  |
 |
| |
|
|
|
 Sam Harris on the Reality of IslamPosted on Feb 7, 2006
By Sam Harris Update #1 (2/08/2006 1:35 p.m. EST): Sam Harris responds to the comments and criticism of this piece. Jump to read.
Update #2: Cilck here for a Truthdig primer on who has, and who hasn’t re-published the controversial cartoons
Verses from the Koran In recent days, crowds of thousands have gathered throughout the Muslim world—burning European embassies, issuing threats, and even taking hostages—in protest over 12 cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad that were first published in a Danish newspaper last September. The problem is not merely that the cartoons were mildly derogatory. The furor primarily erupted over the fact that the Prophet had been depicted at all. Many Muslims consider any physical rendering of Muhammad to be an act of idolatry. And idolatry is punishable by death. Criticism of Muhammad or his teaching—which was also implicit in the cartoons—is considered blasphemy. As it turns out, blasphemy is also punishable by death. So pious Muslims have two reasons to “not accept less than a severing of the heads of those responsible,” as was recently elucidated by a preacher at the Al Omari mosque in Gaza. The religious hysteria has not been confined to the “extremists” of the Muslim world. Seventeen Arab governments issued a joint statement of protest, calling for the punishment of those responsible. Pakistan’s parliament unanimously condemned the drawings as a “vicious, outrageous and provocative campaign” that has “hurt the faith and feelings of Muslims all over the world.” Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, while still seeking his nation’s entry into the European Union, nevertheless declared that the cartoons were an attack upon the “spiritual values” of Muslims everywhere. The leader of Lebanon’s governing Hezbollah faction observed that the whole episode could have been avoided if only the novelist Salman Rushdie had been properly slaughtered for writing “The Satanic Verses.” Let us take stock of the moral intuitions now on display in the House of Islam: On Aug. 17, 2005, an Iraqi insurgent helped collect the injured survivors of a car bombing, rushed them to a hospital and then detonated his own bomb, murdering those who were already mortally wounded as well as the doctors and nurses struggling to save their lives. Where were the cries of outrage from the Muslim world? Religious sociopaths kill innocents by the hundreds in the capitols of Europe, blow up the offices of the U.N. and the Red Cross, purposefully annihilate crowds of children gathered to collect candy from U.S. soldiers on the streets of Baghdad, kidnap journalists, behead them, and the videos of their butchery become the most popular form of pornography in the Muslim world, and no one utters a word of protest because these atrocities have been perpetrated “in defense of Islam.” But draw a picture of the Prophet, and pious mobs convulse with pious rage. One could hardly ask for a better example of religious dogmatism and its pseudo-morality eclipsing basic, human goodness. It is time we recognized—and obliged the Muslim world to recognize—that “Muslim extremism” is not extreme among Muslims. Mainstream Islam itself represents an extremist rejection of intellectual honesty, gender equality, secular politics and genuine pluralism. The truth about Islam is as politically incorrect as it is terrifying: Islam is all fringe and no center. In Islam, we confront a civilization with an arrested history. It is as though a portal in time has opened, and the Christians of the 14th century are pouring into our world. Islam is the fastest growing religion in Europe. The demographic trends are ominous: Given current birthrates, France could be a majority Muslim country in 25 years, and that is if immigration were to stop tomorrow. Throughout Western Europe, Muslim immigrants show little inclination to acquire the secular and civil values of their host countries, and yet exploit these values to the utmost—demanding tolerance for their backwardness, their misogyny, their anti-Semitism, and the genocidal hatred that is regularly preached in their mosques. Political correctness and fears of racism have rendered many secular Europeans incapable of opposing the terrifying religious commitments of the extremists in their midst. In an effort to appease the lunatic furor arising in the Muslim world in response to the publication of the Danish cartoons, many Western leaders have offered apologies for exercising the very freedoms that are constitutive of civil society in the 21st century. The U.S. and British governments have chastised Denmark and the other countries that published the cartoons for privileging freedom of speech over religious sensitivity. It is not often that one sees the most powerful countries on Earth achieve new depths of weakness, moral exhaustion and geopolitical stupidity with a single gesture. This was appeasement at its most abject. The idea that Islam is a “peaceful religion hijacked by extremists” is a dangerous fantasy—and it is now a particularly dangerous fantasy for Muslims to indulge. It is not at all clear how we should proceed in our dialogue with the Muslim world, but deluding ourselves with euphemisms is not the answer. It now appears to be a truism in foreign policy circles that real reform in the Muslim world cannot be imposed from the outside. But it is important to recognize why this is so—it is so because the Muslim world is utterly deranged by its religious tribalism. In confronting the religious literalism and ignorance of the Muslim world, we must appreciate how terrifyingly isolated Muslims have become in intellectual terms. The problem is especially acute in the Arab world. Consider: According to the United Nations’ Arab Human Development Reports, less than 2% of Arabs have access to the Internet. Arabs represent 5% of the world’s population and yet produce only 1% of the world’s books, most of them religious. In fact, Spain translates more books into Spanish each year than the entire Arab world has translated into Arabic since the ninth century. Our press should report on the terrifying state of discourse in the Arab press, exposing the degree to which it is a tissue of lies, conspiracy theories and exhortations to recapture the glories of the seventh century. All civilized nations must unite in condemnation of a theology that now threatens to destabilize much of the Earth. Muslim moderates, wherever they are, must be given every tool necessary to win a war of ideas with their coreligionists. Otherwise, we will have to win some very terrible wars in the future. It is time we realized that the endgame for civilization is not political correctness. It is not respect for the abject religious certainties of the mob. It is reason.
