All of us, every single man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth were born with the same unalienable rights; to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, if the governments of the world can't get that through their thick skulls, then, regime change will be necessary.
The pictures shown are of course very troubling and they should bother anybody. But on the other hand, using such demonstrators as examples of "real" Muslims helps the extremists.
I appreciate the spirit of this site, in that I agree with taking on the jihadists. They are a cancer to Islam as well as to us. But we must not become the allies of those we wish to defeat, who all too happily would like us to help them reinforce their farcical "War on Islam" theme by depicting the extreme fringe mentality shown above as the mainstream.
Religion must of course be open to criticism. Just because religions are about matters of the heart and deeply held beliefs in the holy does not also mean that religiosity cannot be kept in check if we want a secular civil society, as your Alliance seeks. For allowing Church (or Mosque) and State will spell the final end to the Enlightenment legacy. On this point we are in strong agreement.
Hi Alex, Thanks for your thoughtful comment. Yeah, I have trouble with the idea that we are at war with Islam also. Some of the writers here at this site do think of it that way. We don't all have the same opinion. It isn't required here.
Now, as you note, religions need to be open to criticism. I would go a bit further than you on that. The reason religions need to be criticized is because, along with government, and the media, religions are among the most powerful insitutions in our society.
Therefore, criticism of religion is a must because, if it weren't allowed, then religion would be an unchecked institution able to run roughshod over all of civilization.
Sound familiar?
:)
Anyway, here's the thing. Islam needs to be criticized in an especially strong manner these days because moderate Muslims are not standing up and expressing a political voice to almost any degree.
Now, that is not to say there aren't Muslims who are political moderates. However, it is to say that Muslims who are political moderates have NO VOICE.
Think about it, can you name a single moderate Islamic political organization, media outlet, or government anywhere in the world?
I don't think there are any.
That is a terrible track record, and Muslims have to fix it, because they certainly aren't going to allow the Infidels to fix it.
I look forward to hearing your reply.
Oh, by the way, are you not hurt and frightened by the fact that we don't have any appreciable Muslim support in our War against Islamofascism? I mean, really, this ought to seriously bug us. However, we are so compfortable in our strength that we believe we are immune to the threat. We aren't immune. We must win, and if Muslims aren't going to join us in the fight, there will eventually be trouble.
Why do I say that? Because, eventually, we are going to get hit by a really terrible terrorist attack. And then what do you think the common man will think about the Islamic community which had never bothered to stand against the radicals in their midst?
It is of course troubling, this apparent lack of 'moderate' backlash against the radicals. Personally, I cannot think of any important institutions, but University of Michigan (Ann Arbor) professor Juan R.I. Cole, an Orientalist scholar, put together a list of statements from Muslim clerics who are saying things like this:
Citing the US Embassy in Jakarta (Indonesia) from 1 November 2001, the Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar, which is in Egypt, "condemn[ed] the terrorist actions of Usama bin Laden's al-Qaida organization and the Taliban regime ...";
Shi'a Ayatollah Muhammad Husain Fadlallah, likewise, issued his fatwa against UBL;
A "prominent" Pakistani clerical authority, Tahir ul Qadri, did so as well;
And Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who apparently was in the Muslim Brotherhood (Egypt) and, according to Prof. Cole, "gave a fatwa that it was a duty of Muslims to fight alongside the US in Afghanistan against al-Qaeda";
The International Review reported last year that "Spain's leading Muslim clerics have issued a religious order declaring Usama bin Ladin an apostate and to have forsaken Islam ..." etc.
Of course this is just a sampling, and it is unclear how representative it is. But I for one take a measure of comfort that our terrorist enemies are also the enemies of Islam, as President Bush himself once declared.
Once again, I appreciate your thoughtfulness. It seems to me you are a real seeker of truth. If not, you would have simply insulted us for our positions. But instead, you have patiently admonished us, and I don't blame you.
Now, here, I am sorry to give you this information, but it is the truth:
Ayatollah Muhammad Husain Fadlallah is the "spiritual leader" of Hizbollah, the terrorist organization. Here is a link:
As for Qaradawi, you see, he supports Jihad against the Infidel. And, as for "Spain's leading clerics", there is no way I could counter that. I don't know who they are.
I am sorry to say, I don't think you can even find many prominent Islamic clerics who will categorically condemn Jihad against the Infidel.
I come from an ex-communist country. Looking for moderate Muslims (be they scholars or average people) seems to me just like looking for dissidents in the Red Europe: there were, of course, some. But compared to those that openly preached communism and, more so, to those who were silent by fear / cowardice / indifference, they were too few and far between to make any real difference. That's one of the reasons this evil type of society lasted as long as it did. There are - also - some very disturbing similarities between the communist approach to several important (in my eyes) parts of the human living issues and the approach of Islam (or, that Islam that is most vocal). That is an isuuse I intend to tackle in my blog as soon as I am able to. So, as long as we have to dig the Internet to find a bunch of reasonable Muslim people in a sea of hysteric voices, I can't say Islam is a religion of peace.
