Showing posts with label Islam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Islam. Show all posts
Sunday, January 23, 2011
A Warning From Gert Wilders
Geert Wilders, Chairman, Party for Freedom, the Netherlands, at the Four Seasons, New York, introducing an Alliance of Patriots and announcing the Facing Jihad Conference in Jerusalem warned about the Islamization of Europe. He argues that Islam is not a religion, but a political ideology! And he states that America and Israel are the last bastions against Islamization in the West!.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Why Would I Be Suspicious?
Tonight I watched a former Muslim who had converted to Christianity talk about Islam. He admitted that all of Islam is radical. There is no moderate Islamic faith. But, his openness disturbed me. I just wondered why he could be so open about his conversion and Islam itself without endangering his very life.
I say this because of the facts of history. Remember the many faces that hid from those who would take revenge. Rushdie and Ali are only two. But, these took to hiding and lived in isolation. Why would we think that this person would be priviledged and protected from Islamic factions that would want to bring about justice? I am suspicious.
Would there be a possibility that Islam being so violently opposed to Christianity would love for Christians to think that Islam was tolerant? Or would there be a possibility that Islam would use "converts" to infilterate Chrstian circles to promote propaganda?
This morning. I listened to a former Muslim woman talk about her experience of wanting her independence. She explained how Muslims do not think in individual terms. Tradition forms and shapes their thinking and lifestyle. The American ideal of seeking one's destiny is not a way of seeing oneself in the world. She was fortunate to have lived in a free society where she freed herself from the traditions of her past and became a professor.
How can people think that those that are so narrow and confined in their views would be open, accomadating or tolerant to diversity or when it is expected that Muslims will not be open to tell the whole story to the "infidels"? And especially because those that have been Muslims have warned about the political agenda that these have for the West?
I say this because of the facts of history. Remember the many faces that hid from those who would take revenge. Rushdie and Ali are only two. But, these took to hiding and lived in isolation. Why would we think that this person would be priviledged and protected from Islamic factions that would want to bring about justice? I am suspicious.
Would there be a possibility that Islam being so violently opposed to Christianity would love for Christians to think that Islam was tolerant? Or would there be a possibility that Islam would use "converts" to infilterate Chrstian circles to promote propaganda?
This morning. I listened to a former Muslim woman talk about her experience of wanting her independence. She explained how Muslims do not think in individual terms. Tradition forms and shapes their thinking and lifestyle. The American ideal of seeking one's destiny is not a way of seeing oneself in the world. She was fortunate to have lived in a free society where she freed herself from the traditions of her past and became a professor.
How can people think that those that are so narrow and confined in their views would be open, accomadating or tolerant to diversity or when it is expected that Muslims will not be open to tell the whole story to the "infidels"? And especially because those that have been Muslims have warned about the political agenda that these have for the West?
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Today, I Saw and Remembered...
Today, I saw and remembered the Netherlands. It was a sense of "home" for me, as this is my husband's "homeland". Most of his family still live there. And today, I ran across a blog that had some marvelous pictures of the blogger's visit there. It was nostalgic for me. But, her written entry on November 2, 2009, grabbed me heartfully. Her entry described the "culture" very well.
This the entry of "D.C. Weather Report: Mostly Bad News" blog by Iggy Bloggit from Washington D.C. ...
"When I stepped off the platform (after taking a train from the airport to Amsterdam) I saw the future: people living artfully. I arrived into a performance of style and beauty, art and grace. Ahh the Dutchies. Striking and silent. Poise in the way they ride their clunky bicycles, drive their tiny cars. Beautiful and brilliant. Ongoing preservation of really old architecture and traditions of keeping an open mind, speaking openly and to the point, tolerating and living and loving together. Recognition of value in history and future. The past and future together, a perfect equation for a successful present.How do they do it? How does such a place exist, that lives art in every corner?