Sam Harris is the author of “The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason” (W.W. Norton). He can be reached through his website at www.samharris.org. Sam Harris responds to comments and criticismAnyone familiar with my work knows that I am extremely critical of all religious faiths. I have argued elsewhere that the ascendancy of Christian conservatism in American politics should terrify and embarrass us. I have argued that the religious dogmatism of the Jewish settlers could well be the cause of World War III. And yet, there are gradations to the evil that is done in name of God, and these gradations must be honestly observed. So let us now acknowledge the obvious: there is a direct link between the doctrine of Islam and Muslim violence. Acknowledging this link remains especially taboo among political liberals. While liberals are leery of religious fundamentalism in general, they consistently imagine that all religions at their core teach the same thing and teach it equally well. This is one of the many delusions borne of political correctness. Rather than continue to squander precious time, energy, and good will by denying the role that Islam now plays in perpetuating Muslim violence, we should urge Muslim communities, East and West, to reform the ideology of their religion. This will not be easy, as the Koran and hadith offer precious little basis for a Muslim Enlightenment, but it is necessary. The truth that we must finally confront is that Islam contains specific notions of martyrdom and jihad that fully explain the character of Muslim violence. Unless the world’s Muslims can find some way of expunging the metaphysics that is fast turning their religion into a cult of death, we will ultimately face the same perversely destructive behavior throughout much of the world. It should be clear that I am not speaking about a race or an ethnicity here; I am speaking about the logical consequences of specific ideas. Anyone who imagines that terrestrial concerns account for Muslim terrorism must answer questions of the following sort: Where are the Tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers? The Tibetans have suffered an occupation far more brutal, and far more cynical, than any that Britain, the United States, or Israel have ever imposed upon the Muslim world. Where are the throngs of Tibetans ready to perpetrate suicidal atrocities against Chinese noncombatants? They do not exist. What is the difference that makes the difference? The difference lies in the specific tenets of Islam. This is not to say that Buddhism could not help inspire suicidal violence. It can, and it has (Japan, World War II). But this concedes absolutely nothing to the apologists for Islam. As a Buddhist, one has to work extremely hard to justify such barbarism. One need not work nearly so hard as a Muslim. If you doubt whether the comparison is valid, ask yourself where the Palestinian Christian suicide bombers are. Palestinian Christians also suffer the indignity of the Israeli occupation. This is practically a science experiment: take the same people, speaking the same language, put them in the same horrendous circumstance, but give them slightly different religious beliefs--and then watch what happens. What happens is, they behave differently. While the other major world religions have been fertile sources of intolerance, it is clear that the doctrine of Islam poses unique problems for the emergence of a global civilization. The world, from the point of view of Islam, is divided into the “House of Islam” and the “House of War,” and this latter designation should indicate how Muslims believe their differences with those who do not share their faith will be ultimately resolved. While there are undoubtedly some moderate Muslims who have decided to overlook the irrescindable militancy of their religion, Islam is undeniably a religion of conquest. The only future devout Muslims can envisage—as Muslims—is one in which all infidels have been converted to Islam, politically subjugated, or killed. The tenets of Islam simply do not admit of anything but a temporary sharing of power with the “enemies of God.” Devout Muslims can have no doubt about the reality of Paradise or about the efficacy of martyrdom as a means of getting there. Nor can they question the wisdom and reasonableness of killing people for what amount to theological grievances. In Islam, it is the moderate who is left to split hairs, because the basic thrust of the doctrine is undeniable: convert, subjugate, or kill unbelievers; kill apostates; and conquer the world. It should be of particular concern to us that the beliefs of devout Muslims pose a special problem for nuclear deterrence. There is, after all, little possibility of our having a cold war with an Islamist regime armed with long-range nuclear weapons. A cold war requires that the parties be mutually deterred by the threat of death. Notions of martyrdom and jihad run roughshod over the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to pass half a century perched, more or less stably, on the brink of Armageddon. We must come to terms with the possibility that men who are every bit as zealous to die as the September 11th hijackers may one day get their hands on nuclear weaponry. As Martin Rees, Britain’s Royal astronomer, has pointed out, there is no reason to expect that we will be any more successful at stopping nuclear proliferation, in small quantities, than we have been with respect to illegal drugs. If this is true, weapons of mass destruction will eventually be available to anyone who wants them. It seems a truism to say that there is no possible future in which aspiring martyrs will make good neighbors for us. Previous item: Kicking the Oil Addiction: Bush Lied, Again Next item: Take From the Poor, Give to the Military Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. |
Washington’s Overrated ‘Old Hands’
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
By Douglas Ray, December 2, 2007 at 10:05 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
It saddens me to to read the above comments, but it does not suprise me. The world is full of ignorant people, perhaps it always will be. The only thing sane & intelligent people can do is to go on telling the truth, as Sam Harris has so competently done, risking the wrath of the political correctness police.
Report thisIslam is a violent religion, one with, “bloody borders”, as history (and the present day) clearly reveal. And the recent demands by many Muslims to kill the teacher who named a teddy bear Mohammed is sickening beyond belief! Where was the outcry against the murderous muslim mob from so-called Muslims who believe in this; “religion of peace?”? The sooner Islam and all other Theistic religions are discarded on the graveyard of history the better!
By ikarjikar, July 1, 2007 at 11:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
ian, the writer who ends his comments with ‘peace’
Having read all your posts I find that your views reflect mine. I too cannot help seeing the wonderful equivalence of all religious expressions at their essential core. It would be nice to share our views in a less public setting if you could e-mail me at ikarjikar dot ct at aki dot co dot za
peace be upon you
Report thisBy osama bin laden, May 26, 2007 at 9:13 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
i declare Jihad on you Mr. Harris! death to americans halalalalalala!!!
Report thisBy ahmed houry, May 4, 2007 at 12:56 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
i am a muslim by birth and i find your statement to be 0 accurate ,most people in the muslim world don’t dare questions the absurdities of their religion because the consequences are often jail or even death ,countries like saudi arabia force their subjects to pray during prayer time or be beaten publicly .Islam is in shambles now and more muslim are finding out that their religion is evil
Report thisBy J, March 30, 2007 at 6:35 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Their is alot of fruit examining the dangers of various religious beliefs. However, not all religions pose the same dangers as Islam. None of the major religions, accept Islam, contain the commandment to convert or kill unbelievers in their docterines.
As for dogma, we all live in a dogma. All of our beliefs pertaining to origins are based on faith. That faith can be based on the best science really has to offer, or based on fairy tales made up in our heads. Faith though, is necessary.
Report thisBy jboy, February 21, 2007 at 8:46 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Islam is the fastest growing enforced religion in the world.... and you said it Sam, the logical outworking of the religion of Islam is what we see manifested through terrorist regimes day to day. In order to claim Islam you must either somehow negate the claims made intellectually posed by Islam, or realize that it does not withstand the tests of logical consistancy, imperical adequacy, and expirential relevance; and for the layman primarily the latter. It is not in keeping with the world of reality as we know it, in multiple ways.
Report thisIn regard to my first statement that Islam was the fastest growing enforced religion in the world, you must see the willingness of so many people in the Middle Eastern countries to speak about Christianity or another way hush hush like, because they are afraid. They know that Islam is inforced, and with that comes a great amount of opression which silences many questions and concerns that they have pertaining to their own religion. But if one would ever travel to a place where Islam is the dominant religion, I say this with many as my witness, there are many that openly recieve the freedom of Christianity because they know that Islam has not answered their questions satisfactorily, and they also know that it should be a choice of freedom, one that the individual must make for himself! The Koran says there is no compulsion in religion. When a father who claims Islam threatens and even finds it morally necissary according to Islam, to murder his daughter or son if they convert, then my question to him would be that if there is no compulsion in religion, then isn’t it right to say that you must be free to disbelieve as well as to believe? The oppression of the fear and the threat of death in relation to conversion has held many people captive to a religion that is notwithstanding in reality, and has held it’s “believers” captive, primarily through fear.
By Frank Goodman, Sr., February 19, 2007 at 7:04 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: Comment #34101 by Mirza A. Beg on 10/27
I found your comments to be wise and measured, though set in a strident mode. Moderates need no stridency. Only in a moderate sense can Truth be found. We can embrace freedom of expression, but we cannot embrace error as such. Sam Harris is strident in his antipathy to organized religion. But, Sam is somewhat lenient in his opposition in that he can lambaste the extremists while almost legitimizing error of the moderates and adjusted. So long as the extremists use gun powder, nitrates and picric acid to kill people, it is better than to incinerate a million at a time in a cheaper nuclear holocaust. Actually, killing is not unjust. We blithely kill malicious murderers by humane means of lethal injections. If deterrence were the issue, torture to death could be more effective as a deterrent. An easy death by lethal injection would not hold up against suicide bombers, or the gallows, to say nothing of the rack, temperature manipulation, or sleep deprivations.
The correction of error is to recognize error and to eliminate the cause of it, which is ignorance. In that, Sam is in bed with the humane and moderate Muslims, Christians, Jews, and all others. An error is corrected as soon as it is recognized as an error. The role of reason is to lead the sinner to the knowledge of his own errors. To ignore error is the ultimate of ignorance. All religious dogma, but also atheistic rejection of dogma, are forms of ignorance.
