ORLANDO

NEED I SAY MORE?

 

When is an invasion not an invasion?

Photo: Ggia

To quote one of our presidential candidates: 

What difference does it make?

 

Telegraph

Telegraph

Freedom of Expression

Muslim Expression:  Three Examples

Pamela Geller has her fame now.  Thank God and one brave Garland policeman that the only casualties were two jihadis.

Un-Civil Rights

People I like and respect are comparing Geller's recent event to the 'provocations' of civil rights marchers in the 60's, but the comparison is inapt. 

Back in the 60's, black people marched demanding government grant them the same God-given rights enjoyed by their white fellow citizens.

Also, the civil rights marchers did not stick a finger in the eye of those they strove to convince. Yes, they disturbed many segments of white America, how could they not?  But they were not mocking and defaming. They instead appealed to shared religious and cultural values to win over the hearts and consciences of those who were oppressing them.  These are important and fundamental differences.

Finally, had this event been organized and attended exclusively by people from Muslim societies, we would indeed have a new civil rights movement that we could all cheer.  Jews and Christians insulting Muslims does not rise to that level.

Geller as Rosa Parks?  

Yes, people are actually making that comparison.  Other overheated rhetoricians have compared her to a girl who almost got murdered just trying to go to school, or religious minorities struggling to survive and worship without being raped or killed in very a hostile part of the world, and even to victims of terrorist attacks. 

Geller is more like fellow 1st Amendment provocateur Larry Flynt...

Let's put aside Geller's fame-at-any-cost look-at-me-ism for a minute and assume the people who attended the event were sincere.  What is their goal?

Is it to inflame people by throwing our First Amendment rights in their faces like a frying pan full of hot bacon grease?  If so, mission accomplished!

However, America is better than that.  We are a people who can simultaneously grasp every fitness and dietary craze while also becoming more obese and unhealthy, and then make it all OK with cutting-edge surgery and innovative drugs.

Surely we can find a more noble way to defend our eroding foundational freedoms.

Could we at least set our sights a little higher than trying to outdo rabidly atheistic Frenchmen?


Related:
AOW's Post
FreeThinke's Post

Garland Texas

Inoffensive expression doesn't require protection

Above all else, the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content. To permit the continued building of our politics and culture, and to assure self-fulfillment for each individual, our people are guaranteed the right to express any thought, free from government censorship.~Thurgood Marshall

Chances are no matter who you are, what you do, or what you like, someone somewhere will find it offensive.  The event in Garland Texas was certainly offensive to Muslims, just as I'm sure they found Madonna's "Satanic" performance at the Grammy Awards and Katy Perry's "Witchcraft" performance the previous year offensive.  Christians find "Piss Christ" offensive.  I'm sure there are Protestants out there that find the papist trappings of the Catholic Church offensive.

So?

The parody and satire of the "silly" beliefs of Muslims is no more or no less offensive than the parody and satire of the "silly" beliefs of Christians, or the parody and satire of the religious by the non-religious. There are those who believe and who had called for the event in Garland to be banned just as there are those who believe and who called for the Satanic Mass at Harvard to be banned, and those that believe and have called for Islam to be banned... all are wrong.

Do you think I'm wrong? Are my words offensive? Do they upset you?

Tough, suck it up.

Post Script:

The bottom image is "Muhammad prohibiting Nasīʾ", a 17th century Ottoman copy of a 14th century Ilkhanate manuscript.  450,000 people signed a petition to remove it from the Wikipedia article on Muhammed as offensive to Muslims.
 

The President's Op-Ed

Just the other day (Feb 17th) on the eve of the Islamic Terrorism Conference the President published an Op-Ed column in the LA Times. We'll address a few points here, but feel free to read the article and chime in on anything you want about it.

The United States has made significant gains against terrorism.

Well that's an interesting perspective since it seems to be more out of control than ever as indicated in his following paragraphs:

The al Qaeda affiliate in Yemen actively plots against us. Since 9/11, terrorists have murdered U.S. citizens overseas, including in the attacks in Benghazi, Libya. Here in the United States, Americans have been killed at Ft. Hood and during the Boston Marathon. In Syria and Iraq, the terrorist group we call ISIL has slaughtered innocent civilians and murdered hostages, including Americans, and has spread its barbarism to Libya with the murder of Egyptian Christians. In recent months, we've seen deadly attacks in Ottawa, Sydney, Paris and Copenhagen.  Elsewhere, the Pakistan Taliban massacred more than 100 schoolchildren and their teachers. From Somalia, al-Shabaab has launched attacks across East Africa. In Nigeria and neighboring countries, Boko Haram kills and kidnaps men, women and children.

