I have
been letting thoughts about Islam, Judaism and Christianity roam
about the back recesses of my mind. In particular, comparisons
between these three religious philosophies have been plaguing me
of late. As a Christian, a Roman Catholic to be precise, as well
as a lifetime student of history, I am trying to come to grips
with some paradoxes that I cannot reconcile. The completely
inappropriate response (at least in Western eyes), to the fairly
innocuous cartoons of Islam's founder has given me pause to
reflect on the response by different societies to perceived
cultural ‘insensitivity’ and tolerance of religious diversity.
From a historical standpoint, I know that there have been periods
in Christian history that should leave us less than proud. From a
beginning as a new sect of Judaism, to the centuries when
Christians were brutalized and demonized, Christianity ascended to
the status of official religion of what would become the ‘Holy
Roman Empire’. As the dominant religion, it was a short trip
from being oppressed, to becoming the oppressor. Christianity
became intolerant of other religions, particularly Judaism and
Paganism. Institutionalized bigotry became accepted. With the rise
of Islam in the 7th Century, this antipathy was extended to
Moslems. However, because of the methods in which Islam was
spread, primarily through conquest and forced conversion, there is
arguably justification for this attitude. Later, during the
Reformation, and the subsequent establishment of Protestant
religions, hostility between the various Christian denominations
became common, and is still with us today, although to a lesser
extent.
What I find difficult to understand is the transition of the
Christian and Jewish religions from intractable dogma to a more
moderate stance of tolerance and understanding, while Islam seems
to have taken the opposite course. All three religions are based
on premises contained in the Old Testament, including the 5 Books
of the Jewish Torah. Both Christianity and Judaism have kept the
moral values contained in these tomes, but have disavowed the
extremist positions on such items as adultery, diet, adherence to
arcane rituals and restrictions, and many other areas of the Old
Testament. No longer do Christians or Jews stone adulterers to
death, imprison or execute ‘blasphemers’, or send people into
exile for violating a dietary rule. In other words, the evolution
of Western Society has allowed us to become more tolerant of both
dissent and difference. Christianity and Judaism have espoused
less violent methods of dealing with differences, and adopted the
view that religion is both sacred, and personal.
Islam, on the other hand, appears to be regressing in its views.
The rise of Wahhabism within the Muslim world has led to a more
extremist, less tolerant attitude towards non Muslims. The use of
the term “Infidel”, once rarely heard or understood by most
Westerners, is now commonly understood as a point of reference to
identify those of us who are now considered the enemies of Islam.
What has made us a perceived enemy is not our attitudes toward
Islam, nor our actions with regard to Islam. We have become the
enemy simply because we are not Moslems.
 “Infidel””
is an all encompassing term used by the extremist Moslem. It
includes all Christians and Jews, Buddhists, polytheists such as
Hindus, and the Animist and Traditional theologies such as those
found in Africa, Australia and America in their native
populations. Quite a broad spectrum to direct animosity towards.
While broadening the scope of the worlds people they consider
enemies, Islam has also taken a giant step backward with regard to
its interpretation of how God wants sinners or transgressors
treated.
Islamic Law, as now practiced in a number of countries,
includes stoning women for adultery, genital mutilation of female
children, beheading for converting from Islam to another religion,
imprisonment and torture for ‘disrespect’ toward Islam, and
death by various means for blasphemy.
While publicly calling itself the ‘Religion of Peace’, many
Moslem clerics are telling their congregants in Mosques that Jews
are the sons of pigs and apes; Christians, as the children of
whores, are not worthy of any place in society; and Polytheists
are heretics that must be exterminated. A quick comparison of two
similar events, and the reactions to them, will illustrate the
difference between Islam, and most other theologies.
How many remember during the early stages of the Palestinian
Intafada, when a large number of terrorist Palestinian gunmen
invaded the sanctuary of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem?
