Father Orthoduck found the interesting cartoon posted above. It is an interesting thought experiment. As you know there has been much argument about building a mosque near Ground Zero in New York City. Few newspapers will report that there have been objections to building a mosque in any of several states. Even fewer will even bother to report that the opposition to mosques is based on the idea that Islam is automatically a religion that insists on conquest, regardless of any other statements that are made. And, Father Orthoduck has found none that bother to report that similar statements were made prior to the election of President John F. Kennedy and the danger of putting a Papist in the USA presidency. Father Orthoduck was alive back then, but for younger readers, encourages them to Google™ the history of that era to find that there were accusations that the Pope would be in control and that our freedoms would be damaged should a Roman Catholic be elected President. One finds an echo of that today in the arguments that the Supreme Court is not truly representative because there are too many Roman Catholics on it.
But, if you do the thought experiment above, you will see how silly many of the arguments are. Timothy McVeigh was an avowed Christian. Immediately many will deny that and claim that he misrepresented Christianity. But, when the same thing is said by many Muslims in the USA about the bombers, many people stand up to call them liars. The fact that many Muslims are here precisely to escape the more radical regimes is conveniently overlooked. They came here for the same reasons many of our early colonists came here. They did not wish to change religion, but they did wish to change the interpretation of how that religion should be carried out. The same is true of many of today’s immigrants.
But, let’s continue the thought experiment. Father Orthoduck would suggest that you again Google™, but this time do the argument between science and Young Earth Creationists. Now throw in the term atheist and see what comes up. You will read how either atheists or YEC’ers are planning to take over and impose thought control on the people of the USA. Atheists accuse YEC people of being involved in a new Inquisition and of attempting to place science under religious restrictions. The more radical atheists say that for the defense of truth in this country, religionists of that type must be prevented from spouting their “hate-filled” rhetoric.
If you are following the thought experiment, you will begin to see why the arguments about preventing a mosque being built in various places of this country, and, yes, even near Ground Zero (where there is an already existing mosque, by the way) are simply the same argument that has been used against Jews, Roman Catholics, and various other groups for many decades in this country. The only thing that has changed is that every few decades the group that we are allowed to publicly pick on changes. Were one to try to make the same arguments today that were made against President John F. Kennedy, one would quickly be thrown out of either the Democratic or Republican parties. The Supreme Court is one of the last places where people are still commenting about there being “too many” Roman Catholics on it, which is to say “not enough good white Protestants.” And yet, Father Orthoduck would think that those who believe in “strict interpretation” (meaning conservative of a certain type) would prefer that type of judge, regardless of their religion, than a judge who did not follow that particular conservative approach to jurisprudence. In fact, given Roman Catholic history, would not a Roman Catholic “strict interpretation” judge be more likely to be favorable towards allowing some intermingling of Church and State than, say, a Baptist judge? But, again, that is only a thought experiment.
Thought experiments are sometimes valuable to help us keep our thinking straight. Father Orthoduck hopes you have found this thought experiment helpful.
I think the difference between McVeigh and the 911 terrorists is that the Muslims quite obviously acted in the name of their God for their God. Mcveigh’s was much more politically centered. Also, there is a fine argument that he was working for Islamic terrorists. I really do not see the connection between the Christian faith and the attack.
Also, the Koran, along with the other holy books of Islam, teaches Jihad. The New Testament and the Christian teaching of the OT does not teach anything like Jihad.
I for one think that we should not be barking at this mosque thing so much. After all, this country was founded on NOT being a Christian nation. I wish it was but it is not. The Rebels fought againt both England and her church so that the new country could rid herself of any church affiliation but be “free” to practice any religion they so desire. There is nothing in the Constitution that esxcludes Islam.
Well said! I’m pleased to have discovered your blog.
I was thinking yesterday, that one should perhaps suggest banning all building of Catholic churches in Northern Ireland because the IRA claimed to be a Catholic organisation… Absurd.
The McVeigh comparison may be skewed but the comparison to the Christian fanatics who murder physicians and others who perform or assist with abortions is similar. These people claiim to be protecting their Christian principles in the name of God and commit murder to further their cause….does this mean all Christians are murderers? Hardly. The same applies to Muslims. The actions of a few are interpreted by people who feel the need to find a scapegoat group to attack. Jesus loved his friends and enemies alike. A true Christian would follow His example. He did not generalize and incite hate.