If the current state of affairs are "significant gains", I'd hate to see what losing looks like.  I'd also like to ask why if the President recognizes (as indicated by its inclusion here) the Fort Hood shootings as terrorism why the DoD continues to categorize it as "workplace violence", a categorization that has allowed Nidal Hasan to continue to draw ($278,000 since Nov 5, 2009... and that figure is almost two years old) salary and denies benefits to the victims of the shooting. Snopes

Efforts to counter violent extremism will only succeed if citizens can address legitimate grievances through the democratic process and express themselves through strong civil societies.

Islamqa  run by Muhammad Al-Munajjid who at least Al Jazeera identifies as "one of the respected scholars of the Salafist movement" (page three of Al Jazeera link) has this to say about democracy:

Democracy is a man-made system, meaning rule by the people for the people. Thus it is contrary to Islam, because rule is for Allaah, the Most High, the Almighty, and it is not permissible to give legislative rights to any human being, no matter who he is. Undoubtedly the democratic system is one of the modern forms of shirk, in terms of obedience and following, or legislation, as it denies the sovereignty of the Creator and His absolute right to issue laws, and ascribes that right to human beings. Islamqa

There are of course additional supporting and opposing viewpoints with the Islamic world.  The President goes on to talk about pluralism:

Finally — with al Qaeda and ISIL peddling the lie that the United States is at war with Islam — all of us have a role to play by upholding the pluralistic values that define us as Americans. 

Of course the falsehood in that statement is the naive belief that Jihadists or Salafists (not all Muslims) accept pluralism.  The Islamic views on pluralism is as divergent as its views on democracy depending on what particular sect one belongs to.  Given the Sunni ISIS treatment of Shia, I don't think you can expect to see pluralism out of them any time soon.  From Libya to Nigeria to Pakistan, Indonesia to the Philippines I dispute anyone that asserts that a lack of tolerance and pluralism is strictly an Arabic problem within Islam.

With this week's summit, we'll show once more that — unlike terrorists who only offer misery and death — it is our free societies and diverse communities that offer the true path to opportunity, justice and dignity. 

Obama's position reminds me of a friend of mine that used to joke that after he retired he was going to start an Amish Internet Dating Site.  So I have to ask, what makes him think they want what he's peddling? 

Striving in the way of God.

"Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ," the president said.

Well Mr. President, if you want to talk about the Crusades, why stop there?



633 - The Muslim conquest of Mesopotamia (Iraq). 

635 - The Muslim conquest of Damascus.

637 - The Muslim conquest of Syria. 

638 - The Muslim conquest of Jerusalem.

639 - The Muslim conquest of Armenia.

639 - The Muslim conquest of Egypt.  

641 - The Fall of Alexandria.

642 - The Muslim conquest of Persia.

651 - The Muslim conquest of North Africa.

654 - The Muslim conquest of Cyprus.

674 - The First Muslim siege of Constantinople.

691 - The Dome of the Rock is built.

711 - The Muslim conquest of Sindh (Pakistan).

711 - Muslim invasion of the Caucasus.

713 - The Muslim conquest of the lower Indus Valley (India).

717 - The Second Muslim siege of  Constantinople.

718 - The Muslim conquest of Hispania.  

719 - The Muslim conquest of Septimania (Coastal France).

734 - The Muslim conquest of Provence (France).

736 - The Muslim conquest of Georgia.

751 - The Muslim conquest of Transoxiana (Turkestan). 

809 - The Muslim conquest of Sardinia.

820 - The Muslim conquest of Crete.

827 - The Muslim conquest of southern Italy.

827 - The Muslim invasion of Sicily.

831 - The Muslim conquest of Palermo.

870 - The Muslim conquest of Afghanistan 

902 - The Muslim conquest of Sicily.


1060 - The Muslim conquest of Anatolia (Turkey)

1096 - THE FIRST CRUSADE

From its founding to the modern age Islam has been spread at the point of a sword.  The first crusade was the first organized pan-European response under the auspices of the Vatican to a four century old Muslim invasion. So Mr. President, as the saying goes ...and the high horse you rode in on.


 

Islamosis

Editor's Note:  Today's outing is a guest post by a Boone County Professor known to us as bocopro.  Enjoy!

Islamosis

Strange, strange syndrome, this highly contagious Islamosis that is pandemic throughout western Asia and northern Africa and now spreading into Europe and North America. Purely psychosomatic in origin, Islamosis manifests itself primarily in two areas of the body: the higher-order logic centers of the neocortex; and the bodily integument.

Sociologists and neurosurgeons working in conjunction with experienced in-situ physicians and psychiatrists from several advanced nations have distilled the causal factors down to three: rampant male paranoia, complete lack of raison d’etre, and simple jealousy.

Symptoms of Islamosis first appear outwardly on the skin, the integument, in a condition which doctors have named Muslimitis, which alters the skin layers to become so abnormally thin that it quickly festers and becomes necrotic if agitated in any way, particularly rubbing in an uncomfortable direction.