Report thisBy Michael Lee Reider, February 13, 2007 at 4:49 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Mirza A. Beg:
1) You really ought to read the entire aticle before you respond with an emotional diatribe such as this. Many of your concerns are addressed in Sam’s piece.
2) There is absolutely nothing “bigoted” about examining religious beliefs by the light of reason. It is imperative that we apply conversational pressure to those who organize their lives around irrational dogmas, and that is precisely what Sam is doing here.
3) It is easier to dismiss someone’s arguments as “propaganda” than it is to refute them. You haven’t made your case as to how it is that we should not take Sam’s concerns seriously. If it’s true that his quotes from the Koran are taken out of context, and that he does not know what he is talking about, then how about enlightening us with an interpretation which refutes his main thesis? Refusing to respond to legitimate criticism with a well-reasoned counter argument is a cop-out.
Report thisBy Thom, January 22, 2007 at 3:48 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Mirza A. Beg -
I think you missed the point of this entire article. Or maybe you are not familiar with the authors work. It follows the theme that the irrationalities of faith needs to step up in responsibility for a large portion of the world’s ills.
I can assure you, given the same opportunity to criticize America, Sam Harris would gladly step up to the plate. And this time, Christianity would be to blame.
Religious tolerance is something Harris does not preach. And in taking a stance against it, he is infact embodying some of the same traits as the people he criticizes. Tolerance of others has been so embeded in our culture that speaking out against something like religion is fairly taboo. Even though it it perfectly all right for people to use religion to hide behind when they choose to be intolerant of others, such as Gays, Science, and, well, other religions.
No one is perfect, least of all the people of America. To be honest, the fact that 80%+ of the United States population believe in some form of irrational religion, and it permiates the government to and from all levels, and that America is amongst the most powerful countries in the world, scares the living hell out of me. It’s one of the few things that keeps me awake at night.
Sam Harris isn’t bashing Islam, or defending Christians. He is damning all religions, in all currently known forms.
And I am sorry that if Mr Harris actually wrote you, you would not respond to him. If I had your point of view, I would certainly be interested in what a rational mind had to say about something I disagreed with. You can call his work hateful, but you can hardly call it irrational.
Report thisBy Anchorite, November 24, 2006 at 11:55 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
THE NEED FOR IDEOLOGY
The human spirit DEMANDS an ideology, a sense of certainty. It will never be disciplined by a secularism.
What remains of the Enlightenment is TV screens: Druggy bikers and a few nerds.
Do you think THAT can stop Allah?
We have to do much better. Science has to co-opt the spirit. IMHO Robert M. Pirsig succeeded in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.
Report thisBy Gregory Wonderwheel, October 30, 2006 at 5:00 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Thanks Mirza A. Beg, You are not alone in seeing the foolishness of Harris diatribe. All your comments are well taken.
Report thisBy Mirza A. Beg, October 27, 2006 at 8:21 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Dear Friends:
I do not resent one bit any criticism that is leveled against the behavior of many Muslims, particularly in the middle-east. I am one of the strongest critics. I have written many articles of wonton killings in Iraq and other parts of the Muslim world. I have written about Darfur. Most of these articles are published on some on-line journals, some India and some Muslim Magazines, and occasionally in the US papers. For some reason they never publish my articles criticizing Muslims, perhaps then those who want to say that they can not find Muslims taking a stand can justify them selves.
I don not contest some of the accusations in this article and the knowledge of the person who has posted it, because I have written some thing similar. How ever no one can educate a person who refuses to be educated. The prevalent attitude of “I know the truth and do not confuse me with facts.” is pervasive not only among the rightwing Armageddon seeking Christians, which is the dominant political force in the US these days but also among the masquerading liberals.
I do take exception with some of the statements.
1. While castigating the parliaments of the Muslim Countries, and they should be castigated, did the author remember that the US congress passed a sense of the congress resolution, that it did not need to because Bush was given all the signals to Israel to destroy Lebanon. Congress passed the resolution supporting the destruction of Lebanon only three months ago – 99 to 1 in the Senate and 4018 to 8 in the House. The bigots on the Muslim world side only see this and not their own behavior just as the bigots on this side do not see there own murderous impulses.
2. The criticism of the sectarian killing and the cartoon controversy is quite justified, and I have written about it. But the mirror image of the bigots on the other side also only see the American invasion based on lies supported by more than 70 percent of the US population at the time, liberals included. The surge in the opposition to the war is because we are not winning and are mired in a quagmire, not because it was brought about by a Christian President who takes order from the Biblical version of God and not because it was immoral.
3. He asks for Tibetan Buddhists suicide bomber or Christian Palestinian Suicide bombers. This is a typical method of bigotry to express it self, build a straw man. Modern suicide bombing wave stared in Sri Lanka of the idyllic Sirandeep fame and is still going on; I guess this ignorance will not permit him to know that. The 30 year old war there is between Hindu Tamils (about 25% in the north and the majority Buddhists. More suicide bombing took place there than all others combined with the exception of last year in Iraq. Among the Palestinians, the original attacks on the international passengers were carried out by PLFP organized by a Christian physician George Habash. Palestinian Christians are constantly ignored and the Palestinian struggle is painted as if there are no Christians opposed to Israelis except when this point has to be made. Suicide bombing where the perpetrator kills himself), where innocent people are victims are reprehensible, but by selective condemnation he seems to condone the Homicide bombing (where the perpetrator makes sure only others are killed), that is by 1000 pound smart bombs on densely populated centers. If he gathers the statistics he world find ten times more innocent people have been killed by Israeli and American homicide bombings.
4. Talking of nuclear weapons, I have always been against it and hope that conditions will be created that countries do not go for it. But there is only one country while violating test ban treaty and developing more sophisticated bunker busting small nuclear devices losses the any moral grounds for preaching to others. That country also happens to be the only country that has used nuclear bomb on human beings not once but twice, within three days, and still can not accept the guilt and keeps coming up with inane excuses, (to the rest of the world), particularly for the bombing of Nagaski.
5. He quotes Quran that he does not know any thing about, the sad part is either he knows even less about the Old Testament, or being what he is he can not see the passages in Deuteronomy and Numbers.
This does not elevate Islam to a better level. But it does show what the intent of the author is, while he claims to condemn all religious bigotry. This bigot of what ever variety he is, he claims to be looking for Muslims moderates. I only hope first he finds the bigot in himself to curb, then he will have easy time finding Muslim moderate.
Had he written to me privately I probably would not have answered, but since it is written for an obvious propaganda purposes, on a forum of decent and educated friends, I felt the need to answer. There are many terrible things going on this world that need to be, not only criticized but actively resisted. Criticism of Islamic countries or Muslim behavior is absolutely legitimate, and I can post for those who may be really interested many articles (at least a dozen), but such masquerading liberals make Pat Robertson look distinctly ultra liberal.
I am sad that this network is becoming propaganda organ for the bigots masquerading as liberals. Sad regards,
Mirza
Report thisBy Alexa, September 21, 2006 at 10:07 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Hello, nice site look this:
http://project-voyeur.autosib.com ]project voyeur[/URL]
http://voyeur.autosib.com “ ]voyeur[/url]
http://free-voyeur.autosib.com “ ]free voyeur[/url]
End ^) See you
Report thisBy James Joiner, September 19, 2006 at 11:01 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Just a note first! I do not trust the so called Islamists who in reality will turn out to be the majority of Islam. any more than I trust Bush.