Elyse,
You cannot compare the abortionists to Muslims. Again, the Koran and the other holy books of Islam command their followers to kill. Muhammad, their foudner was a murderer. Our founder, Jesus, was a peace maker. The abortionists are NOT acting according to their religion. But the Muslims are!
How can you say that the Quran commands it’s readers to kill? Have you read a single page of it? People have killed for Christianity and every single religion since religion has existed. All religions oppose murder but all religions have extremist who will kill for it. Islam and Christianity are actually pretty similar if you take a look at them side by side.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1331831/British-pupils-taught-Sharia-way-cut-thiefs-hand.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
Take a look at what is being taught in the UK in these “peaceful” schools. I don’t want one of these next door to me, or even in my town or the next town. There’s nothing peaceful about this religion.
“British pupils taught Sharia way to cut off a thief’s hand
By James Slack
Last updated at 12:01 AM on 22nd November 2010
Children are being taught about Sharia law – which is derived from the Koran – in weekend schools
Children are being taught about Sharia law – which is derived from the Koran – in weekend schools
Children in Britain are being taught brutal Sharia law punishments, including how to hack off a criminal’s hand or foot.
So-called ‘weekend schools’ – which offer the hardline Saudi National Curriculum to Muslim children in the UK – also teach that the penalty for gay sex is execution and that ‘Zionists’ are plotting to take over the world for the Jews.
One set text book challenges youngsters to list the ‘reprehensible’ qualities of the Jews.
Another for six year-olds asks them to answer what happens to someone who dies who is not a believer in Islam. The answer being looked for is ‘hellfire’.
A BBC Panorama investigation, to be screened tonight, identified a network of more than 40 weekend schools teaching around 5,000 children, from age six to 18.
The schools are run under the umbrella of ‘Saudi Students Clubs and Schools in the UK and Ireland’.
They are not state-funded, and do not use Government buildings. They are able to exploit a loophole which means weekend schools are not inspected by Ofsted.
Last night, experts at the Policy Exchange think-tank warned that similar extremists could seek to exploit the Government’s policy of giving greater freedoms from state control to free schools and academies.
They call for the establishment of a Due Diligence Unit to check whether those applying to open the schools have an extremist background.
Current checks are largely limited to fraud, criminal convictions and funding.
Education Secretary Michael Gove, who is believed to be supportive of the idea, said he would not tolerate anti-Semitism and homophobia in English schools.
The Panorama investigation identified a book for 15 year-olds being used in the classes which teaches about Sharia law and its punishments.
It says: ‘For thieves their hands will be cut off for a first offence, and their foot for a subsequent offence.’
There are diagrams showing children where cuts must be made.One passage says:
‘The specified punishment of the thief is cutting off his right hand at the wrist. Then it is cauterised to prevent him from bleeding to death.’
For acts of ‘sodomy’, children are told that the penalty is death and it states a difference of opinion whether this should be done by stoning, or burning with fire, or throwing over a cliff.
Panorama alleges that a building used for one of the schools, in Ealing, West London, is owned by the Saudi government .
Mr Gove told the programme: ‘I have no desire or wish to intervene in the decisions that the Saudi government makes in its own education system.
‘But I’m clear that we cannot have anti-Semitic material of any kind being used in English schools. Ofsted are doing some work in this area.
‘They’ll be reporting to me shortly about how we can ensure that part-time provision is better registered and better inspected in the future.’
In a written response to the findings, the Saudi ambassador said the schools had nothing to do with the Saudi embassy.
It stated: ‘Any tutoring activities that may have taken place among any other group of Muslims in the United Kingdom are absolutely individual to that group and not affiliated to or endorsed by the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia.’
Panorama separately claimed that some Muslim private schools have expressed extreme sentiments on their school websites.
These include: ‘We need to defend our children from the forces of evil’, and ‘our children are exposed to a culture that is in opposition to almost everything Islam stands for’.
Policy Exchange says Britain’s faith and other schools are increasingly vulnerable to extremist influences.
The authors claim the Department for Education, Ofsted, education authorities and schools are ‘not equipped’ to meet such challenges.
Current checks for extremism are described as ‘piecemeal’.
The report adds: ‘The Government’s policy of opening up the education system to new academies and free schools programmes could be exploited unless urgent measures are taken to counter extremist influence.’
Hm, now here is a typical article that sounds more like a tabloid article rather than a news piece.
But, let me point out a couple of things. One, there is no evidence that such things are being taught in the USA. We do not punish people based on what people from the same background are doing in other countries. Our courts have held over and over that there must be evidence in this country that the overthrow of the government or its laws is being taught.