At that stage, although the condition remains entirely psychosomatic, it takes on characteristics of a typical bacterial or viral infection, becoming highly contagious, particularly through sharing of printed materials such as leaflets, magazines, and books written in Arabic which plagiarize and pervert traditional religions. Much evidence exists to suggest that it can spread also by word of mouth as well as by electronic messaging.

Immediately following the initial infection, the neocortex of the afflicted individual morphs into a slimy froth, much like what would result from collecting pond scum and mucus and mixing them in a high-speed blender. Reasonable discussion, logical decision-making, and normal social interaction become impossible for the victim.

The next stage is known as Jihadoma, in which the individual becomes irrational and violent, often joining other victims in mobs and frenzies characterized by anti-everything gibberish and chest-thumping twaddle. All the classic symptoms of paranoia can be seen in his behavior at this point. Many victims then further degenerate into what is known as Cartoonophobia, a serious behavioral paroxysm resulting in uncontrollable rage at the sight of 7th century pedophiles being depicted in unflattering situations on paper.

Once fully involved in Cartoonophobia, the final inevitable stage occurs: Martyrisis, the delusion that slaughtering innocent infidels will heap lasting credit upon the name of the Islamosis sufferer and transport him to an alternate reality filled with camels which spit dates, oases which flow with milk and honey, and dozens of personal concubines of indeterminate gender and species.

The only cure known for this dangerous condition is cerebrum upgrade, a delicate surgical procedure in which the damaged neocortex is replaced by that of a howler monkey, or a pig if no suitable monkey can be found. Failing that, the most effective treatment is insertion of 50 to 60 grams of either lead or copper directly into the brainstem at an upward angle of approximately 45 degrees.

Dr. Wadda Ghuque, a board-certified psychologist, provides the following insight, which he has recorded in many sessions with Islamosis sufferers:

“Society has treated me badly. My mother was distant and frightened of my father, who was ignorant and brutal. I was picked on in school and not allowed to form any real relationships with girls of my own age. Since I spent all my time memorizing the Qur’an, I didn’t learn any marketable skills, so I can’t find a decent job. Praise Allah that Islam, through our Prophet Muhammad’s dictations (PBUH), gives me authority to wreak my vengeance on a cold, cruel, blind world.”

The statement is not a direct quote from any specific individual, merely a composite of related utterances by multiple victims. Still, there can be no disagreement that it identifies much of the problem in the Islamic mind. Dr. Ghuque, along with many of his colleagues, hasten to add that many young Muslim men (women are not permitted to share their opinions in public, if they have any) are privately covetous of what they see as happiness and fulfillment amongst followers of other belief systems, such as Christianity, Buddhism, Judaism, and Hinduism, and have concluded that if they can’t be happy, then they want no one else to be either.

As one young man, whose identity must be withheld for ethical doctor-patient reasons, said:

“Dammit, it’s tough to watch all those girls, their open faces framed in glorious hair of different colors, their vibrant skin right out there for the eye to see, shaking their booties, having great fun, drinking beer, eating bacon cheeseburgers, while I’m stuck here with this miserable falafel and cous-cous and hot tea watching who-knows-what-the-hell-that-is wrapped up in a tent and smelling like she hasn’t had a decent bath in a month. Makes a guy want to go shoot somebody.”

 

The Religion of Peace

For where two or three have gathered together

in his name, this is usually the result

No, not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim these days and since we can't separate the wheat from the chaff, it's time to burn and salt the fields.  Until they get their own house in order they must not be allowed free reign in ours.  Is this discrimination? Yes, but it is a reasonable and rational response, look at the picture above... this is what we get (repeatedly) in turn for amnesty and for our generosity in opening our doors to them. 

Bernard "Tignous" Verlhac. Photo: Georges Seguin

Georges Wolinski, Photo: Alvaro

Jean "Cabu" Cabut, Photo: Georges Seguin

Stéphane "Charb" Charbonnier, Photo: Coyau

How many more good men have to die 

before we stop importing their killers? 

I'd rather die standing than live on my knees.

~ Stéphane Charbonnier

Stéphane Charbonnier didn't have to die... Impose a moratorium on immigration and asylum now, make any terrorism related charge a capital offense.

Je Suis Charlie 

Wir sind das Volk!

PUSHBACK

15,000 gather in Dresden the other day, last week it was 10,000, the week before 6,000, early on it was a few hundred.  PEGIDA or Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the Occident (Patriotische Europäer gegen die Islamisierung des Abendlandes) is just one of the signs of of pushback from Europeans fed up with their government's liberal immigration policies.  From the NPD and AfD in Germany, to UKIP in the United Kingdom, to the National Front in France, the far-right is rising in Europe.

In Germany, rather than address their citizens concerns, the government dismisses them out of hand as neo-nazis, pin-striped Nazis, dangerous, unmistakably right-wing extremists, and a disgrace.  It is the government's attitude that is dangerous and a disgrace placing concern for foreign asylum seekers ahead of concern for their own citizens.  It is this indifference that enables the far-right and is the best recruitment tool that they could hope for. 

