Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Comment on: My Soap Box

Islam is Politics

15 Comments

Islam is a politic

you are absolutely right, they want to change the laws of all countries, to their law, hence politics it is.....nice call

Just like Christianity

I agree with you that religion has no place in politics. Islam is a perfect example.

Sharia

Fools who equate Christianity with Islam are obviously stuck in the Middle Ages. Modern Christianity may proselytize but certainly doesn't behead, bomb, hang, or stone non-Christians. But modern Islam does. And unless fools willingly blind themselves to the very real threat of living under sharia law, they had best confront reality instead of some politically-correct nonsense.
Here in the USA, the camel's nose is already under our tent. Bush's government is trying to mislead Americans with the "Islam is a peaceful religion" b.s. I-Slam never was and is not now "peaceful" or a "religion". It is a fanatical cult that specifically calls on its adherents to force I-Slam and sharia law down the throats of all infidels or, failing that, to eliminate them. The politically crowd bends over (praying to Mecca?) in accommodating the I-Slamists. And yes, I am spelling it correctly. "I-Slam" = I (Muslim) will Slam all who don't follow my particular brand of 'whatever the heck it is'.

Peace, brother

Thanks for augmenting my point. Shariah law is responsible for some of the worst contemporary human rights abuses over it's so-called governed peoples. It is also done in the name of God. I am an infidel in that I believe in no religion. I could have used any religion in my subject line, but I chose Christianity because of the historical atrocities committed in the name of Christ as well as Evangelicals' never ending quest to infuse theology into public policy. We derive authority and power from our constitution which is of the people, by the people, etc; not from one religion's idea of a higher power.

Wrong again

Nope, not augmenting your point. Our founders in their Declaration of Independence noted that we derive authority and power from our Creator - ergo, the "higher power".

I don't want to be right

Allah is a widely accepted "higher power". Are you suggesting the U.S. Constitution is not of the people and by the people but rather by the mercy of Allah? So you do support Shariah law after all?
You've unwittingly made my point again. The original poster complained that if a religion has "political goals and uses politcal means" it ought to be regarded as a politcal entity. In other words, religion and politics don't mix- especially religions with stated goals of converting the masses and/or doomsday prophecies.
Finally, I'm well aware that the intent of the original post was to register his frustration with political correctness in dealing with a radical religious ideology having the stated goals of converting or killing infidels. I saw an opportunity to point out the hypocrisy of marrying politics with ANY religion. But, alas your God is bigger than their God, right?

Islam is politics

When I used to play solitaire, I thought that the object was to get all the cards built on the aces in order. My husband said that the object was to uncover cards. When the true object was clarified, it changed my focus in the game, and I have been winning a lot more.

We need to be sure that our focus is right while we fight this war. We may find a much different result.

Welcome, Fellow Coloradan

Valid point about Islam being a political organization (or set of organizations, given that the Sunnis and Shias will never agree to disagree about which side has the full truth and nothing but the truth).

The major difference between Islam and Christianity is the nature of their founding personalities. Jesus was the essense of normality (that was, in fact, his whole reason for being--to model "normality," that is, what we, as Children of God, are supposed to be like). Muhammed was the essense of non-normality.

I strongly urge everyone to check out http://www.non-normie.com, where Jack Thomas has defined non-normies and showed out of long experience how children turn into non-normies. Take his test to see where you fall on the spectrum between normieness and non-normieness. You can also apply the test to anyone you know or know of.

It's clear that Muhammed was a flaming Right-Polar non-normie, and therefore Islam is more properly a cult, or set of related cults, that goes out of its way to create more flaming (in some cases literally!) non-normies.

While Jesus was the essence of normality, given that until he lived among us, most of humankind was lost in non-normieness (aka sin), it shouldn't be too surprising that a fairly large percentage of his modern followers (at least the loudmouths) are non-normies rather than normies.

The wonder is that there are so many normies (about 85% of the population of the U.S., according to Mr. Thomas, and an unknown percentage of the world population) in this day and age. Nor are all of them necessarily Christians. You don't hear much from them, however, because they're too busy earning a living, caring for their families, helping their neighbors, inventing better mousetraps, defending their towns, cities, and nations against the self-destructive natures of the non-normies of the world, and generally living real lives as real adults.

Non-normies of all stripes, on the other hand, are loudmouths precisely because they have frozen themselves at the age of 8 (according to Jack; I would have said the age of 4), by deciding to stop at anger in the five steps of grief over any loss. To hang onto anger, resentment, and grudges instead of letting go is the ultimate in stupid, so you could say non-normies by nature are stuck on stupid.

Once stuck on stupid, it is almost impossible for a non-normie to get unstuck through his or her own efforts, probably because it requires the gut-wrenching recognition that one has been horribly and unnecessarily stupid. But once a non-normie comes to that recognition, with the help of a 12-step program, there is hope for healing and learning how to behave normally most of the time. Such people are thus best described as recovering non-normies.

It's almost impossible for adherents of Islam to become recovering non-normies without being killed by their fellow adherents, precisely because the whole structure of Islam is designed to control essentially every thought and action of its adherents. The word does, after all, mean submission. Muhammed is the classic example of a control freak who's succeeded in controlling large numbers of people long after his demise. Even though Stalin may have been responsible for many more millions of deaths as a result of his efforts to control everyone around him, Muhammed is responsible for large numbers of deaths over a much longer period of time. And he will be responsible for many more in years to come.