Bush has done to Christianity and America what he is accusing the so called Islamists of doing to Islam. We have perverted unbridled religiosity on both sides of this so called war on terror. Read the following if you please and you will understand why Bush is going after them, The format of excuses, and the way this is going to turn out.
Religious wars are the longest and the dirtiest and this will be the worst. Please read on!
In your face world! with the entire world against him, with obvious failure, we must stop him!
Bush is facing growing international skepticism over his policies for Iran and Iraq. He addresses world leaders at a time when his administration is confronted by an array of foreign policy woes and at home by a Democratic challenge to wrest control of Congress from his fellow Republicans.
His speech today to the 192-nation General Assembly will focus on his vision for Middle East democracy, a source of doubt in many world capitals given unrelenting violence in Iraq three years after a U.S.-led invasion toppled Saddam Hussein. Bush’s speech to the UN today is expected to highlight his democracy push in the Middle East, a strategy some of Washington’s foes in the region see as a pretext for bullying countries it opposes.
“He will have very concrete suggestions about the path forward for realizing his vision of freedom,” an administration official said.
But Bush’s comments will also be a reminder of the foreign policy challenges he faces. U.S. forces remained bogged down in Iraq, a war increasingly unpopular with the American public, and Baghdad’s nascent government is struggling for control.
Lebanon’s fragile ruling coalition, once hailed by Bush as a democratic success story, was severely weakened by the month-long Israel-Hizbollah war.
Critics say Bush’s democracy campaign backfired in the Palestinian territories, where the Islamist group Hamas won elections and is now under U.S.-led diplomatic isolation. President George W. Bush faced growing international skepticism over his policies for Iran and Iraq as he arrived in New York on Monday for a U.N. General Assembly session. http://in.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type =worldNews&storyID=2006-09-19T004511Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_ 0_India-268198-1.xml He doesn’t care & for a reason!
N. K. Afghanistan, China, Russia, it’s building thanks to Bush’s ignorance and new world order!
I ignoring the reality of the ever growing (thanks to Bush, summit of the Non-Aligned Movement amongst everything else, must stop or we are in trouble! The meeting was held in Havana and ended with delegates agreeing a final statement. The BBC reported that the meeting now consists of 118 countries, mostly from the developing world.
The delegates representing almost two-thirds of all the countries in the world gave their approval to a document which spells out the points they agree on.
There is strong condemnation of Israel’s recent intervention in Lebanon, a call for the United Nations to be more representative of smaller nations, support for Iran’s nuclear energy plans and implicit criticism of much of US foreign policy.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/17/11531/3390 He just does not care about the horror he is creating in the middle east and following is why!
From 9/11 he has been following a plan. Fighting terrorism was not it. It was just the reason he needed to attack Iraq and start to implement his new middle east and world order. Please read the following and you will understand everything.
9/11 was Bush’s pearl harbor. Problem is, Bush is no FDR and has squirreled away any sympathy the world had for us.
Now let me say something I have repeated many times over the years. In after sight you may agree, let me know!
As you may remember, Bush was looking for something to happen that would put the country and the world behind what he already had plans to do. 9/11 gave him that something.
He then used the excuse of 9/11 to attack Iraq and unsettle the middle east guaranteeing the loss of Afghanistan, Iraq, and the entire middle east. He did all this so he could further his idea of a new middle east and world order. Of course lying all the while and whipping up as much support and frenzy as he could in the media and minds he controls.
At this point it behooves him to continue to ignore reality and continue to whip up a frenzy so he can continue staying the course in order to further prosecute his new middle east and world order.
We are all shamelessly being used so Bush can follow his plan for new order. I wrote this 3 years ago but it is more obvious today. Let me know what you think? I won’t get any deeper but it gets worse from here. http://www.anaveragepatriot.com/downloads/Manuscript2.pdf
It is up to us to stop this madness! We must stop this! We have got to put an end to this starting in November! We must take away his absolute power because by his original plan this can only end one way and it’s getting closer and it has to according to Bush’s plan to implement new world order he must first take on the world and we are getting there.
Report thisIn closing , if you have already looked at the preceding manuscript I want you to remember the already fragile state of the planet. I ask you to keep Al Gore’s Inconvenient truth in mind and following is the dire choice being ignored right now and the consequences of making the wrong one as we are letting Bush lead us to. We must stop it! http://anaverageamericanpatriot.blogspot.com/2006/08/g rowing-world-situation-has-larger.html
James Joiner
Gardner, Ma
http://www.anaveragepatriot.com
By rob, September 19, 2006 at 4:18 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I dare you to blatantly and easily and with your upfront style to discuss FACTS about the jewish mindset and ideology(i.e we are all goyims)as you do when it comes to Islam and Muslims. I KNOW you can not!
Report thisBy Ian, August 7, 2006 at 6:23 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Blueboy (and, in a moment, Kiriakos):
Boy - and atheists accuse believers of being “literalists!” LOL. Okay, so maybe there aren’t “800 exhortations in the Old Testament to kill non-believers.” The point was simply that there are more such passages in the Old Testament than in the Qur’an: whether it is two times as many or three times as many or more was never my point.
You then talk about a “qualitative difference,” in that “The Qur’an is being interpreted to justify murderous acts globally, whereas the Old Testament is not.”
I certainly cannot disagree with you here. I do note two things, however. First, if you want to change the “focus” of your comment - i.e., that it is not the quantitative number of passages in either text that is relevant, but rather the intent and/or “applicability” of those passages - that is fine with me; but that is not what you seemed to mean when you offered your original quote.
Second, the operative phrase in your new approach is “being interpreted to justify.” Again, I cannot disagree. But this would seem to suggest - correctly, I might add - that the intent and/or applicability of the “offending” passages (or at least most of them) is not necessarily what is currently being “interpreted” by narrow-minded mullahs and imams.
Despite my nitpicks (LOL), on the whole I agree with your comment.
Re “two wrongs do not make a right,” it was not my intention to offer a tit-for-tat. I was simply pointing out that it is, unfortunately, in the nature of “religion” (and, if we are to be intellectually honest, political systems as well...) to be “hijackable” by strong-willed extremists.
Re not addressing certain of your points, if I do not do so I give you leave to take that as my tacit agreement with those points. LOL.
Re the cite from Tim Rutten, although I dislike and somewhat disagree with the phrase “permeates the Islamic world,” I completely agree with the rest of his statement, which I thank you for as I can now cite it to others.
Kiriakos:
Setting aside your blatant insensitivity (if not outright hostility) against people of faith, you say that “Christianity has a history with pretty much the same defects that Islam is showing us today.”
You are either being deliberately provocative or willfully ignorant. I think blueboy’s comment that the murderous actions of Judaism are qualitatively different from those of Islam would have to apply to Christianity as well: the evils perpetrated during the Crusades and Inqusition were specifically targeted at Jews (and, to a lesser extent, Muslims), while the fundamentalist extremists of Islam target ANYONE AND EVERYONE who is not Muslim - not just Jews, but Christians, Hindus, even atheists.
As well, the last Crusade occurred almost 700 year ago. Can you point to any action by Christians since then that shows the “same defects” as radical Islam? Have you ever heard of a Christian suicide bomber? The question is rhetorical.
You also say, “...some of Christianity’s worst ideas have sort of waned...” As noted above, the last Crusade was almost 700 years ago. “Sort of waned?!” I would say they have all but disappeared. As well, it is intellecutally dishonest to speak of Christianity’s “worst ideas” without considering some of its best - Christianity is responsible for the creation and building of more orphanages, hospitals, schools, universities and community centers (among other things) than any other faith - and those socio-political movements in which it either took the lead or was in the forefront, including the abolitionist movement, the suffrage movement, the child labor movement, the civil rights movement, and the anti-Vietnam War movement, among many others.