The 2013 revision of the UN Trends in International Migrant Stock lists Germany as having 11.9% of the population as immigrants, France 10.8%, the UK as 8.9%, the US as 12.8%.  When 1 in 10 people are immigrants is it any wonder that the natives are restless?  

NUFF SAID?

THERE IS NO GOD BUT ALLAH

AND MOHAMMED IS HIS PROPHET

According to news reports, this is the flag that Man Haron Monis had his hostages holding up in the window of the Lindt Cafe.  The flag and the statement on it (the Shahada) find widespread use through the Islamic World.

Saudi Arabia

Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan

Caucasus (Chechnya) Emirate

And the list goes on: Hamas, Al-Shabaab, Al-Nusra, The Islamic State (ISIS)

But when you get right down to it, the Shahada is in direct contradiction to western values.  Contrast the Shahada with the Nicene Creed

WE BELIEVE

Or the Apostle's Creed

I BELIEVE

What did Man Haron Monis believe?

 "Those atheists, people of the book (Christians and Jews), where will they end up? In Surfers Paradise? On the Gold Coast? Where will they end up? In hell and not part-time, for eternity.  They are the worst in God's creation."

SBS Australia

So, why do we let these medieval asshats in our countries again? 

SBS Australia  

And why don't we deport them when they act like asshats?

Blasphemers, Heretics, and the like

Grigoriy Myasoyedov 1835-1911 "Baptism by Fire"

But the Bible says:

Bring out of the camp the one who cursed, and let all who heard him lay their hands on his head, and let all the congregation stone him.

Yes it does, but a people should be judged by their actions, not their dusty old words.  I refer to those Islamic apologists that defend Islam by pointing to the Bible and saying "See, your book says it too".

The last person executed for heresy in Britain was Thomas Aikenhead, that was in 1697.  There is not a tribe among men that hasn't killed, killed the outsiders, killed the different, or killed the enemy.  The question then should be, when was the last time they did it?  

Thomas Aquinas said:

“if we compare murder and blasphemy as regards the objects of those sins, it is clear that blasphemy, which is a sin committed directly against God, is more grave than murder, which is a sin against one's neighbor. On the other hand, if we compare them in respect of the harm wrought by them, murder is the graver sin, for murder does more harm to one's neighbor, than blasphemy does to God.” 

To find western nations executing blasphemers one must go back centuries, to find Islamic nations executing blasphemers one generally need look no further than the previous week.

WTF OVER

What in Allah's name are you talking about?

In the United States, Eid also reminds us of the many achievements and contributions of Muslim Americans to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy. 

In whole: Presidents Statement on Eid al-Fitr

It's not Muslim achievements or contributions that I dispute but the qualifier "the very fabric of our nation" and "the core of our democracy".  It's not that I don't recognize Islamic contributions to science, literature, or philosophy to name a few, I just can't seem to tie any of those to the fabric of our nation or the core of our democracy.

What am I missing?



 

All Atheists are Terrorists

Apologists take note

Saudi Arabia has introduced a series of new laws which define atheists as terrorists, according to a report from Human Rights Watch.  Article one of the new provisions defines terrorism as "calling for atheist thought in any form, or calling into question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion on which this country is based"

Independent 

A Mosque or a Church?

Spain is home to Cathedrals that were once mosques, and European Muslims are asking for their houses of worship back. I'm sympathetic to their cause. After all, the Christians aren't using them, except as musty museums that attract tourist dollars.

American Christians are un­usual in that their churches rarely occupy sites sacred to other faiths. But throughout history new religions often appropriated older sacred places for their own purposes. London's St. Paul's Cath­edral stands over the re­mains of a pagan temple, and the Metro­politan Cathedral in Mexico City is within the sacred pre­cinct of Aztec Tenoch­titlán. Invaders normally as­sumed that dominant religions should by right occupy the greatest buildings, and they grabbed sites ac­cord­ingly.

Such displacements are much in evidence across Europe and the Middle East, where Christians and Muslims often battled each other and where frontiers shifted frequently. (Whose Holy Ground)

The non-practicing Europeans who won't cede ground to Muslim worshipers remind me of an older child stubbornly clinging to a toy even though he has outgrown it. Here's an idea. Hold a contest to see who can get more people to show up to the building, Catholics or Muslims. Whoever produces the bigger crowd wins the property.

The author of the article just wants to let sleeping dogs lie, and ends with a question...

And what would happen if Christians tried to recover the many former churches in the Middle East that are now Islamicized?

What would happen? The Islamists would cut their heads off.

And that’s the difference between us and them. It is telling that while Christians cower in fear all over the Muslim world, prey to burnings, bombings and murder, Muslims in the west freely exercise their religion and bring their cultural and religious practices to the public square without fear of violence.