More to the point, please remember the way communism crumbled: in some countries it required human sacrifice. Do we really want more human lives lost on the altar of one - any - God?
Fadlallah looked like a familiar name; didn't realize at the time that he was in that position, which is unfortunate. Hezbollah is a tricky thing to say the least, an abominable terror army bent on annihilating Jews (or in chic euphemistic language, "eliminating the Zionist regime"; compare if one called to "eliminate the Alawite regime" in Syria, for instance) at the most.
Most reasoned analysts, keeping to the facts as they best know them (I only have the most cursory awareness of these whirlwind events and the historiosocial context they has evolved from), say that Hezbollah's principal aim is to drive Israel out of its prized Sheb'aa Farms, which is claimed to be "under occupation", etc. But enough about the Hezbollah thugs.
The top post refers to Ashura, the Shi'a holy day. I have for as long as I've heard of the specific practice of self-flaggelation (quite graphic indeed) I have thought it to be ... well for lack of more sophistication, really fucked-up. Then again, Catholics drink the metaphorical blood of their Christ and take of his body with the communion wafer, right? Can't judge too harshly.
(I use the example of Catholicism -- for sake of argument, no agenda -- to make a second point, namely the analogue of the Sunn'i/Shi'a split and the Catholic/Protestant split, historically violent antagonisms there; some of the more gruesome nativist sentiments in our history were pointedly anti-Catholic, I think mirroring the virulent hatred of Shi'ites among many Sunnis, especially in the more backward societies.)
Every religion I think has its weird fetish things going for it, the Ashura example being among the more extreme.
I knew some Christian guys who went to Jerusalem and staged the final hours of Jesus' life along the Via De La Rosa. My friend played a Centurion and his brother played Christ. So, the poor Jews of Jerusalem got treated to the sight of my friend beating his brother with a whip.
So, yeah, all religions have their own strange "fetishes" as you put it.
But honestly, I've never seen anything like Ashura in any religion other than Vodun.
8 comments:
There are two disturbing things at work here.
The pictures shown are of course very troubling and they should bother anybody. But on the other hand, using such demonstrators as examples of "real" Muslims helps the extremists.
I appreciate the spirit of this site, in that I agree with taking on the jihadists. They are a cancer to Islam as well as to us. But we must not become the allies of those we wish to defeat, who all too happily would like us to help them reinforce their farcical "War on Islam" theme by depicting the extreme fringe mentality shown above as the mainstream.
Religion must of course be open to criticism. Just because religions are about matters of the heart and deeply held beliefs in the holy does not also mean that religiosity cannot be kept in check if we want a secular civil society, as your Alliance seeks. For allowing Church (or Mosque) and State will spell the final end to the Enlightenment legacy. On this point we are in strong agreement.
Hi Alex,
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. Yeah, I have trouble with the idea that we are at war with Islam also. Some of the writers here at this site do think of it that way. We don't all have the same opinion. It isn't required here.
Now, as you note, religions need to be open to criticism. I would go a bit further than you on that. The reason religions need to be criticized is because, along with government, and the media, religions are among the most powerful insitutions in our society.
Therefore, criticism of religion is a must because, if it weren't allowed, then religion would be an unchecked institution able to run roughshod over all of civilization.
Sound familiar?
:)
Anyway, here's the thing. Islam needs to be criticized in an especially strong manner these days because moderate Muslims are not standing up and expressing a political voice to almost any degree.
Now, that is not to say there aren't Muslims who are political moderates. However, it is to say that Muslims who are political moderates have NO VOICE.
Think about it, can you name a single moderate Islamic political organization, media outlet, or government anywhere in the world?
I don't think there are any.
That is a terrible track record, and Muslims have to fix it, because they certainly aren't going to allow the Infidels to fix it.
I look forward to hearing your reply.
Oh, by the way, are you not hurt and frightened by the fact that we don't have any appreciable Muslim support in our War against Islamofascism? I mean, really, this ought to seriously bug us. However, we are so compfortable in our strength that we believe we are immune to the threat. We aren't immune. We must win, and if Muslims aren't going to join us in the fight, there will eventually be trouble.
Why do I say that? Because, eventually, we are going to get hit by a really terrible terrorist attack. And then what do you think the common man will think about the Islamic community which had never bothered to stand against the radicals in their midst?