Even scaffolding and trash bins and mailboxes are decorated with simple illustrations or constructed in such a style to make them pleasing, to add to the collective. My impression is that it is history and an attitude of tolerance that has allowed them to appreciate life, to move beyond matters of disagreement and work together from all sides of political, religious, scientific, and personal perspectives and form a more perfect society. Oh, you are religious? Great, enjoy the meaning in the beautiful ancient churches. Oh, you are homosexual? Have a great life, we were the first country to legalize your marriage. Welcome welcome everyone, we may not all live the same way but we all live, all the same. Our differences make us more interesting.
When I look I can see golden age and holocaust, renaissance and crusade. Is "historically rich" really so important? My high school French teacher thought so, she made it clear what she thought of the US and none of us understood her distaste. That was a long time ago, I've come to understand what she meant. But never to the aching degree I felt in a land where I looked at the people and finally felt I'd found my other elf girl selves. They looked like me! Long and blonde and legs and creamy features. I love and hide behind my personal identity as the white minority in every place I've lived. This disturbed something in me, to see what I would have been if my family a few generations back had not left Western Europe. I felt proud to be European. But though my longings to explore further are directed away from the US, there is a certain cool thing about being American too, and surviving it :) After all we did just elect a black president... and yes, that is unbelievable worldwide still a year later, worth referencing again and again.
One evening I sat with friends outside a bar on the canal in Utrecht.A stranger sat down beside me, looked to be about 40. Big guy, Moroccan. Don't know which of us started it but we settled into a conversation, the bold honest talk of strangers.
"So you are not Dutch?" he asked.
"I am American. I live in Washington, DC."
"Oh, I like to meet an American," he said. I didn't ask him why, but a few minutes later he told me.
"So how old were you when all of this shit happen?"
"I'm 28," I said, trying to follow him.
"So 8 years ago. You were 20. You were in DC? What was it like there?"
"No," I caught up to his meaning.
"I was in Hawai'i. It was early in the morning. We all knew of it, right away."
"Ahh," he said. A few minutes later: "Do you like to know where I was?"
"Yes, of course."
"I was in prison."
"Here in the Netherlands?"
"No. In Morocco."
"What for?" Immediately I felt like an ass for asking, but he was cool in his reply, validating my question.
"It was not for rape, or anything like that. It was not for any thing."
"Did you learn of it right away, do they tell you in prison?"
"We learned, but not right away. I was not so happy about it. I tell you, you go to America and tell your friends. You go to DC and tell your friends, I am part of Islam and they do not ask me permission to do this.
"A personal apology, for an event with shaky details and worldwide effect.
"I will tell them," I said. "I understand."
He nodded.
I said, "They do not ask me permission about things, either."
We sipped our drinks and understood.
This the entry of "D.C. Weather Report: Mostly Bad News" blog by Iggy Bloggit from Washington D.C. ...
"When I stepped off the platform (after taking a train from the airport to Amsterdam) I saw the future: people living artfully. I arrived into a performance of style and beauty, art and grace. Ahh the Dutchies. Striking and silent. Poise in the way they ride their clunky bicycles, drive their tiny cars. Beautiful and brilliant. Ongoing preservation of really old architecture and traditions of keeping an open mind, speaking openly and to the point, tolerating and living and loving together. Recognition of value in history and future. The past and future together, a perfect equation for a successful present.How do they do it? How does such a place exist, that lives art in every corner?
Even scaffolding and trash bins and mailboxes are decorated with simple illustrations or constructed in such a style to make them pleasing, to add to the collective. My impression is that it is history and an attitude of tolerance that has allowed them to appreciate life, to move beyond matters of disagreement and work together from all sides of political, religious, scientific, and personal perspectives and form a more perfect society. Oh, you are religious? Great, enjoy the meaning in the beautiful ancient churches. Oh, you are homosexual? Have a great life, we were the first country to legalize your marriage. Welcome welcome everyone, we may not all live the same way but we all live, all the same. Our differences make us more interesting.