Meanwhile, here's a cool story about a brave Muslim Voice for European Christianity.

You Don't Have a Right to Not be Offended

An obscurantist Muslim immigrant we graciously allowed through the gates of civilization attacked a Pennsylvania man who was dressed like a zombie Muhammad on Halloween. An idiot judge, citing Sharia law and extraordinary Muslim sensitivities, let the assailant off.

So does that mean I can punch Larry Flynt out of his wheelchair for his anti-Catholic comments and cite Canon Law as my defense?  No, it doesn't.  But what it does do is set the legal precedent that Islam is in a special protected class because it's practitioners are too violent to control themselves.  America takes another step closer to the turd world.

The assailant, Talag Elbayomy, a Muslim immigrant, physically attacked Perce, attempted to pull his sign off, and, according to police, admitted what he had done right after the incident. The defense argued that Elbayomy believed it was a crime to insult the prophet Mohammed (it is, under sharia law), and that because he was in the company of his children, he had to act to end this provocation and set an example about defending Islam.

Judge Martin did not lecture the defendant about free speech or how disputes are resolved in a civilized country. He instead dressed the victim down for failing to appreciate how sensitive Muslims  [...] are about Islam. (Sharia Court of Pennsylvania)

I blame the State Department

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that our government should not be letting in people who think it is OK to attack others who offend their beliefs. I shudder to think what would have happened had this creep been walking down South Beach with his family and spied two men holding hands and kissing.  And how in the hell can we be letting people in and not explaining our laws to them?  All hopeful immigrants must be briefed that not only is blasphemy not against the law, it is one of the chief ways many of us exercise our first amendment rights.

Letting such people come here is like letting wild beasts into your home.  It is doubly dangerous when we have judges who more resemble ayatollahs, trampling the constitution while lecturing victims on how to avoid further attacks by not offending Islam.  The people of Pennsylvania should impeach that judge for trampling the constitution he has sworn to uphold.

There Ain't No Bridge Big Enough...

In an article about the flaming outrage in Afghanistan, I stumbled upon some words that say it much better than I ever could.  Upon concluding that we should quit Afghanistan sooner rather than later, Andrew McCarthy further observes...

That, however, cannot be the end of it. If, according to the president, we need to apologize to Muslims because we must accept that they have such an innate, extraordinary ardor for their religion that barbaric reactions to trivial slights are inevitable, then they should not be invited to enter a civilized country.

At the very least, our immigration laws should exclude entry from Muslim-majority countries unless and until those countries expressly repeal repressive sharia laws (e.g., the death penalty for apostates) and adopt American standards of non-discrimination against, tolerance of, and protection for religious minorities.

If you really want to promote freedom in Islamic countries, an immigration policy based on civil-rights reciprocity would be a lot more effective, and a lot less expensive, than dispatching tens of thousands of troops to build sharia “democracies.” It would also protect Americans from people whose countries and cultures have not prepared them for the obligations of citizenship in a free society. (Why Apologize?)

Indeed.  Imagine (God forbid) if all of us were as violently hypersensitive about our beliefs as that immigrant.  The country would be in constant turmoil.  If we value our freedoms, our culture and our way of life, we can't be letting in those who do not.

Religion or Culture?

I have little patience for people who sing from the catalog of Christianity's sins but brook no criticism of Islam.  When defending Islam, their favorite argument is that it's not the religion, its the culture

Sir Charles, OM, QC, OFM, Knight of the Queen's Girdle and all that, (Peace Be upon Him), charges to the rescue any time someone casts aspersions upon the Religion of Peace. (See this thread at Leticia's)

He and fellow Defenders of the Faith have excuses from now to doomsday explaining away the horrors that Islam has spawned:

It's not the religion but the national culture...
... religious conservatism...
... women like being swaddled head to toe when it's 120 degrees outside...
... and they don't like driving anyway...
... but it's only a small stick ....

OK, I added the last three, but I have heard variations of them at other forums...

The Christmas day killing in Texas where a man gunned down his entire family as they were gathered around the Christmas tree spurred my fellow Right Blogistanis to yet another gang attack on Islam, but it actually caused me to back up and reconsider. Mr. Yazdanpanah was obviously mentally distraught and emotionally anguished due to bankruptcy, family problems and a marriage breakup.

The Yazdanpanah's were not Muslim Fundamentalists

This is a man who reportedly enjoyed happy hour cocktails with men and women after work.  Look at family pictures and how the women dress.  This is not a fundamentalist family.  They were celebrating Christmas (albeit secularly), with a Christmas tree for Pete's sake!  Religion probably did not motivate him.  But did his native culture?  And what shaped that culture?  He's Iranian, so I'm waiting for an apologist to suggest Zoroastrianism...