There are three ways to deal with non-normies, once you've identified them (or they've made themselves obvious). First, ignore them. This makes them scream ever louder until they get your attention and you have to kill them in self-defense. Second, laugh at them--and be prepared to kill them in self-defense. Third, remove yourself from their presence to a sufficient distance that they can't easily reach you and will turn their attention to more inviting targets of wrath.

We have, and to some extent still are, attempting to ignore the flaming non-normies on both the Right and Left, and we're on the verge of having to kill a lot of them in self-defense.

We are beginning to laugh at them and point out that they are not normal, and therefore shouldn't expect to be taken seriously. We're not yet ready to defend ourselves against their fury at being made fun of, especially in this country.

We're not yet thinking seriously about removing ourselves permanently from their presence, largely because that requires a frontier, and the only one left is out there, above our heads. It's still very expensive to get into that frontier--but the cost of access could drop rapidly if enough normies and recovering non-normies decided building cities and towns in orbit, beyond the easy reach of the non-normies demanding obiescence from everyone else, was worth the investment of their time, energy, and resources.

Sure, the non-normies will try to stop us--or come with us--but if we plan properly to deal with the trouble they start before it goes too far, we have half a chance of building places in space where most of the inhabitants are normal and the occasional non-normie sticks out like a sore thumb. We can deal with sore thumbs.

If this third option interests you, check out my blog for more information about how to get there from here.

Meanwhile, I'm adding you to my blog roll.

But of course!

Any creed that explicitly advocates the use of force to achieve a political, economic, or social goal is a political creed. That's how politics is defined: the pursuit of power over others, regardless of the end in view.

A religion, by contrast, must:
1. Provide a mythos -- the supernatural "backstory" that believers accept;
2. Provide an ethos -- the code of conduct to which believers are supposed to conform;
3. Allow for voluntary acceptance or rejection of the creed by all individuals, according to their judgment and consciences.

Islam:
-- Barely passes criterion 1;
-- largely fails criterion 2 (Muslims are allowed all manner of departures from their ethos "if it would benefit Islam or Muslims");
-- and wholly fails criterion 3 (Islam is regarded as being "at war" with those parts of the world not yet submissive to it, and of course, the penalty for heresy, apostasy, or blasphemy against Islam is death).

As we mathematical types like to say, "quod erat demonstrandum."

So. . .

To summarize earlier posts, the United States constitution derives power from the Judeo-Christian God. Further, many people (possibly the majority) of citizens regard the U.S. as a Christian nation. We undoubtably use "force to achieve a politcal, economic or social goals" either directly or by proxy. So how do we separate the politics from the theology?

Rob you make excellent points but...

The difference is in whether a religion, historically AND foundationally support active political control of their own group as well as other unbelievers. Christianity has justified political persecution in the past but it is not substantially supported by its foundational documents and traditions, Ie: the bible and oral traditions(before the bible was finally completed, approximately 500 years) The new testament as a whole, along with the traditions doesnt outline governmental policy at all, though it mentions "submitting to those appointed over you" on one occassion.

Simply put, it doesnt say, "govern or lord over others", in fact , it is contrary to that especially given the story of Jesus, who sought no earthly power, but wish for his adherents to live holy lives.

Talk to any muslim and they will tell you muhammed was more than a prophet, he was a statesman, and they will reluctantly say he was a military leader, if at all.

The traditions in the sunnah, say that they should kill everyone or make them pay the Jizya tax in submission. (Dhimmitude) This mantra is repeated numerous times throughout the sunnah and the Qur'an, and is also repeated by clerics around the world.

The founding fathers in the US acknowledged that our rights ultimately come from the creator but allowed and expected freedom of conscience and thus religion so that the church does not lead the country by mandate unless given that right by the people themselves.(to date that has not happened)

in summary, Christianity has historically lorded over others governmentally but it is not supported at the foundational level especially by Jesus example, but islam has not only supported such notions historically it is supported also foundationally which is why you have quite a few theocracies of varying degrees in the muslim world(pakistan,Iran, saudi, syria, yemen, sudan and ) but only one in the christian world(the Vatican.)

Sharia

America was founded as a Chistian nation. We obey laws found in the Bible. We have an army.
The Koran is the foundation of law in quite a number of countries in this world. They have armies, too.
Personally, I would like to continue living in a nation with Biblical laws. What I hear about Sharia law does not appeal to me. Since moslems are intent on militarially spreading the enforcment of their law, I want my army to protect me from them.

I really didn't want to go here but. . .

Leviticus 24:16

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.

Are these the kind of biblical laws you want for our country?

Or how about

"Thou shall not covet thy neighbor's goods". That is anti-consumerism and anti-capitalism.

Or maybe you agree with Dinesh D'Souza who went on t.v. to offer a defense of Osama Bin Laden's hatred of the United States. He comiserated with OBL's hatred of our deviance in extending civil liberties to gays and claimed that this was one of the main reasons we were attacked on 9/11!

Again, if you're telling me that Islam is a politcally bent intolerant religion with a violent worldview, you're preaching to the choir. My point is and has been that in a purely capitalistic and democratic state, there is NO place for religion in politics or policy making.

Back to the issue at hand:

When politicians are too afraid to deal with problems because of political correctness, it is time to change something. Let's change the way we think about our enemy so we don't get PC'd into giving up!