Finally, you say, “It just doesn’t matter much - any religion, if it becomes popular enough, will be able to morph into a sysem of ignorance, violence, slavery and oppression, just like any top-down, don’t-ask-questions system.”
As noted above, I agree that religion - like any “top-down” belief system, including a socio-political one - is inherently hijackable by strong-willed extremists. And whether it is Islam or the government of the United States, this is obviously a bad thing. But I disagree with your tacit assumption that we should simply “throw out the baby with the bathwater.” Even were I an atheist (and I was for my first 20 years), I would no more want to do away with faith and religion than I would want to do away with representative democracy - even when it doesn’t work properly.
Peace.
Report thisBy kiriakos, August 7, 2006 at 1:24 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I do not expect the ignorance and intolerance engendered by all of the world’s religions to end in my lifetime. But at least there is a better than average chance among the western democracies to choose to overcome religious jingoism and nationalism without fear of being stoned to death. So it’s up to us in Europe and the US and a handful of other modern countries to lead the way, to begin by getting real about ALL religions - they are systems of ignorance that are all more or less equally at fault for the kind of hatreds that are making life miserable across the globe right now.
One of the first steps is to stop voting for idots who believe fairy tales from the Bible are infallible truth. It should be a litmus test: SAMPLE CAMPAIGN QUESTION: ARE YOU THAT STUPID, CANDIDATE BUSH? OK, YOU ARE TOO STUPID TO BE PRESIDENT.
Another useful idea is to admit that Christainity has a history with pretty much the same defects that Islam is showing us today. We are a little out of sync, and some of Christianity’s worst ideas have sort of waned while Islam’s idiotic spasms of violence and ignorance are reallly on parade right now, but it just doesn’t matter much - any religion, if it becomes popular enough, will be able to morph into a system of ignorance, violence, slavery, and oppression, just like any top-down, don’t-ask-questions sytem.
Which sugggests another good idea: learn to lead at least yourself. Do not follow. Question authority, question it even more if they tell you to have faith in something that cannot be proved.
Report thisBy Blueboy1938, August 7, 2006 at 11:09 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Ian:
It seems a little unlikely to me that there are as many as 800 exhortations in the Old testament to kill non-believers, but I defer to your scholarship. However, what we are really talking about is a qualitative difference: The Qur’ran is being interpreted to justify murderous acts globally; whereas the Old Testament is not. To say that there are Christian fundamentalists taking political positions antithetical to some groups and that Christianity was hijacked during the Crusades and Inquisition, and you might as well add the pogroms in czarist Russia and the conquest of the Americas, is beside the point. Two wrongs do not make a right. Whole populations were at least passively supportive of these atrocities at the time and made up a very large percentage of the actual numbers of Christians existing at that time. Every Christian who came to Central and South America either actively participated in the genocide of native populations or benefited therefrom.
I noticed that you did not address the indictment of the Muslim physician regarding the pretty universal effort to subjugate and even kill women. That doesn’t seem to me to be a minority excercise, as whole countries, such as Saudi Arabia, do so today.
Tim Rutten eloquently addressed the intellectual divide between mainstream Western thought and conduct and that of contemporary Islam in this exerpt from his LA Times piece of Febrary 4, 2006, which echos your thoughts regarding the responsibility of moderate Muslim clerics:
“The West’s current struggle with a murderous global Sunni Muslim insurgency and the threat of a nuclear-armed theocracy in Iran makes it clear that it’s no longer possible to overlook the culture of intolerance, hatred and xenophobia that permeates the Islamic world. The hard work of rooting those things out will have to be done by honest Muslim leaders and intellectuals willing to retrace their tradition’s steps and do the intellectual heavy lifting that participation in the modern world requires. They won’t be helped, however, if Western governments continue to pander to Islamic sensitivity while looking away from violent Islamic intolerance. They won’t be helped by European diplomats and officials who continue to ignore the officially sanctioned hate regularly directed at Jews by the Mideast’s government-controlled media, while commiserating with Muslims offended by a few cartoons in the West’s free news media.”
Here are a few other sources, better qualified than I, which reinforce Mr. Harris’ thesis that, if not you, then others might benefit from:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ ID=38614
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp
http://www.muslimhope.com/IslamWarlikeOrPeaceful.htm
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=2006080501 5119AAINUD6
http://www.ethicalatheist.com/docs/islam_infidels.html
http://www.nmhschool.org/tthornton/mehistorydatabase/m uhammad_and_early_islamic_perio.htm
http://www.nmhschool.org/tthornton/mehistorydatabase/i slamic_conquests_632.htm
And in answer to an early post declaring that Hitler was not a Christian:
Report thishttp://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler-myths.htm#myth1
http://www.nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm
By Ian, August 6, 2006 at 5:59 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Blueboy:
You said, “If you mean that there are ‘five times more’ murderous passages in the Bible than the four I quoted from the Qur’an, that’s 20. I only gave four for sake of space and reader patience, there are at least 200 ‘kill the infidel’ passages remaining that I didn’t quote.”
No, you missed my point. If there are “200” more such passages in the Qur’an, then there are STILL five times more than that in the Old Testament (okay, maybe four times more…). The point being that, as a percentage of the total text of the book, the Old Testament has far more passages of this nature than the Qur’an.
You then say, “Furthermore, whatever the Qur’an actually says, even you must admit there are many Muslim clerics inciting their ‘peaceful flocks’ to kill Jews wherever they find them, along with Americans and any other stray non-Muslims they happen to come across.”
Yes, and there are many Christian clerics inciting their ‘peaceful flocks’ (though perhaps not as “directly” as Muslim clerics) to bash gays, shoot abortion providers, and condemn anyone who is not pro-Bush, pro-war, etc. as “unpatriotic” and “aiding the terrorists” – which, believe me, will eventually lead to violence and murder among our own.
What I am getting at is that ANY faith, religion or belief system can be “hijacked” by a comparatively small but vocal group of “fundamentalists” with specific, narrow agendas. We saw Christianity so hijacked during the Crusades and the Inquisition, and we are now seeing the hijacking of Islam. However, see my next response.
You said, “Of course there may be many Muslims who do not actually want to personally kill Jews, etc..”
And this is where your stereotyping fails. Because just as the number of Christians who actually engaged in or supported the Crusades, Inquisition, etc. was miniscule in comparison to the total number of Christians worldwide, so too the number of Muslim clerics and their followers who are engaged in radical fundamentalism – and the violence, murder and terror that it brings – is miniscule compared to the number of Muslims worldwide, the vast majority of whom simply want to be left alone to express their faith privately and quietly. The only reason it SEEMS otherwise is because it is the smaller group of fundamentalists who hold the “public eye” (i.e., dominate the media), just as the reason most people immediately assume that everyone who self-proclaims as “Christian” must be a member of the “Christian Right” – despite the fact that the majority of Christians in the U.S. (to say nothing of worldwide) do NOT subscribe to the views of the “Christian Right” – is because the “Christian Right” dominates the media.
In this regard, the REALITY is that the VAST MAJORITY of those of every faith – Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, et al – are NOT involved in the “extreme wing” of their faith, do not support that extreme wing, and are happy to quietly and privately hold and express their faith.