But second, look again at the article because I suggest that you missed quite a few thing that you would find intolerable.
1. The Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia stated outright that what may be being taught is not endorsed by the Royal Embassy. I mentioned Timothy McVeigh above, but it would be easy for me to quote from any of several Christian groups within the USA that openly teach of a coming race war and of the necessity to kill others to defend this country. Some of the wacky Idaho groups will also teach children about killing techniques. So, should Christian schools be banned in this country?
2. The solution proposed by the English government is to make sure that no homophobic teachings are done in their schools and further that the students will be taught against such things. Would you be willing to have the USA government teach your children against such things as homophobia, sexism, racism, etc.? Normally the Christian community is quite against such things, but if you are for it, well then say so.
3. “They are not state funded … they are able to exploit a loophole…” says the article. The solution proposed is government oversight of all schools whether public or private, with a “screening” of any who wish to open one or be teacher in one. Are you willing to have the teachers in every private school and the owners subject to a government check? Are you willing to have those schools overseen by the government? No, I suspect you are not.
The article above is dangerous both because it is a slanted piece that picked on some extremists to tar all others with the brush, but also because it is calling for greater government control. Yet, you pick it up as an example of why we should lose our freedoms in the USA in favor of more government control. And here I thought that I was supposed to be the liberal socialist.
Psalm 137:8-9 says, “O Daughter of Babylon, doomed to destruction, happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us-he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.
In the Book of Revelation, the punishments that God will reign down upon the inhabitants of the earth will be fierce.
Let me ask you this. Are you and the fellow whatever you call yourselves active in the World Council of Churches, which is hopelessly tainted with left-wing political agendas? It seems that what is left of the Christian world in your part of the world has gone entirely dhimmi. I see that you are a member of the ACLU and were “chrismated (whatever that means) into the Orthodox Church”. Is this even a genuine church? I’m sure you will say it is. Frankly, I’ve never heard of it. It seems to some offshoot of some old hippies that have decided to call themselves a “church.”
Although it is convenient for you to minimize this article as more or less an opinion piece despite the fact that the newspaper says it is a NEWS ARTICLE, I find that it is very factual in representing the fact that from 35-40 weekend school are teaching Shariah law, including how to butcher people for crimes, which is the very same thing that is being practiced right now in various Muslim countries. What complaint do you have about any of this not being a fact?
And, regardless of your dismissal of the Saudi’s involvement in this school, these schools are still being run under of ‘Saudi Students Clubs and Schools in the UK and Ireland’. The Saudi’s may be POSSIBLY less than honest about their involvement in this, as they are most likely not willing to admit just how much money they have put into the political area in this nation getting their “guy” elected (who still won’t divulge where and how much money he was given from foreign entities), and have been messing around in the politics of the U.S. for several years now. This is not a secret to those that care to do research on this subject.
The fact remains that these schools in the UK ARE TEACHING SHARIA LAW AS IT’S CURRENTLY BEING PRACTICED IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES, regardless of what you OR THEY say. You can’t change that truth. I’ll take this article’s word over yours, which I find somewhat suspect. Your reputation is not that great among religious folk.
And, once Muslims reach the tipping point in the country, we will be having the same thing, regardless of what you say. Shariah Law is already being pushed in this country and will continue to be pushed by this political/military group which hides behind religion to spread.
You’ve only convinced me that you are not interested in anything other than your lefitist agenda.
You seem to have misused Psalm 137:8-9. I’m not sure what you are trying to say and in tying it to Revelations, except perhaps threatening Christians that oppose Muslims?
Only the ignorant would make this conclusion that I think you are trying to foist upon those that know not.
The destruction of Babylon, for example, had been clearly foretold by Isaiah and Jeremiah (Isaiah 13:1,9,16 and Jeremiah 51:37-44). Eventually God must set things right , and this will involve judgment upon those who spurn His grace (Deuteronomy 32:35; Romans 12:19). The victory of God will involve the crushing of evil (Revelation 19:11-21). I don’t think God meant this to include Christians that are revolted by violent teachings of Muslims.
I’ll see if you post this. If you are interested in honest debate, you will. If you don’t, then you and I will both know where you stand.
