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.
LOL
Welcome to the rage party!!
The constitution is not a suicide pact.
Who said that?
Maybe you missed his disclaimer about "dopey things"?
Hmmmm... concept of something like the trinity in islam is a tough nut to crack indeed. To them, this concept is often interpreted as "shirk," polytheism, and a major sticking point.
Also, they're destiny (end of days scenario) is already written out for them, and they will be looking for the "great deceiver" and the mahdi. The Prophecy of the 72 sects works against this too, and would easily be invoked against belief in a "son of allah."
The Koran (Yusufali):
To be honest, IMHO, they are better off ditching Mohammads entire pack of lies and deceptions and open their hearts to an alternative message altogether.005.017: In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every - one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things."
005.072: They do blaspheme who say: "Allah is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.
005.073: They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.
I never said anyone had been TRIED for being a member of the mafia. I said they were watched and followed--closely. But we can't even do that to members of the death cult aka islam.
That did not stop the Allies from bombing the living $hit out of much of Europe, and nuking two Japanese cities with largely civilian populations. Back in WW2, the civilised world had the courage to paint with a broad enough brush to get all the bad guys, and regrettably, some good ones as well.
Ugh... "their destiny...."
You obviously need to read the post that my reply was too.
It depends on who is interpreting the First Amendment. If the left does it, the First means no Christian prayer in school, but courses mandating students emulate muslim practices are OK. If the left interprets the First it means Christian groups, including the Boy Scouts, can't use public facilities to meet after hours, but muslim groups get to meet during the school day, and non-muslims are ordered either to attend and show respect, or shut up about it altogether.
I actually meant to include the guy you were posting to about "no beheadings" in this country, but I must have spelled his name wrong.
"But we can't even do that to members of the death cult aka islam.
"
Of course we can, and we do. What gave you the idea we weren't watching?
Attempting to "outlaw Islam" - apart from being impractical - would bring America in line with Austria, where an alleged Holocaust-denier is currently facing criminal charges. Such an America would be too similar to the Soviet Russia my parents and I left in 1980. No place for that here - not even after 9/11.
I cannot believe what some posters on this thread are advocating. Of course, we all had a bit of the "nuke-'em-all" anger inside of us right after the 9/11 attacks. We need to remember that day, guard our freedoms when threatened, and fight back when attacked. But I will dignify any "wipe out all Islam" arguments with no more time than it took me to write this sentence.
With freedom comes responsibility (libertarians believe this despite what some conservatives say), and I view the Second Amendment as a bit of both. I just hope it doesn't have to come to that.
Just as it was before the birth of Christ. But, as I already stated, only after a very bloody and violent war where Islam is decimated.
You have a deal.
We are in a state of war. You do realize, don't you, that during the WWII, your type of advocacy would lead to a visit by the FBI, no? Good thing Bush never got Congress to formally declare war, otherwise we'd have all sorts of interesting things going on that would violate the Constitution, including "detaining American citizens one dislike(s) the government views as enemy sympathizers".
Nonsense. Mosques and Islamic organizations are the most watched people in the USA, and there is nothing wrong with that.
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.