The following cartoon is my favorite Muhammad cartoon, simply because it says it all:
The cartoon symbolizes what Islam has become for all practical purposes ... Islam, has become synonymous with terror, sharia, honour killing, hijabs, hyper-chauvinism, murder of homosexuals and rape victims, stoning, forced conversion, irrationality, ... and just about everything you'd expect to find in some black comedy about iron age barbarians.
It matters not that most Muslims aren't violent, but they are ... each and everyone, an enabler because of their silence. And, most Muslims do aspire to hyper-chauvinism and many of the other "dark" beliefs of Islam. The vast majority of Germans prior to World War Two weren’t violent ... but they became enablers with their silence.
Imagine if you will, that a Christian sect began promoting a purely Old Testament version of “law and order”, including stoning for adultery and the wholesale slaughter of “unbelievers” if they didn’t “repent” and turn to the god of the Old Testament. Then imagine, that this sect actually began acting on its beliefs, even going as far as to take over and run some countries based on Old Testament dogma.
Christians the world over would protest at every possible level the hijacking of their religion by this sect. From the Pope to the evangelical church in your town, Christians would have none of it. Why? Because the sect would have departed from Christian doctrine, embracing instead the Old Testament instead of the New. Christians, in other words, would have a doctrinal basis from which to attack the violent sect. Furthermore, and we know this from our history, Christians would also attack the sect simply because of its anti-democratic bent.
But don’t expect this level of protest from Muslims … they can’t even produce one single functioning liberal democratic Muslim state, least of all stand up for human rights. Why? Because unlike Christian, Buddhist, or Sikh doctrine, Islamic doctrine leaves no room for the modern liberal ideals on which our Western democracies are built. Islamic doctrine is barbaric … and it is the antithesis of everything we believe about freedom in the West.
Ordinary Muslims can’t stand up to the so-called extremists because they don’t have a philosophical foundation within Islam to do so. The extremists are right. They are, the true believers.
What this means is that Muslims will have to transform … or change … the basic foundations of their religion before they can enter civilization. Either that, or they’ll simply have to call themselves Muslims, but like many Christians, ignore most of the teachings of their faith. Frankly, I believe that that’s the case already.
Christians were at one time, barbaric. The Holy Roman Empire was sadistic, hyper-chauvinistic, irrational, and violently expansionist. But, Christianity was reformed because its foundational doctrine is compatible with modernism … it is almost pacifist … and it complements the peaceful coexistence of humans of varied beliefs. Christian reformers, in other words, had a doctrinal foundation to guide them. Muslims though, do not.
Let me make it clear that the point is not to attack Muslims as individuals … but to attack the doctrinal basis of their faith. We have every right to do so. We have every right to call a spade a spade or a barbaric doctrine what it is. We have every right to argue … say, that Jesus never existed, or that reincarnation is a fantasy. We have every right to criticize the beliefs and doctrine of any faith or political bent … once we lose that right, we will no longer be a liberal democracy. And, if it offends those who believe the doctrine we criticize … so be it. Part of living in a liberal democracy is being able to “suck it up!”
It matters not that most Muslims aren't violent, but they are ... each and everyone, an enabler because of their silence. And, most Muslims do aspire to hyper-chauvinism and many of the other "dark" beliefs of Islam. The vast majority of Germans prior to World War Two weren’t violent ... but they became enablers with their silence.
Imagine if you will, that a Christian sect began promoting a purely Old Testament version of “law and order”, including stoning for adultery and the wholesale slaughter of “unbelievers” if they didn’t “repent” and turn to the god of the Old Testament. Then imagine, that this sect actually began acting on its beliefs, even going as far as to take over and run some countries based on Old Testament dogma.
Christians the world over would protest at every possible level the hijacking of their religion by this sect. From the Pope to the evangelical church in your town, Christians would have none of it. Why? Because the sect would have departed from Christian doctrine, embracing instead the Old Testament instead of the New. Christians, in other words, would have a doctrinal basis from which to attack the violent sect. Furthermore, and we know this from our history, Christians would also attack the sect simply because of its anti-democratic bent.
But don’t expect this level of protest from Muslims … they can’t even produce one single functioning liberal democratic Muslim state, least of all stand up for human rights. Why? Because unlike Christian, Buddhist, or Sikh doctrine, Islamic doctrine leaves no room for the modern liberal ideals on which our Western democracies are built. Islamic doctrine is barbaric … and it is the antithesis of everything we believe about freedom in the West.
Ordinary Muslims can’t stand up to the so-called extremists because they don’t have a philosophical foundation within Islam to do so. The extremists are right. They are, the true believers.
What this means is that Muslims will have to transform … or change … the basic foundations of their religion before they can enter civilization. Either that, or they’ll simply have to call themselves Muslims, but like many Christians, ignore most of the teachings of their faith. Frankly, I believe that that’s the case already.
Christians were at one time, barbaric. The Holy Roman Empire was sadistic, hyper-chauvinistic, irrational, and violently expansionist. But, Christianity was reformed because its foundational doctrine is compatible with modernism … it is almost pacifist … and it complements the peaceful coexistence of humans of varied beliefs. Christian reformers, in other words, had a doctrinal foundation to guide them. Muslims though, do not.
Let me make it clear that the point is not to attack Muslims as individuals … but to attack the doctrinal basis of their faith. We have every right to do so. We have every right to call a spade a spade or a barbaric doctrine what it is. We have every right to argue … say, that Jesus never existed, or that reincarnation is a fantasy. We have every right to criticize the beliefs and doctrine of any faith or political bent … once we lose that right, we will no longer be a liberal democracy. And, if it offends those who believe the doctrine we criticize … so be it. Part of living in a liberal democracy is being able to “suck it up!”
|