Every time a Muslim man decapitates someone or kills his (always female) family members, a "Religion vs. Culture" argument breaks out. It's a silly argument over a false choice. Religion and Culture, you can't have one without the other. Cultures are informed by their dominant religions, and a religion accepts what is not objectionable from the surrounding culture. 

Grand Ayatollah Imam Shirazi explains it better than I ever could:

So in the case of Islamic religion and its followers, Islam does influence the culture, but culture does not generate the religion; for all the teachings of Islam are generated or inspired by none other than the divine entity. Inherently every aspect of the teachings of Islam is based on a reason and wisdom for the good of mankind - [whether or not the reason happens to be known to him.]

On the other hand if a practice or a particular aspect of culture does not contradict the system that is brought for the good of mankind, i.e. it does not contradict the teachings of Islam, or it is good for mankind, then it is accepted or endorsed by the Islamic religion, since anything which is considered good or is not considered harmful for mankind is declared permissible and therefore accepted and endorsed by Islam. And this is the kind of relationship Islam harbours for faith and culture. (Imam Shirazi)

So why are some practices absolutely prohibited (drinking), while female genital mutilation is AOK?  These are religious judgement passed on cultural practices.

Ducky, Jack and other ably proffer evidence to bolster the "culture, not religion" argument. Places like the United Arab Emirates, though ruled by Sharia, are relatively free from stonings and head chopping. The Emirates are very rich, and they bribe jihadis to leave them alone, and they deal harshly with public fundamentalist outbursts. Ducky has pointed out that various religions in Africa perform female genital mutilation, and the practice pre-dates Islam.

So, we have some evidence that prosperity tamps down a religion's most repugnant rituals, and we find that some practices are shared among various religions.  Neither observation answers the culture or religion question definitively, and that's because the two are inextricably entwined.

All I can offer in response is a different attempt at disaggregation.  What about those non-Muslims living in Muslim-dominated cultures?

* Number of bombings carried out by Christians compared to Muslim-inspired explosions.  A quick glance at the news or some googling will reveal Islam beating Christianity 10-1, or greater.

* Since Pakistan is proud home to over 600 honor killings annually, I'd like to see the Christian/Muslim breakdown of the statistics.  Again, some googling will reveal it is approximately, oh... 100% Muslim and 0% Christian, unless it is a Christian who is on the receiving end of an angry wielder of the Flaming Sword of God.

An additional comparison that would be interesting would be the annual number of per capita Old Testament-style punishments meted out in Israel over the past decade compared to surrounding countries.

So is it really the culture?  

Even an intellectually dishonest redefinition of honor killing (carried out by apologist feminists, no less), cannot snatch first prize in body count from Islam's bloody grasp.  They still outnumber even Catholic Latin American husbands who kill their wives in a fit of jealous rage.

So, I don't condemn Islam or its practitioners; I simply view it with eyes wide open. I appreciate the contribution my fellow Americans of the Islamic faith make to this nation in the fields of industry, medicine, the arts, and defense. I thank God we are spared the darker aspects of their faith here in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

Maybe culture and national character have something to do with it after all...

Daily Mail
WFAA.com
PEW Survey - Muslim Attitudes
Imam Shirazi - Teachings of Islam

Nutballs From Hell

All religions have their problems and suffer the sins of their fools and Grand Inquisitors.  Islam, like its fellow faiths, has earned the obloquy heaped upon it.


It should be nobody's business how a religion conducts its affairs, but its influence on society is everyone's concern.  If a religion advances the culture and is a boon to the society, all the better.  Even those who don't practice it benefit from it.  It works in reverse also.  A religion can drag a culture down, keeping its people shrouded in ignorance and society mired in misery.

I'll leave it to the reader to draw his or her own conclusions on the differences between Christian-influenced cultures and those under the spell of Islam.

One major difference between Islam and Christianity is the nature of their spectacular sinners, the ones who make the news in some big way. Christians make the front page almost always by acting in violation of the teachings of Christ. Muslims  trigger news updates usually by taking their teachings too far or too literally in defending faith and honor. I must give Islam credit. It's followers are much more fervent than Christ's.

We Christians bear the shame of a minuscule percentage of pedophile priests or flock-fleecing evangelists whose grave sins are not some weird perversion of the faith, but rather a bald-faced repudiation of it. The sin of slavery was ended in large measure by appeals to Christianity, and that faith powered America's civil rights movement. That is an important distinction between Christianity and Islam. While Christian crimes and atrocities spring from a rejection of the Gospel, and are ultimately ended by appeals to the same, Islamic horror shows stem from "misinterpretations" of their sacred texts, or turbo-charging some passage.

"A phobia is an irrational fear or dislike."