Sigh, the Antiochians left the National Council of Churches years ago precisely because they were so liberal. And, you may wish to look up the Eastern Orthodox in the Wikipedia. We are part of the Patriarchate of Antioch. It is obvious that you will not take anything I say as being accurate, so look it up yourself. Opposing the violation of the rights that American citizens have, regardless of their religion is not liberal. That is why no judge has yet ruled against the Islamic center. The Constitution trumps all attempts to restrict our Bill of Rights.
Many of the arguments against the Islamic center use a cherry picking approach. What I do when I pick out Christian groups who have done the same thing is to point out that even within the USA there are groups claiming to be Christian who do identical things and to point out that I can cherry pick Christianity to look equally bad. As long as Muslims in the USA do not violate the Constitution and the laws, they are simply to be treated like any other citizen of the USA.
Thank you for reply. I accept that your group is not a part of the National Council of Churches; however, you are a member of the ACLU. I can hardly see any difference. Both are leftist in their agenda.
I don’t believe it is cherry picking to report that there are schools in the U.K. that are teaching how to butcher people in compliance with Shariah law just as are happening right now in Muslim countries, and that the teachers claim they are teaching Shariah law! It’s not just one school, or even two. It’s almost 40 doing the same thing, following apparently the same identical examples/lessons. That is not cherry picking. It is a fact. It IS being taught. Timothy McVeigh was one person…………this is a group of many people teaching fearful things which are a part of Shariah and in the name of Shariah. I don’t want that in my country.
Your red herring about England’s laws do not pertain to this country. That was not the purpose of my post. It was to expose what will happen once Muslims become more populous as they are in England. England is losing England at the moment, due to the number of Muslims that have taken over and are demanding their rights, much as the people in Minnesota have experienced once the numbers grew to an extent they could exert influence over politics.
Nor, do I think that Muslims are a “religion”. They are a POLITICAL MOVEMENT with their own laws hiding behind a “religion” to gain First Amendment protection. We must recognize that religion is only one aspect of Islam‘s Qur’an. The rest of this charter advances ideas, social behavior, and laws that are in direct conflict with American and western laws and values. And, they want us to change our laws to fit Shariah. The man behind the mosque has said so. http://www.shoebat.com/blog/archives/393.
This IS NOT A RELIGION. IT IS A POLITICAL MOVEMENT invading our country.
I will agree with you that it is a dreadful mistake if England were to allow Sharia law to be applied in certain situations. And, I have no problem with those who are planning overthrow being controlled. France has recently cracked down on some of their radicals, although their solutions leave me cringing a little bit.
Many Muslims in the United States are not involved in any attempt to overthrow the government. What we miss is that there is a difference between those who are in Europe and those who are here. Let me explain. Because both France and England had colonies in Muslim (and Hindu) areas, there are many who have the right to go to England or France, not as immigrants, but as citizens. Thus, it is significantly easier for more radical elements of Islam to get into England and France. Besides that, various European countries have worker visas that allow non-permanent-immigrants to live in Europe for very extended periods in order to fulfill a demand for low-skill, low-pay employment.
The situation is very different in the United States. Our worker visas are not really worker visas, they are high technology visas. The Muslims we tend to receive are from the well-educated, much less radical class. And, we check all our immigrants rather thoroughly, particularly since 2001. We only ever had a couple of colonies, and those were short-lived, so we do not have people who have the right to come here, except for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the American Virgin Islands, the Federated Territory of Micronesia, etc. This is why I argue that until such a time as people break the law here we need to give them all the rights due as American citizens.
I hope this helps you to understand why I defend American Muslims. I think that they are not the European Muslims by a long shot. Most of them came here to escape the radicalism. Have a few snuck in who are otherwise? Of course, think 2001. But, that is not the common experience here.
In passing, I may have been a board member of the ACLU, but there are many of my fellow ministers who would think that I was nuts for that. GRIN.
Perhaps you should do some research on the honor killings http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-norfolk/muslim-women-are-regularly-beaten-and-murdered-where-is-the-outrage of women by their Muslim husband’s within the U.S. Apparenlty, they find no difficulty in committing this act, nor do the Muslim men in their neighborhood that help them escape the laws of the U.S. Most specifically, I’m speaking of the two teens that were shot by their Muslim father (while also abusing their American mother) for dishonoring him by dating two “non-Muslim” hispanic teens.
Perhaps you can see why I don’t believe you can say with a straight face “This is why I argue that until such a time as people break the law here…” What do you call this? Have any of these men been prosecuted? No. They hide behind their “religious laws” that allow them to beat, rape, behead, murder, stab women in their families by husbands, fathers, and sons.