You then add, “But thousands rallied in Baghdad just the other day screaming to do so [kill Jews and bomb Israel into oblivion].”
Yes, but MILLIONS of others did NOT. If you cannot keep things in perspective, you only add to the problem.
Finally, you say, “While you are quite correct that taking things [in sacred texts] out of context is dangerous, try telling that to the mullahs who preach hate and jihad.”
I agree with you, but that is a job for moderate Muslims. I am too busy trying to get the so-called “Christian Right” to see that many of its positions are unloving, unforgiving, limited to “hot button issues” (abortion, homosexuality, gay marriage, stem cell research, etc.), and ultimately not in keeping with the ministry of the person they claim as their leader (Jesus), who preached love, peace, humility, forgiveness, compassion, patience, charity, selflessness, service, justice and truth – none of which the “Christian Right” seem to have very much of, less an abundance of.
As for “denigrating my admittedly feeble understanding of Islam,” it was not my intention to be denigrating, and I apologize if that is how I came off. Rather, I am simply sick and tired of people who talk about Islam and cite the Qur’an, and yet have never actually read it – ALL of it – so that they have a legitimate foundation from which to opine. This is true of far too many pundits, talking heads and others who dominate the airwaves and editorial and op-ed pages with uninformed and insupportable tripe, regurgitating what they read and hear from everyone else, despite the fact that few, if any of them, have ever bothered to read the Qur’an so they can truly claim to know what they are talking about.
Peace.
Report thisBy Blueboy1938, August 5, 2006 at 10:35 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Well, thanks for the sharp rap on the knuckles, Schoolmaster Ian. However, perhaps you should just re-read Mr. Harris’ piece. If you mean that there are “five times more” murderous passages in the Bible than the four I quoted from the Qur’ran, that’s 20. I only gave four for sake of space and reader patience, there are at least 200 “kill the infidel” passages remaining that I didn’t quote. Furthermore, whatever the Qur’ran actually says, even you must admit there are many muslim clerics inciting their “peaceful flocks” to kill Jews whereever they find them, along with Americans, and any other stray non-Muslims they happen to come accross. The Danes, as I recall, were the ones to die du jour after those rather amusing and pretty tame cartoons came out that they were ranting about.
Of course there may be many Muslims who do not actually want to personally kill Jews, etc., and bomb Israel into oblivion, but thousands rallied in Bhagdad just the other day screaming to do so. Yes, Ian, all signs of a very “peaceful Islam.” Yeah, right! While you are quite correct that taking things out of context is dangerous, try telling that to the mullahs who preach hate and jihad (not the self-inspired, quest kind, either)? A female Muslim physician has eloquently stated that the Islamic fundamentalists only incidently want to wage war of cultural annihilation against (mainly) the west, they want to drag Islam and anyone living in a predominately Muslim country back to what she said was the “Dark Ages.” My guess is, Brother Ian, that she has read the entire Qur’ran at least once and is actually living with the hell Islamic fundamentalists are creating for women: subjugating, stifling, deaccessing from education, and, yes, even killing them. How in any god’s name can anyone be so benighted as to call such murder “honor killings”?
Now, if you want to fill in the missing parts that neutralize even the few passages of hate and murderous exhortation that I quoted, feel free to do so. Aside from denigrating my admittedly feeble understanding of Islam, you have failed completely to do so, so far.
Report thisBy Ian, August 5, 2006 at 6:23 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
To Blueboy1938:
You cite a handful of passages from the Qur’an which speak to killing, etc., and conclude: “Well, I think that pretty much lays to rest the contention that Islam is a religion of peace.” You are incorrect on two counts.
First, just as the so-called “Christian Right” (which, like the Moral Majority before it, is neither...) takes Scripture out of context to support narrow, unloving, unforgiving and ultimately un-Christian positions, you are taking these passages out of the contexts in which they appear. This is not to say that they could ever by construed as “nice.” But you cannot simply lift a passage out of context and say, “Hey - look what THIS says!”
Second, and far more importantly, there are at least FIVE TIMES as many passages like the ones you cite from the Qur’an in the Old Testament - passages where God tells the Israelites to kill and murder everyone (including women and children), and usurp or burn cities. Are you prepared to call Judaism a “violent” religion?
I have read the Qur’an - the entire Qur’an - twice, and am currently on my third reading. So I can tell you of a certainty that, overall, Islam IS a religion of peace, community, brotherhood, charity and “internal (spiritual) struggle” - which is the PRIMARY meaning of “jihad,” as it appears in about 75% of cases.
Rather than simply using a search engine to seek out particular words or phrases, you might want to read the book to see what it actually says. This way, you will not be taking passages out of context in order to fit your predetermined ideas of what Islam is about.
For the record, I am an evangelical minister who has studied comparative religion for over two decades.
Peace.
Report thisBy Nick, August 4, 2006 at 8:39 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Regards by Very well job here with that website! Congratulations, I love it very much. I really appreciate your work here.
Report this<a href="http://phentermineaad.blogspot.com/"not click </a> http://phentermineaad.blogspot.com/
http://phentermineaad.blogspot.com/ Warm regards Nick!
By Guitarsandmore, July 24, 2006 at 12:34 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Humans are social animals and need each other. We suffer and atrophy when alone (too much) just as we grow and thrive when we can interact with others. This becomes plainly obvious when you have children. You can just see it happen.
Church can provide a real sense of community where there is none in your life. It is still your own responsibility to decide what you are going to do with your life. Just as it is your responsibility to keep the church on track. If your church is preaching hate and extreme prejudice then interrupt the behavior. The Church (any church) needs at least as much monitoring and control from the membership as does our country and it’s leaders.
Remember, we’re not here for them. They’re here for us.
Report thisBy Blueboy1938, July 23, 2006 at 11:48 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Fido, I went to the site you mentioned. Searches for “virgins,” “houris,” “infidels,” “beheading,” “retribution,” were fruitless.
However, a concordance of the Quran came up with the following:
“And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.” 002:191
“So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah’s Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives).” 047:004
“Remember your Lord inspired the angels with the message: “I am with you: Give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: Smite you above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.” 008:012
“When at length they provoked Us, We exacted retribution from them, and We drowned them all.” 043:055
“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war; but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: For God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. “ 009:005
Well, I think that pretty much lays to rest the contention that Islam is a religion of peace and the idea that Islam has not indulged in forced conversion. Nice to know that, once everyone has converted, Allah will be merciful. There were, admittedly, a number of references from Fido’s linked site to explanations that 9/11 was not Islamic terrorism. However, all the hijackers were Muslims and the ones on United Flight 93 were heard praising Allah on the way down. Granted, selective citations and distorted interpretations may not completely explain what gave rise to the motivation of suicide bombers and pilots, but we just don’t see Buddhist, Hindu, Shinto, Christian, Zoroastrian, or Jewish suicide bombers, now, do we?
Report thisBy Anonymous, July 22, 2006 at 1:54 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Update #2: Cilck here for a Truthdig primer on who has, and who hasn’t re-published the controversial cartoons
“Click” is misspelled.
Report thisBy Gregory Wonderwheel, July 19, 2006 at 7:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Haris says, “It is as though a portal in time has opened, and the Christians of the 14th century are pouring into our world.”
I look at it as a growth curve. Islam is 500 years younger than Christianity. What was Christianity like 500 years ago? Burning people at the stake and other forms of brutal state-church control of the population for the benefit of the church. I expect that Islam as a religion will mature and in 500 years will look back at this time as something shameful as Christians should look back at the Inquistion.