This is why the fake term Islamophobia is so dangerous: It insinuates that any reservations about Islam must ipso facto be "phobic." A phobia is an irrational fear or dislike. Islamic preaching very often manifests precisely this feature, which is why suspicion of it is by no means irrational. (Christopher Hitchens, Slate)

Islamic Extremists:  Taking it Too Far

All religions that reach back to antiquity have some barbaric aspects to them. Judaism and Christianity have gotten past them (how many stonings happen nowadays in Israel, or Utah?) Islamic societies cling to ancient brutalities and bring them to new heights of horrible culmination.

It is also true that all religions have their kooks and practitioners on the fringes who, when God asks them to take one aspirin, decide to go him one better and gobble the whole bottle. Mormons condemn those "Jack" Mormons who go outside the church and practice polygamy, which often includes teenage girls. All Christians condemn the murder of abortionists and the bombing of their clinics. We are near unanimous in our condemnation of Revrund Phred Phlapps and his First Church of God Hates Fags.  There is no way the teachings of Christ can be twisted out of shape enough to call these actions righteous.

About all I can say in defense of Christianity compared to Islam is that our kooks are less spectacular and have a harder time making the news than their flamboyantly violent Islamist rivals. Violent criminal acts in the name of Christ are so rare as to make each one a singular and memorable event, while Islamic violence has metasticized into a global miasma so routine that it has lost its shock value.

Muslims Immigration: Even Open-Minded People Think it's a Bad Idea

This is a reprint from 2009.  I thought I'd run it since my last post on Islam in America got such a response.  As AOW concluded, immigration policy is something we can and must get control of.  Stop importing people who hate us and who have a history of spawning children who will grow up here and end up hating us... --Silverfiddle

** Unhinged DeviledEgg Rant Alert! ** 

If the thought of an "honor killing" on American soil doesn't disgust you and make you boil with patriotic rage, you're brain dead! 

I live in Europe, I've lived in North America, and I've lived in that armpit they call the Middle East. No contest which I think is better!

Close The Damned Gates!

Why the hell do Western nations continue to allow these troublemaking Muslims to immigrate? Look at a map.  Wherever there's trouble, angry turbaned men with beards are involved.

Our cultures are incompatible.  We enjoy pork bbq and beer, use toilet paper and refrain from female genital mutilation, for example.

Many Muslim immigrants refuse to assimilate, and the only way to have peace here in the West is to give in to their fleck spittled agitations at the expense of our cultural norms.  Not while I have breath in my body!  Better to close the gates!

ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE!!! DISAGREE AND I'LL KEEEEL YOU!!!

Unlike the DeviledEgg, foreign editor of The Australian Greg Sheridan is no xenophobe, but he declares, "Uncontrolled Muslim Influx a Threat to the West."

It is extremely difficult to talk honestly about Muslim immigration. All generalisations about it are subject to countless exceptions. Muslims are very different from each other.

Most are reasonably successful. But a much bigger minority end up with social, political, extremist or other problems resulting from a lack of integration than is the case with any other cohort of immigrants in Western societies. A lack of honest discussion about this results in bad policy.

He goes on to recommend a book by Christopher Caldwell, Reflections on the Revolution in Europe: Immigration, Islam and the West.

Jacob Laksin at City Journal recommends the book as well.

Polls show that some 70 percent of Britons believe that there are too many immigrants in their country. Majorities throughout Western Europe agree, and Muslim immigrants in particular are viewed with suspicion.

Europe is a Benignly Racist Continent
 
Despite the finger-wagging at America, many Europeans are fundamentally and unconsciously racist and insular. Here in Germany, people from the next village over are considered outsiders, fellow German speakers from Austria are treated as the enemy, and those who hail from farther afield have no hope of ever fitting in in the land of beer and bratwurst. 

Europeans are in a jam, trying to steer a course between the Charybdis of bigotry and the Scylla of cultural destruction. Worse, the entire continent is in denial. Muslims are to blame as well, especially when they display open contempt for their new home:

Yet the immigrants themselves are far from faultless. One of the immigration debate’s inconvenient truths is that Muslim immigrants have been so difficult to assimilate into European societies because they’re unwilling: many Muslims simply choose religious ties over national loyalties.

... 31 percent of British Muslims felt they had more in common with the people of Muslim nations than with their fellow Europeans.

I hope the US can learn the right lessons from Europe's immigration debacle. Reading Caldwell's book would be a good start, but cutting off all Muslim immigration is imperative.

I've got to stop now, that guy shouting from the tower is giving me a headache!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The DeviledEgg is prone to unhinged rants, childish outbursts, and fits of anger, but he's really a good egg once you get to know him. He is half German and half American and splits his time between the two countries. Western Hero is proud to add him to the team.

City Journal - Jacob Laksin
RCP - Greg Sheridan

The Hidden Imam & The Risen Lord

Liberals who reflexively scream and caw like a flock of startled birds at anything uttered by a conservative make the fundamental mistake of conflating Islam itself with the different cultural milieus and practices that spring from it.  We who defend Western culture should not make the same mistake.