It is of course troubling, this apparent lack of 'moderate' backlash against the radicals. Personally, I cannot think of any important institutions, but University of Michigan (Ann Arbor) professor Juan R.I. Cole, an Orientalist scholar, put together a list of statements from Muslim clerics who are saying things like this:
Citing the US Embassy in Jakarta (Indonesia) from 1 November 2001, the Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar, which is in Egypt, "condemn[ed] the terrorist actions of Usama bin Laden's al-Qaida organization and the Taliban regime ...";
Shi'a Ayatollah Muhammad Husain Fadlallah, likewise, issued his fatwa against UBL;
A "prominent" Pakistani clerical authority, Tahir ul Qadri, did so as well;
And Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who apparently was in the Muslim Brotherhood (Egypt) and, according to Prof. Cole, "gave a fatwa that it was a duty of Muslims to fight alongside the US in Afghanistan against al-Qaeda";
The International Review reported last year that "Spain's leading Muslim clerics have issued a religious order declaring Usama bin Ladin an apostate and to have forsaken Islam ..." etc.
Of course this is just a sampling, and it is unclear how representative it is. But I for one take a measure of comfort that our terrorist enemies are also the enemies of Islam, as President Bush himself once declared.
Hi Alex,
Once again, I appreciate your thoughtfulness. It seems to me you are a real seeker of truth. If not, you would have simply insulted us for our positions. But instead, you have patiently admonished us, and I don't blame you.
Now, here, I am sorry to give you this information, but it is the truth:
Ayatollah Muhammad Husain Fadlallah is the "spiritual leader" of Hizbollah, the terrorist organization. Here is a link:
http://www.answers.com/topic/mohammad-hussein-fadlallah
Now, here's a link where the Sheikhs of Al-Azhar specify the rules for killing Jews:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=22221_Islamic_Scholars-_Kill_The_Jews_But_Not_Here&only
I am not able to find any info on Tahir ul Qadri.
As for Qaradawi, you see, he supports Jihad against the Infidel. And, as for "Spain's leading clerics", there is no way I could counter that. I don't know who they are.
I am sorry to say, I don't think you can even find many prominent Islamic clerics who will categorically condemn Jihad against the Infidel.
Hope to hear from you again..
Alex,
I come from an ex-communist country. Looking for moderate Muslims (be they scholars or average people) seems to me just like looking for dissidents in the Red Europe: there were, of course, some. But compared to those that openly preached communism and, more so, to those who were silent by fear / cowardice / indifference, they were too few and far between to make any real difference. That's one of the reasons this evil type of society lasted as long as it did. There are - also - some very disturbing similarities between the communist approach to several important (in my eyes) parts of the human living issues and the approach of Islam (or, that Islam that is most vocal). That is an isuuse I intend to tackle in my blog as soon as I am able to. So, as long as we have to dig the Internet to find a bunch of reasonable Muslim people in a sea of hysteric voices, I can't say Islam is a religion of peace.
More to the point, please remember the way communism crumbled: in some countries it required human sacrifice. Do we really want more human lives lost on the altar of one - any - God?
Fadlallah looked like a familiar name; didn't realize at the time that he was in that position, which is unfortunate. Hezbollah is a tricky thing to say the least, an abominable terror army bent on annihilating Jews (or in chic euphemistic language, "eliminating the Zionist regime"; compare if one called to "eliminate the Alawite regime" in Syria, for instance) at the most.
Most reasoned analysts, keeping to the facts as they best know them (I only have the most cursory awareness of these whirlwind events and the historiosocial context they has evolved from), say that Hezbollah's principal aim is to drive Israel out of its prized Sheb'aa Farms, which is claimed to be "under occupation", etc. But enough about the Hezbollah thugs.
The top post refers to Ashura, the Shi'a holy day. I have for as long as I've heard of the specific practice of self-flaggelation (quite graphic indeed) I have thought it to be ... well for lack of more sophistication, really fucked-up. Then again, Catholics drink the metaphorical blood of their Christ and take of his body with the communion wafer, right? Can't judge too harshly.
(I use the example of Catholicism -- for sake of argument, no agenda -- to make a second point, namely the analogue of the Sunn'i/Shi'a split and the Catholic/Protestant split, historically violent antagonisms there; some of the more gruesome nativist sentiments in our history were pointedly anti-Catholic, I think mirroring the virulent hatred of Shi'ites among many Sunnis, especially in the more backward societies.)
Every religion I think has its weird fetish things going for it, the Ashura example being among the more extreme.
Alex,
I knew some Christian guys who went to Jerusalem and staged the final hours of Jesus' life along the Via De La Rosa. My friend played a Centurion and his brother played Christ. So, the poor Jews of Jerusalem got treated to the sight of my friend beating his brother with a whip.
So, yeah, all religions have their own strange "fetishes" as you put it.
But honestly, I've never seen anything like Ashura in any religion other than Vodun.
Neither have I. It is indeed very strange.
Post a Comment