The “problem with Islam” is the same problem that every religion, even Buddhism, has when it becomes identified with state (i.e. worldly) power. Only recognizing the humanity of pluralist society and the enlightenment inherent in the doctrine of separation of church and state can lead to societies that do not commit the kinds of hypocritical political responses that now occur in every state heavily influenced by a single religious view whatever that religious view is.
Report thisBy Inbal, July 7, 2006 at 9:39 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Mr. Harris,
You state that “It is not often that one sees the most powerful countries on Earth achieve new depths of weakness, moral exhaustion and geopolitical stupidity with a single gesture. This was appeasement at its most abject”.
Perhaps it is not often, but it happened not long ago; pls. see: Winston S. Churchill, The Second World War, vol. 1 The Gathering Storm, and you’ll see how the most powerful countries of that time fell victim to Nazi treachery and intimidations. Lamentably appeasement did not save Europe. Quite to the contrary, a war with terrible consequences and immense human tragedy was a direct result of that shameful appeasement.
Report thisBy anonymous, June 28, 2006 at 10:44 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Pick up the Hebrew Bible or the Torah, or whatever the Politically Correct term is. If you simply look at the horror that is on the pages in front of you, you can see that the Israelites are the inventors of terrorism and imperialist genocide against “idolators” (aka infidels). Islam and fundamentalist Christianity are merely immitators of that trickled down curse on humanity and cultural development.
And for some reason it is just unconsciously accepted that Israel, unlike any other nation in the post colonial world has some indisputable claim to do the same now.
If you dispute this, and say that Israel is simply to protect the Jews from another holocaust, consider this: “The” holocaust was only one of many and half the victims of this one holocaust were non jews. Further Stalin killed 4x as many people in concentration camps, and gee then there’s Pol Pot. . . .Then there’s the Armenian genocide which was hysterically barred by Jewish groups from inclusion in the Holocaust Museum. The list goes on, but the point is this: WHY doesn’t the suffering of non jews matter just as much as that of the “chosen” people?
Maybe we should get to the source when we are rightly frightened of religion being used as a weopen of terrorism and murder.
Report thisBy uchiha, June 25, 2006 at 1:42 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: Will, Comment #4155
Hey Will; Sam quotes countless violent passages from the Koran in “The End of Faith” - I thought the list would never end when I read it…
Report thisBy mark t, April 28, 2006 at 7:35 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
To all of you going on about the inherently violent nature of Islam, please read the work of Nawal El Saadawi. She could use more support from us, and less anti-Muslim rants.
Report thisTo Guitars, try learning about unitarian universalism--much less weird stuff will be taught to your daughter (and why don’t you teach in the sunday school you’re taking her to, if you’re worried about what they’re teaching your child?).
Also UUs and UCC have great sex ed programs.
And to R.A. Earl--I advise you to get over your dangerous dependency on food, water, and the internet. If you ‘need’ something, it’s clearly a crutch.
By greeseyparrot, March 7, 2006 at 11:23 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: #4081, nice post Chantz, however one quibble, the etymology of the term you chose to describe what it is to “kill over a cartoon”, has as its root the supposed effect of Earth’s satellite (Luna=Moon) on one’s sanity, rather than any relation to the bird (the loon) known for its lovely haunting call.
Report thisBy R. A. Earl, February 28, 2006 at 12:32 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Sorry to hear, Guitars, in your #4361 posting, that you “need” your church people.
I don’t disagree that observing what others do and say might, on occasion, be helpful in confirming or ordering your own thoughts and notions. But I guess where you and I part company is over the “need” issue.
As soon as you “need” someone or something, I believe you’re in trouble. To “want” them or it in your life is fine but to “need” them implies a dependency which is another word for crutch. And who needs crutches? Lame people, of course. Whether it be a broken leg or a broken sense of self - what’s right and wrong… it’s still busted.
As soon as you see yourself in the “need” mode, you are wide open to manipulation. You “need” them so you do whatever is required to maintain that relationship. Automatically YOU are no longer the real YOU… you become what THEY require you to be.
When a whole nation is “needy” you get an entire society that’s playing games… pretending this or that… politically correct so as to not offend… and no one BEING HONEST. It isn’t long after that that NO ONE knows what TRUTH IS!
But as Jack Nicholson said in that movie… YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH. I find most people simply can’t or won’t rely on their own view of life… they “need” to be spoonfed some already prepared “way” (religion is a way). It’s very sad.
Report thisBy GuitarsandMore, February 28, 2006 at 1:30 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Yes, it is important to learn to think for yourself. We need our alone time.
Humans are also social animals and we learn and grow in groups. If you have ever tried to raise a child you will see this right away. Read Hillary Clinton’s book “ It takes a Village”.
You really do need the teachers and the other students, the aunts and uncles, grandma and grandpa, the people at the store, your neighbors, and the people at church. The people at church can be a good resource for information that you might use to help raise a child, cook a meal, live healthier. You might be surprised at how many things you can learn from the people at church that have nothing to do with religion at all.
That’s what I mean when I say love each other. HELP each other get through this thing called life in the best way possible.
My kid bloomed like a flower when I took her to preschool and kindergarten. She just loves church too.
I am always prepared to give the people at church a hard time about their crazy beliefs and their weird ways, but I know I need those people.
Report thisBy R. A. Earl, February 24, 2006 at 2:00 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
In #4155 Will asks: “Can you produce more evidence as to the inherantly violent nature of Islam by reference to the scriptures etc?”
I’m not Will, but may I suggest “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)” by Robert Spencer, Regenery Publishing, Aug 2005. Some accuse the author of cherry picking passages to support his biases but at least he documents his choices with chapter and verse quotations from both the Koran and the Bible.
In #4197, GuitarsandMore wrote: “Join a religious organization and try to love one another. If we don’t learn how to love one another we are all going to die.”
I have a better suggestion: How about NOT joining ANY group and learn to THINK FOR YOURSELF? This “fetish” we humans have to clump together in mind-numbing groups like piss in cat litter boggles my mind. Almost from birth we’re trained and conditioned to be groupies… join the crowd… be a team player… participate and volunteer and whatever you do, don’t get a reputation as being a LONER! That’s what our society teaches… and I think it’s a load of crap!
How about connecting YOURSELF in YOUR OWN WAY to the Cosmos… think about it for a moment… everything you’ve read and heard has been produced by other humans WHO HAVE NO MORE RELIABLE NOTION OF WHAT LIFE’S ALL ABOUT THAN YOU DO, no matter what they claim… so why follow self-styled leaders like a bunch of sheep when they don’t know where they’re going either?
Trust yourself… not some bogus religious claptrap. If you can’t, then you get what you deserve.
Report thisBy GuitarsandMore, February 22, 2006 at 11:14 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
If you want to learn more here are some free web sites you can jump into and read.
http://www.afsc.org/
http://www.mennoniteusa.org/
There are some 300 million people in the United States and out of that group there are some 800 hate groups that commit hate crimes. The Ku Klux Klan for example hates black people and used to kill them. The skinheads hate Jewish people and who knows what they do to them. Throughout the world there are hate groups of all kinds and different races and cultures.
There are also religious groups who are dedicated to love; at least that’s what they are trying to do. Some of them may be misguided and perhaps a little off the track. You stand a better chance of going into one of these groups and helping them remember how to love than joining a hate group.
Please don’t join a hate group. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Join a religious organization and try to love one another. If we don’t learn how to love one another we are all going to die.