These thugs took over one of the holiest shrines in all of
Christendom. They even shot at Israeli soldiers from within the
Church, since they had taken their weapons with them. While
inside, they abused and intimidated the clerics trapped within,
and deliberately despoiled and debased the religious symbols
revered at this site. Defecating and urinating on relics; defacing
icons, statues and other religious artifacts brought only laughter
from these men. After a lengthy standoff, safe passage to other
countries was arranged for the terrorists, and they finally
abandoned their occupation of this shrine. The Israeli defense
forces never attacked the church, nor shot at the terrorists while
they were near the building. In other words, the Israelis
respected the Christian shrine, which the Moslems defiled. As part
of this respect, the Israelis allowed known murderers and
terrorists safe passage, to insure the safety of the Church which
most Christians consider the birthplace of the Christ, and well as
those held hostage within.
During all of this, there was no outcry for vengeance against
Moslems from any Christian sect, although all of Christianity was
insulted, belittled and disrespected by these events. Indeed, the
reaction of Christians was primarily one of patience, and
cooperation with the authorities to achieve a peaceful resolution.
Many of the Moslem criminals went to predominantly Christian
countries as part of the agreements ending the siege. To my
knowledge, there has been no retribution brought on them by any
Christians.
As a counterpoint, the false report of a Koran being mistreated at
the detainee facility at Guantanamo triggered worldwide Muslim
protests, arson, rioting, and deaths. With this response as an
example of the extremist reactions by many adherents of Islam, the
cartoon response should not have come as a surprise. The murders,
rioting, looting, arson and calls for the beheading of the Danish
cartoonists and editors who published the drawings stand in stark
contrast to the response by the West for the violations of the
Church of the Nativity. Indeed, the publications by a Danish
newspaper have resulted in the deaths of Christians in Nigeria,
and the burning of their churches. Yet, by no stretch of the
imagination, are Christian Nigerians connected in any way to the
publications that have inspired the Moslem reactions.
In another study in contrast, the terrorists and their enablers in
Iraq have repeatedly used mosques to store weapons, train killers,
assemble bombs, recruit new members, and launch attacks against
American and other coalition troops. Indeed, they often fire at
our troops from inside the mosque itself. Yet, American commanders
continue to honor the sanctity of the mosques, avoiding collateral
damage to the edifice even if this puts their troops at risk. If
a mosque is threatened by coalition forces, the clerics vow that
any action against a holy place will bring massive retribution.
Yet terrorists, who claim to be the true followers of Islam,
continue to kill fellow Moslems by the score, even going so far as
to destroy Mosques. But these offenses have yet to inspire any
significant or sustained outcry from the Moslem world.
At last count, of the 18 main areas of armed conflict in the
world, 15 of them involved Moslems. I have not read the Koran, and
have no intention of doing so. The contents of the Koran are not
relevant to any of the issues that face us today, and there is a
simple reason I say this. If the Koran authorizes the beheading
and brutal murder of defenseless people, enslavement of those
deemed unworthy, genocide against those of another religion,
forced conversion of people to Islam, the rape and murder of
children, and all the other horrors that are even now being
committed by these monsters, then Islam cannot claim to be the
religion of peace. In fact, it cannot be called a religion, but
rather a cult like movement incapable of any rational tenets.
On the other hand, if these barbarous acts are being carried out
by seemingly large numbers of Moslems in defiance of the teachings
of the Koran, then the entire Moslem community shares
responsibility for not stopping this insidious movement from
spreading evil in the name of Islam. If they don’t vigorously
and publicly take action against the beast within their faith,
they have shown that they agree with the terrorists, their
methods, and their goals. If that is the case, the Koran itself
has become irrelevant, as the proponents of Islam are ignoring
their own teachings.
I will be called intolerant for my thoughts. Many will say I am a
bigot, a racist, or that I am Islamophobic. I can’t stop the
name calling, and I won’t be drawn into debates with those who
do not know history, and cannot see what is clearly happening. As
my grandfather would say, I have been called worse names by better
people. What I would say is where is a substantiated argument
against what I have stated? And I am not referring to revisionist
history, or what happened in the 12th century. I am talking about
2006, and what is occurring now. We cannot change the past
(although some would rewrite it), but we do have control over the
present, and can influence the future. So what say you, the sons
and daughters of Islam? Are you an enabler of terrorists and their
goals, or are you indeed part of the ‘Religion of Peace’? If
the former, at least have the courage to say out loud what you
mutter in the mosque. If the latter, where are the massive
protests against the killers and the horrors they are bringing
down on the innocent?
Again, where do you stand?
|
