan. The organization collapsed never again to reclaim the power and prominence it once had.
Now, the KKK has always based its precepts on Christianity, as well as racial identity. It also reacted with violence, rallies, death threats and killing when it was threatened. It careened far away from being a mere "idea" or religious theology and became a terrorist organization. And it became a terrorist organization even though literally millions of Americans that belonged to or identified with the Klan were not themselves violent, evil, or dangerous citizens.
The leadership of the Klan supported violence. The leadership preached violence. The leadership planned and fomented it. Therefore, it had to go because it became a danger to every law-abiding citizen, whether they agreed with the racial and religious concepts the Klan espoused or not.
Islam has become the KKK of the 21st century. The sooner we awake to this truth and take steps to ban the religion, or somehow curtail its pernicious influence the better. The west is going to have to put sever restrictions on Islamic Mosques and public display of Islam. Further, devout Muslims should not be allowed to hold public office (though it certainly should not become a racial issue — sins of the father should not be visited upon the sons).
This is no religious purge as in centuries past. In the past religions were banned to be replaced by the state sponsored sect and believers of the banned religion were mistreated, tortured, unduly taxed, and terrorized. This is absolutely not the model the west would follow by banning aspects of Islam today. No religion is replacing Islam and no one is suggesting that Muslims be mistreated. But the creed to which they hold is fast becoming the most dangerous one in the world today. It is a fine line that we walk to consider banning Islam, but the safety of society is at risk not to do so.
This is not an easy conclusion at which to arrive. But if we continue to turn a blind eye to the danger that Islam presents to the west, we are signing our own death warrants.
The KKK was put down in the USA and made powerless for the same reason. Communism was destroyed for the same reason, as well. Islam is a danger to the world.
Unfortunately, it is just that simple.
Unless that is, you're doing something like applying for a drivers license, say in Florida for eg...
The name Sultaana Freeman ring any bells?
What Islam needs is a New Testament to the Koran just like the KJV of the bible needed one.
The problem isn't a few corrupt mullahs or princes, it's that the religion itself. It's basic text says it's ok to use force to convert, to enslave the infidel if they don't convert. The mullahs aren't corrupting the text, they are interpreting it pretty much as it was written.
It's been suggested that Islam needs a reformation, as the Christian church had one. However, the Christian reformation was a return to the text. The Islamic return-to-the-text Reform movement is Al-Queda and the associated mullahs, who want to remove the princes & leaders who have been cooperating with the Western infidels.
We can live with a corrupted, decadent Islam. It's the pure stuff that is poison.
Many of the things the U.S. Government did in the 19th century were wrong, like the genocide they attempted to perpetrate on the native tribes. Just because it's been done before doesn't mean it's right.
LOL! Good point.
How many of them ACT in terrorism?
Get off of the condemning BS. 85% of them don't live in countries were they can speak out like that without repercussions.
Something we Americans DO NOT understand.
But again, you paint an entire segment of the WORLD with too broad a brush.
"The devil...the prowde spirite...cannot endure to be mocked." ...Thomas More "The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to texts of Scripture, is to jeer and flout him, for he cannot bear scorn." ...Luther
I think that was the real energy behind the cartoon uproar.
Spot on!
That's why I have an OBL driver license in my wallet. They are terrorists, if we don't laugh at them they will have won...
You cannot outlaw a religion. It's not possible. At best, you can outlaw the open practice of a religion. Not the same thing at all.
Don't forget the fragging incident in Iraq.
Western technology is a direct benefit of western thought and western theories of governance. Left to its own devices, Islam is incapable of achieving remotely similar.
"Thou shalt not commit murder...Correct me if I'm wrong , I'm just a poor country boy.
"
That became law here when laws prohibiting murder were passed. Every society I know of has laws against murder.
Of the 10 Commandments, three are law in the united states. Three.
There are lots of laws in the Old Testament. Most have no relevance to US law. The dietary laws, for example, are simply not reflected in our laws.
We do not stone people to death for adultery here in the USA, although that is Old Testament law.
Our laws are those which have been enacted by our legislative bodies. Other laws do not apply.
Is 53 close enough?
Understand that I see Christianity full of some of the same vitriol. That someone can find a verse to justify anything they want to do...especially old testament.
Other than the actual words of Jesus himself, there is too much ugly stuff in the Bible. But again, that's my interpretation, and it's shadowed by bad experiences. (That keep being reinforced /sarc).
The same with Islam. Yes, it's bad, but logic says you can't wipe it out without killing 6 million people. I would like to believe a reformation would be encouraged first.
I lived amongst them for a while :)
I don't pay any attention to what's being said on this thread. It's either ignorance or hate, but it won't get ANYONE into a position of power.
It's a matter of making sure that the views on this embarrassment of a thread don't paint the entire conservative movement. That would be a tragic thing.
"Unless that is, you're doing something like applying for a drivers license, say in Florida for eg...
"
True enough. She had to remove her veil to have her license photo taken, because that is the law. She may wear it freely at other times, though, right? You see, there is a law requiring her to show her face for that photo, but no law keeping her from wearing a veil in public.
"What Islam needs is a New Testament to the Koran just like the KJV of the bible needed one."
I'd agree with that. The Old Testament is full of nasty business. I'm glad the New Testament is there. It keeps the world a little more habitable.
Imagine if we stoned adulterers as required in the Old Testament!
Or strong willed Mullah. Someone that got everyone's attention.
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.