Report thisBy Will, February 22, 2006 at 10:01 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Sam,
Very interesting read. Only objection to raise right now is your appeal to ‘basic human goodness’ as I am not sure this isn’t borderline ethnocentricity. Perhaps you can work around it as it’s only a fringe point you make by using it.
Can you produce more evidence as to the inherantly violent nature of Islam by reference to the scriptures etc? It would be appreciated by those of us who fundamentally agree with you and your argumentation.
Regards,
Report thisWill.
By Clifford Weinstein, February 22, 2006 at 9:28 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Take a pill = get well
Report thisReligion = always correct
I can take an asperin and dispell a headache; and if I too believe in supernatural,omnipotent ruler ; I need no asperin,because I don’t need to think or take responsibility for my actions as long as I preface those actions as religious . The masses choose to believe in magic and superstition,accept the ancient ramblings authored by persons bent on controlling the world and all that inhabit it; leave choice and free thought out of their reality. I will not take much notice of them. I understand them. I am just as prepared to strike them down if they attempt to attract me. Religion = darkness
By R. A. Earl, February 22, 2006 at 8:41 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I guess what I find most disturbing is the lack of CREDIBLE information about Islam & Muslims (and Christianity and Christians, for that matter).
I suppose I should bite the bullet, so to speak, buy an authorized copy of the Koran and the Bible and read each, cover to cover, and come to my own conclusions. Sorry… I don’t have that much life left in me.
I know a little more about Christianity than about Islam but both so far seem to be DELIBERATELY impenetrably dense and contradictory compilations of codswallop… almost as if either “God/Allah” hasn’t a clue how to communicate with “His children,” or his prophets/messengers/writers/clerics/publicists and other assorted lobbyists and spokespeople have just badly mangled their part. Whatever, the end result, in my view, is an obfuscation of the highest order.
You’d think that given the incredible amount of material that’s been accumulated on both these “philosophies of life” someone would have by now compiled an UNBIASED and ACCURATE “executive summary” of the fundamental tenets of each.
In any case, if anyone knows of such documents, please post titles and authors here. I’m not really expecting an answer because I strongly suspect that BOTH religions have been carefully crafted BY “MEN” so that any inherent meaning is left to individual INTERPRETATION, thus assuring forevermore ongoing confusion and conflict and providing justification for MILLIONS of “clerics” to live in grand style shooting off their mouths to control the ignorant masses as they see fit.
Report thisBy GuitarsandMore, February 21, 2006 at 9:40 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Based on information found in the Wikipedia – The Free on line Encyclopedia I can only conclude that the Middle East made significant contributions to the field of Mathematics as long ago as 2000 BC. Don’t be too quick to judge an entire civilization by the acts of a few. To say that these people are worthless is a gross exaggeration. Angry yes but worthless no. They must have been calm enough to think at one time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_math
Report thisBy Ayatollah Khomeini, February 21, 2006 at 6:20 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Brother Fadel,
Why do you only read the Quranic verses of mercy and do not read the verses of killing? Quran says kill, imprison! Why are you only clinging to the part that talks about mercy? Mercy is against God. The Prophet used the sword to kill people. Our Imams were quite military men. All of them were warriors. They used to wield swords; they used to kill people. We need a Khalifa who would chop hands, cut throat, stone people. In the same way that the Messenger of God used to chop hands, cut throats, and stone people. In the same way that he massacred the Jews of Bani Qurayza because they were a bunch of discontent people. If the Prophet used to order to burn a house or exterminate a tribe that was justice.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Iran/KhomeiniSpeech.htm
Report thisBy Mr. Shreds, February 21, 2006 at 10:18 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I believe that a picture is worth a thousand words. Go here for some pretty pictures of the “Religion of Peace” hard at work;
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrshreds
Report thisBy Chantz, February 21, 2006 at 9:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
It is perplexing to see so many willing to devote their existence to violence in the name of religion. Most certainly, an editorial cartoon does not warrant such outrageous behavior. After all, it is a cartoon. Offensive to some, obviously yes. But to kill over a cartoon is loonacy! Isn’t is much more productive to speak about your concerns instead of acting with fire bombings, violent riots and threats of murder? Let’s all take a collective deep breathe and begin the dialogue, just as you have done here. Thank you for allowing me to share my opinion.
Report thisBy fido, February 21, 2006 at 1:02 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
well,if you like to discover Islam go to
Report thishttp://www.islam-guide.com/
By Kate, February 20, 2006 at 5:14 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
To: Robert Bolt post on 2/13
Just found this site but enjoyed your philosophical argument (with self?) enormously. To focus on one small point: “The Caliphate was known for the spread of knowledge culture and art. Through the academic customs of Islam, many of the books and knowledge of the ancients were preserved and advanced.” However, the Caliphate, as you acknowledge was 14th century Islam.
Today, Islam is notorious for violence, ignorance, hysteria, book-burning and jihad against artists. All major cultures and religions have contributed ‘something’ towards the progress of civilization in the intervening period but Islam has not. There has been no Reformation or Enlightenment because those with power in Muslim countries consciously control and suppress their own people. This does not apply only to rulers lolling in ostentatious wealth while the illiterate majority live in poverty and ignorance. It applies too, to the ‘spiritual’ leaders, ignorant men who have read nothing apart from the rantings of a 5th century, morally questionable, human.
It is, I think, a fundamental error of Western liberal thinking to assume that ‘rational’ or logical explanation can mollify mindsets embedded in 14th century ‘absolutes’ e.g. Mohammed may not be ‘seen’ or pictured because he is not to be worshipped as an idol. Idolatory means the worship of other than GOD. Muslims should therefore riot if God is portrayed. They do not. Muslims worship Mohammed. Mohammed is not God. I fear worship and veneration of Mohammed amounts to idolatory in any logical mindset.
The few Muslims of my acquaintance are professionals - people with third level British educations. However, they are distinguished by their social ‘separateness’ which, prior to 9/11, was attributed to ‘shyness’. Today, I have come to suspect that ‘shyness’ is, in reality, a dangerous racial/religious superiority.
Muslims come from different ‘tribes’ and different regions of the world; the Islamic insistence on an all-encompassing religious, as opposed to national identity, presents as inately sinister.
Muslim dogma and indoctrination appears to remain unshaken by formal education. Again, I have listened carefully to the ‘moderates’ who disown violence; all, without exception have claimed “offence” at the cartoons; all have required ‘apology’; one in particular, a professor in a British University said: “the West cannot expect Muslims to conform to the cultural norms of Western society”. Pardon me? This is either arrogance of the most extreme form or it is total stupidity. I would question the woman’s suitablity for her present post. We, of western origin, would have no choice but conform to the ‘norms’ of Muslim society were we to visit Saudi et al.
A ‘Sunday Telegraph’ (19/02/06)poll revealed that 40% of British Muslims thought Sharia law - surely the most inhumane and archaic of all legal systems - should run in those areas of Britain where Muslims are in a majority. This aspiration is profoundly disturbing: a minority religious grouping proposes religious mini-states within the British State.
This is not a matter of Westerners believing their way of life superior. It actually is, despite all the drawbacks, superior to any society where women are stoned on suspicion of adultry; where gays are executed; where people are taught to love Mohammed so much that they willingly turn their children in firebombs. Appeasement will not stem the tide of demands heaped upon demands nor will it stop the murder and chaos Muslims claim as their right.
Western governments must take legal steps to protect their own populations. Immigrants have a duty of respect to the laws