Posted on 04/15/2002 6:06:27 PM PDT by swarthyguy
I guess I was brought to this line of thought by reading how Ataturk pretty well tamed Islam in a few years in Turkey using similar techniques.
Whereas, Islam which never has any excesses and is a religion of peace, has done nothing to provoke any antagonism. Infidels are antagonistic because that is a characteristic of infidels. You know what infidels are like dontcha?
NOT!
Of course, Islam can be practiced in the US using the approach I described. I'm basically saying that the part of Islam which causes Islam to be excessively prone to violence and discrimination to non Muslims be defined as not part of Islam, and discarded from the religion by law.
Basically, my approach is that no religion can act as a cover for criminal behavior or insurrection. It's just a matter of degree as compared to allowing 'religious' human sacrifice, sex with animals, cannibalism, etc. Are we saying we're not secular because we don't allow the religious practice of these criminal behaviors? Then why should we give Islam a free hand to plot mischief under the guise of 'religion'?
Incitement to violence, perhaps ?
I'm glad someone has thought of a way to address this. I've been torn between the idea of freedom of religion and the sense that Islam doesn' t seem to have a place in a democratic, freedom -loving society such ours. I have been truly concerned about the influx of Muslims to this country because of the totalitarian worldview which this religion seems to espouse. As many westerners who have lived in Dar es Sallam (the land of Islam) have said, as long as muslims are in the minority, they will present the "Islam is peace" face to the world. But, because of the totalitarian spirit of their worldview,i.e., that it encompasses everything, I have a difficult time seeing how it could be the majority religion of a society and not be a constraint on the freedom of non-believers at minimum.
Your suggestion about expunging parts of their scriptures or teachings, while extreme, call to mind the requirements imposed on settlers of Utah, who, when they wanted to join the Union as a state, were requred to prohibit polygamy as a legal right. I don't know if it was expunged within the LDS teachings, but it is not permissable (legally) in Utah.
All I know is, I do not want the kind of Muslim influence here (heavily financed and politically oriented to a foreign end) as is seen in Europe, especially with imams who plead innocence as to the "political" nature of their mosque.
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.