Perhaps you can see, as a woman, why I disagree with your rosy words. I fear for any woman who ignorantly marries into this culture. Is this not “breaking the law”?
To name a few:
http://fubarmedia.wordpress.com/2008/01/03/muslim-father-shoots-and-kills-his-two-teenage-daughters/
http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-norfolk/muslim-women-are-regularly-beaten-and-murdered-where-is-the-outrage
http://politicalvelcraft.org/2010/10/04/approximately-3308-americans-have-been-murdered-by-islamic-terror-attacks-on-american-soil-since-1972/
http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2010/07/honor_killings_in_the_us.html
Just to add a note:
Please do not cite examples of all the other crimes that take place in the U.S. committed by non-muslims. Yes, they do, but I have a hard time remembering the last crime (rape, shooting, beheading, garroting, sexual abuse, murder, knifing, encouragement to suicide, etc.) that took place because of ” religious beliefs” that this crime was not only called for, but necessary to save the honor of the man/men in the family, and committed by the man/men of the family despite all the decrys that “this has absolutely nothing to do with Islam.”
Comparing apples and oranges. Don’t know if you mean to do that……but it’s often the type of false analogy I read when someone is trying to defend their position on a subject.
Let’s see, what about the Waco suicides, as one instance? Or the more recent case of the Christian religious community whose leader was arranging the marriages of 12 year old girls of the community to various quite adult men of the community? I could cite several more examples, but there are people who call themselves Christian who are currently engaging in quite evil practices. If you let me go back to the early 1960’s, there was a reason that Birmingham was nicknamed Bombingham, the most famous case being the murder of the four young black girls in a church on a Sunday. All were done in the name of Christianity.
Oh, I see that you’ve erased all my links about honor killing in the U.S.
Now, how is that fair?
Erased what links? They are all up there and functional.
That solves it. You are not interested in the truth of this matter.
All you are doing is covering up the crimes of this religion under the guise of “fairness.” You sir, are as guilty of these crimes as the men who committed them. blindness to crime is not a virtue.
I wish you complete failure in your endeavors in this type of coverup for the murders of the women in the U.S. by the men of Islam.
Now, delete this post, too. But, yu will read it before you do delete it. You do the devils’work in allowing this to happen in silence.
Yes, they are …….now.
At first, they were there (after your GRIN comment) and then they weren’t.. Now, they are back. You’ve even inserted some comments from you that weren’t there about Waco. In fact, I’ve just received a notice of your last comment which has been added in between my comments. This isn’t a honest site. You edit/remove/add back comments.
Waco was a one-time instance of one man, as well was the polygamy sect instance.. These men were brought to justice under U.S. laws and whose actions were CONDEMNEND BY FELLOW CHRISTIANS, if not prosecuted by FELLOW CHRISTIANS.. Their behaviors were recognized as ABERRANT within their own groups.. Comparing these rare instances to a religion of millions that has taught that these behaviors are not only acceptable, but REQUIRED and that has existed over centuries is a poor analogy.. Very poor. And, a very weak analogy. Your arguments is falling apart as evidenced by your editing actions and your comparing apples and oranges.
Where is the condemnation of these actions by fellow Muslim men? There are some few women, maybe one or two out of millions, but that’s it. And, there are death warrants out for their deaths.. Again, apples and oranges.
I still state that…………You are still an accomplish to these murders of women by Muslim men by making excuses and covering up for them as some type of “normal” behavior amongst other religions.
Shame on you..
You completely skewed my original question which was: …… **but I have a hard time remembering the last crime (rape, shooting, beheading, garroting, sexual abuse, murder, knifing, encouragement to suicide, etc.) that took place because of ” religious beliefs” that this crime WAS NOT ONLY CALLED FOR, BUT NECESSARY TO SAVE THE HONOR OF THE MAN/MEN IN THE FAMILY AND COMMITTED BY THE MAN/MEN OF THE FAMILY despite all the decrys that “this has absolutely nothing to do with Islam.**
……to one where you left out part of my question in order to give false examples about isolated instances here and there.
Another type of dishonesty from you.
The complaint by moderate Muslims is that whenever a Muslim does something it is because they are Muslim. Whenever a Christian does a similar thing, it is an isolated instance. There are a lot of isolated instances of Christians in the USA doing sad things in the name of Christ, then. Living in the Deep South has let me learn many of those stories. The reason many blacks became Black Muslims in the 1960’s was precisely because they saw not whites only, but Christianity as well, as being responsible for their plight.