Islam in the United States, with Mormons

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

The genteel doctor has indeed given us a thought provoking thread. As I sit here absentmindedly thumbing my 7th century edition of the Quran, I can’t help but wonder why academics like Dr. Peterson, products of the West who enjoy a freedom that Islam seeks to subvert, would continually introduce the misguided notion that Islam is in reality a mishmash of multiculturalism and pluralism, a sort of sister culture to ours and that all we really need to do is understand it better, accept it, and enjoy living side by side with people who are mandated to eschew us.

16:104: Lo! Those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, Allah guideth them not and theirs will be a painful doom.

16:105 Only they invent falsehood who believe not Allah's revelations, and only they are the liars.

16:106: Whoso disbelieveth in Allah after his belief, save him who is forced thereto and whose heart is still content with the Faith, but whoso findeth ease in disbelief: On them is wrath from Allah. Theirs will be an awful doom.

3:28: Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. Whoso doeth that hath no connection with Allah unless ye but guard yourselves against them, taking as it were security from them. Allah biddeth you beware only of Himself.

From the Copts in Egypt to Buddhists in southern Thailand, the “unbelievers” are continually harassed, harangued, murdered, raped, and made to feel Islam’s wrath. This is a fact one cannot escape, but one can choose to ignore. The proverbial head in the sand is what seems most apt at this point.

What a disappointment that we’re presented with a face of Islam, by people who know better, that simply isn’t true. Under Shariah law ours is a miserable lot, and under Islamic jurisprudence Muslims are mandated to bring everyone unto the House of Peace. Al-taqiyya, “kitman”, and jihad all have multiple meanings but have one underpinning mandate: Spread Islam. And where Islam isn't accepted, or is resisted, misery follows. There will be more murder, committed by Muslims, in the name of Allah, and this isn't a rare exception. It's a mandate.

The inevitable and unrelenting practice of Quranic warfare is upon us, and will only grow bolder as time passes. What’s disheartening to witness is to observe the willful act of free men who introduce, aid, and abet a totalitarian system into our culture rather than resist it. What a shame for everyone, except, of course, Muslims.

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

[_TAK]

They would hate it, and would probably kill some Mormons.

So I encourage any who may think that this would be an amusing club with which to beat Mormonism and its adherents to reflect long and hard before they make it a public issue.

I suspect they would hate even more the lying and covering up the proxy work.. If you really think lives are in the balance .. then perhaps the your leaders should suspend the practice and ask forgiviness.. Of course we know that will never happen.. they can't even keep their promise to the Jews to stop the temple folly..



.

[_Mary]

Daniel thankyou for the links.

KA there was a really interesting debate over here last Sunday am on TV about whether the Burka should be banned.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00ldh0h

A number of representatives contributed to the discussion, including an Oxford Imam. Interestingly some of the strongest voices arguing against the Burka where from the Islamic scholars, who, being very liberal in belief, felt that it was not a requirement, but had come about for cultural reasons.

The girl wearing the Burka in the programme, could only argue that she did so, to be close to the prophets wives, and because of guidance rather than because of scriptoral dictat.

When asked why she wore it in further detail, she said that it was to stop men from being tempted by her face and body, though on that reasoning she was asked why then, men were not advised to wear the Burka, since women are just as likely to be attracted to a man based on his face and looks. For this she had no answer (surprisingly enough), and went back to justifying wearing it because of the prophets wives.

I've mixed with quite a few Muslims from childhood onwards (being raised in a multi-cultural town), and can say that Islam is as broad in belief, approach and culture as is christianity. Many of my Turkish acquaintances approach Islam as many English would approach christianity ie it is part of the culture rather than an over-riding influence in everyday life.

The UK is an interesting mix of cultures. I think there are still some cultural hurdles to jump over in terms of assimilation and compromise, but in the long term our nation has been built on the influx of a variety of cultures and peoples. Hopefully it will work out, though as always it is the extremists that can rock the boat on both sides of the equation from the BNP to the Islamic fundametalists and hard-liners.

[_KimberlyAnn]

Mary, I don't think burkas should be banned. I certainly don't think they should be worn, however. They are oppressive. And it matters not to me that they might be worn to be closer to the prophets' wives. They were oppressed, too! The prophets of Islam were false. Islam is a misogynistic religion at its core.

And to be sure I don't give any misogynistic religious practices a pass. When it comes to women not being ordained as ministers or being asked to cover their heads during prayer, Paul can kiss my ass.

KA

[_Daniel Peterson]

Not only should Muslims not care, they should thank the Mormons! Don't you know that Muslims, like Jews, don't have many friends?

Anti-Semitism (defined here, as it commonly is, as hostility to Jews and Judaism) has reached epidemic proportions in the Islamic world, but is also vastly on the rise in even more or less respectable circles in Europe (to say nothing of the skinheads), and is well represented on the extreme political left in the United States and in academia.

The Jews, in Western society, have never had many friends, and the era of relatively good feelings that ensued in the horrifying wake of the Holocaust seems to be coming to an end.

That my less scrupulous and intellectually serious critics appear to be unaware of this, or perhaps even unconcerned, and can't or don't care to properly understand or contextualize the comment of mine to which Kimberly Ann alludes, doesn't really surprise me much.