Some bloggers in Right Blogistan have really been laying the wood to Islam, some going so far as to call it a satanic cult.  Others struggle to separate the Islamist murderers from the religion itself, while still railing against its malignant influence on Western Christendom.  While I do not criticize religious debate, I am in the latter camp.

I don't think it is any more racist to criticize black panthers or radical islamists than it is to attack white supremacists.

It is not anti-Christian to call Fred Phelps and his followers the anti-American ass-hat dingbats that they are, and it is completely legitimate to criticize Muslim extremists operating in the west who hate our western values. 

Having said that, I think Christians and conservatives do our cause more harm than good when we criticize Islam itself.  I've done it.  Usually while criticizing one of the Muslim world's multifarious abhorrent cultural practices, hydra-headed hatreds, cultural intolerance, or religious bigotry.  We can condemn an abortion clinic bomber without condemning Christianity; can we condemn a Muslim terrorist without casting aspersions upon the religion of Islam?  

How do you like it when smart-ass atheists ridicule your faith?

Sticks and stones, right?  But does it make you have a more favorable or less favorable opinion of them?  Does it make you more willing or less willing to hear what they have to say?  I found Mike Huckabee's winking anti-Mormonism repellent.  He lost my vote, and I'm not even a Mormon.

It is in our own best interests to keep our focus on the anti-Western practices of the few, rather than the religion of the many who go about their daily lives as good Americans.

My God's Better than Your God

I remember awhile back hearing Glenn Beck on the radio mocking the Shia Twelvers, calling the Hidden Imam “the boy in the well.” You’d think he'd be a little more circumspect, seeing as how his religion is based upon God coming into the world as a human baby, dying, and coming back to life after three days in the tomb, and then ascending to heaven.  To the skeptic, that's right up there with Mohammad's flying donkey.

Some Christians believe we’re all saved.  Others believe there is a preordained elect, and the rest of us will burn in hell. Catholics pray to saints, believing they are with God and can therefor plead to him on our behalf.  This leads fundamentalists to condemn the followers of the Whore of Babylon to eternal damnation. And that's just within Christianity!

My point here is not to mock anyone, but to simply point out that our different and varied beliefs are not reconcilable.  We don't have to respect the religion of others, but we must respect each others' constitutional right to freedom of worship.  None of us can scientifically prove our particular sect or belief is the right one, so why argue about it and inflame one another? As Dennis Prager once observed, every religion has elements that look downright ridiculous to outsiders.

Freedom of Conscience - Freedom from Violence

Outside of some witch trials, institutional bigotry against Jews, and a few spasmodic episodes against Catholics and Mormons, we've been blessedly free of sectarian turmoil and bug-eyed religious zealotry here.  I pray we can keep it that way.  Inshallah

Do Muslims have the Same Rights as Christians?

Herman Cain Stumbles over the Constitution

Just a Conservative Girl over at Potluck scolded presidential candidate Herman Cain for siding with the Murfreesburo, Tennessee group that wants to prevent a mosque from being built in their town. She rightly points out that Cain’s position runs afoul of the US Constitution.

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain said Sunday that communities have a right to ban Islamic mosques.

"Let's go back to the fundamental issue that the people are basically saying that they are objecting to," Cain said. "They are objecting to the fact that Islam is both religion and (a) set of laws, Shariah law. That's the difference between any one of our other traditional religions where it's just about religious purposes. (Sacbee – Herman Cain)

Cain’s reasoning is tenuous and tendentious as best. I understand the distinction he is making between religious islam and political islam, but it still does not pass constitutional muster. What’s to stop communities from banning Catholic Churches because that faith’s canon law does not jive with civil law on the subject of divorce? As gay marriage fever sweeps the nation, can states outlaw Baptist Churches because they refuse to bless such ceremonies?

Religious law that is voluntary, respectful of human rights, and not in violation of civil law is a good thing

Muslims have a right to their Sharia law, so long as it’s practice does not conflict with our civil law, and it does not impinge on the rights of the rest of us. It’s called religious freedom. More importantly, certain abhorrent practices aside, Sharia law is a code for Muslims to live by, and it provides a way for them to guide their lives and solve problems without getting government involved.

Indeed, the concept of solving problems at the lowest level has been snuffed by progressivism. Catholics call this concept of solving problems at the lowest level, subsidiarity, but they didn’t invent it. It goes back to the time of Moses, and our founding fathers wrote a constitution and built a nation upon the concept. National civil society starts with personal morality. Problems must first be addressed within the family, next the larger community, and so on. We’ve forgotten how to solve our own problems without government intervention.

If we are to stay true to our constitutional principles, we cannot be singling out certain religions for especial opprobrium or holding them to extraordinary standards. So long as the Murfreesburo Muslims obey the law, seek no special favors from the government and refrain from dictating their laws to non-Muslim citizens, what’s the problem?