[_EAllusion]

I've never really seen antisemitism systematically on the academic left. I've just seen a few people here and there. I've seen a lot of systematically nutty things from that end of the spectrum mind you, but that isn't one of them. I have seen a lot of anti-Israel rhetoric. That really isn't the same thing, though there are people interested in advocating the Israeli government's positions who intentionally conflate the two.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, there is an antisemitic wing of conservatism that is close to where I'm at. It's really a holdover from decades ago when antisemitism was common among conservatives - the Bircher wing. It's difficult to nail down exactly where they are coming from, but it's the general area of libertarian/militia survivalist/conspiratorial/Southern nationalist types. You'll find those people at Lew Rockwell's site and the like. I know that when you are at an LP meeting, if someone starts talking about "international bankers" and their blight upon society, it's not exactly difficult to decode what really is being said.

[_BishopRic]

The way I see this is probably a bit different than some. The major world religions all have a less than peaceful past, and it seems that the radical edge of most continue with some degree of violence today.

Mormonism notwithstanding (not that I consider it a "major world religion," but it is significant for most of us here).

But I see a trend towards tolerance and acceptance of others in each of them. Yes, it seems that radical Muslims have a little catching up to do, but I had a Muslim client a few days that teaches at a local high school here in SLC...he was one of the most pleasant, friendly gentlemen I've ever met. He gave me hope for a peaceful world.

I'm certainly not an expert in world religions, but it seems that there are teachings of exclusiveness and superiority in each -- as well as love and tolerance of all. On the surface, this seems contradictory, but I think through eye to eye dialogue and interaction, we can't help but shift the pendulum towards the "love" side of the teachings.

I applaud Dr. Peterson for his efforts in this regard.

[_Daniel Peterson]

On the opposite end of the spectrum, there is an antisemitic wing of conservatism that is close to where I'm at.

Yes, there are those, too. The old "Liberty Lobby" was a pretty repulsive example of it. And Pat Buchanan's "paleocons" sometimes make me very nervous on this front, as well.

Believe me: As an Arabist, I know full well that there is a distinction between anti-Semitism and being critical of Israel. But the line is often crossed, in my experience.

By the way, being denounced as an anti-Semite by Scratch and some of his acolytes has been one of the weirder experiences of my life.

Although often critical of Israel, I'm one the most pro-Israeli non-Israeli Arabists I've ever heard of, and I grew up -- literally -- on my father's stories of his involvement in the liberation of the Nazi concentration camp at Mauthausen, and on his horrific official documentary photographs of what his unit (the 11th Armored Division, of Patton's Third Army) found there when they entered the camp. My father put a display of his photographs up in front of the old city hall in Linz, Austria, under the title "Nazi Kultur," as a very early part of the de-Nazification program there immediately after the war.

I've been to Mauthausen (and to Linz), as a sort of pilgrimage, more than half a dozen times; have donated sets of my father's photographs to the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, to the BYU library, and to the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC; and intend to donate a set to the new museum at Mauthausen itself.

If I'm an anti-Semite, as Scratch has suggested (and KA has casually echoed here), I'm an exceedingly eccentric one.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

But I see a trend towards tolerance and acceptance of others in each of them. Yes, it seems that radical Muslims have a little catching up to do, but I had a Muslim client a few days that teaches at a local high school here in SLC...he was one of the most pleasant, friendly gentlemen I've ever met. He gave me hope for a peaceful world.

I'm certainly not an expert in world religions, but it seems that there are teachings of exclusiveness and superiority in each -- as well as love and tolerance of all. On the surface, this seems contradictory, but I think through eye to eye dialogue and interaction, we can't help but shift the pendulum towards the "love" side of the teachings.

Good Day, Sir.

There is a saying amongst many a Muslim: "When in Mecca..." This is usually followed by a smile and a shrug of the shoulders.


Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

[_Mary]

Mary, I don't think burkas should be banned. I certainly don't think they should be worn, however. They are oppressive. And it matters not to me that they might be worn to be closer to the prophets' wives. They were oppressed, too! The prophets of Islam were false. Islam is a misogynistic religion at its core.

And to be sure I don't give any misogynistic religious practices a pass. When it comes to women not being ordained as ministers or being asked to cover their heads during prayer, Paul can kiss my ass.

KA

I don't think the Burka should be banned either, though it does bring up some interesting issues as regards the lack of ability to identify someone wearing it, and on a positive it might actually be nice to be looked on as something more than just a sex object.

Just out of interest, my father used to drive the directors of the company he worked for up to London, Inns on the Park back in the 80's. All the supposedly devout Arab Muslim men would think nothing of picking out the nice British high class prostitutes at the end of the evening. My father used to ask the girls why they would be doing such a thing, to be told that the Arabs were the best payers and their best clients. Most of these men were supposedly devout Muslims with wives at home.

So, I think there is a lot of hypocracy among the men in these types of cultures. I found the same from my observations actually in Cyprus as a single girl. The Cypriots (as committed Greek Orthodox) would outrageouly flirt with the British and European girls, only to be found on a Sunday with their family at church, acting the loving and righteous husband. They expected their own women to be pure and undefiled, but were happy to spend time with any European girl they could get their hands on. They saw the girls as easy pickings and were very predatory.

I don't know about Islam being inherently misogynistic. Sometimes I think maybe cultural and religious practices get so inter-twined that its difficult to separate them. There are certain aspects of Islam that gave rights to women long before they were given to a British woman for instance, at least that is my understanding.

I can appreciate what you say about some of the supposed words of Paul. I think maybe the different interpretations of Christianity and Islam have done a lot of damage to women over the ages.