When I look I can see golden age and holocaust, renaissance and crusade. Is "historically rich" really so important? My high school French teacher thought so, she made it clear what she thought of the US and none of us understood her distaste. That was a long time ago, I've come to understand what she meant. But never to the aching degree I felt in a land where I looked at the people and finally felt I'd found my other elf girl selves. They looked like me! Long and blonde and legs and creamy features. I love and hide behind my personal identity as the white minority in every place I've lived. This disturbed something in me, to see what I would have been if my family a few generations back had not left Western Europe. I felt proud to be European. But though my longings to explore further are directed away from the US, there is a certain cool thing about being American too, and surviving it :) After all we did just elect a black president... and yes, that is unbelievable worldwide still a year later, worth referencing again and again.
One evening I sat with friends outside a bar on the canal in Utrecht.A stranger sat down beside me, looked to be about 40. Big guy, Moroccan. Don't know which of us started it but we settled into a conversation, the bold honest talk of strangers.
"So you are not Dutch?" he asked.
"I am American. I live in Washington, DC."
"Oh, I like to meet an American," he said. I didn't ask him why, but a few minutes later he told me.
"So how old were you when all of this shit happen?"
"I'm 28," I said, trying to follow him.
"So 8 years ago. You were 20. You were in DC? What was it like there?"
"No," I caught up to his meaning.
"I was in Hawai'i. It was early in the morning. We all knew of it, right away."
"Ahh," he said. A few minutes later: "Do you like to know where I was?"
"Yes, of course."
"I was in prison."
"Here in the Netherlands?"
"No. In Morocco."
"What for?" Immediately I felt like an ass for asking, but he was cool in his reply, validating my question.
"It was not for rape, or anything like that. It was not for any thing."
"Did you learn of it right away, do they tell you in prison?"
"We learned, but not right away. I was not so happy about it. I tell you, you go to America and tell your friends. You go to DC and tell your friends, I am part of Islam and they do not ask me permission to do this.
"A personal apology, for an event with shaky details and worldwide effect.
"I will tell them," I said. "I understand."
He nodded.
I said, "They do not ask me permission about things, either."
We sipped our drinks and understood.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Free Speech Is in Danger...
I have written about Gert Wilders, a Dutch politician that is outspoken against Islam. Today it was reported that he is being tried for "hate speech"!
What did he say? He said that the Koran was like "Mein Kampf" and that if he was to be tried, then they should bring the Turkish Muslim that killed the Dutch film maker to be tried, as well.
What was the "crime" of the film-maker? He was making a film on Islam using the testimony and life of a courgeous "freed" Muslim woman. He called the film "Submission". And she tried to get him to make the film using a pseudonym, which he did not do. Should we be driven by fear, when it comes to making a documentary, telling the truth of a life?
Is this crazy or what? Is there 'One Special" and Priviledged religion nowadays? The U.N. has granted special rights over and above the Declaration of Human Rights. Islam should not be granted the right to kill someone for any reason. Killing should trump "religious freedom".
It seems we have things backwards today. We become so afraid of discrimination, that we inadvertly discriminate. And why? How can we un-do what has been done in the past? We can only promote more justice in the future by social norms, not legislation. The problem, is that many in the West do not hold religion as seriously as those in the East. And that is something that is taken seriously by political/religious ideologies. Just look at the Christian Church during its "reign of power".
Power corrupts, so there should be no priviledged race, religion, or sex. And we cannot protect from discrimination by "quotas".
What did he say? He said that the Koran was like "Mein Kampf" and that if he was to be tried, then they should bring the Turkish Muslim that killed the Dutch film maker to be tried, as well.
What was the "crime" of the film-maker? He was making a film on Islam using the testimony and life of a courgeous "freed" Muslim woman. He called the film "Submission". And she tried to get him to make the film using a pseudonym, which he did not do. Should we be driven by fear, when it comes to making a documentary, telling the truth of a life?
Is this crazy or what? Is there 'One Special" and Priviledged religion nowadays? The U.N. has granted special rights over and above the Declaration of Human Rights. Islam should not be granted the right to kill someone for any reason. Killing should trump "religious freedom".
It seems we have things backwards today. We become so afraid of discrimination, that we inadvertly discriminate. And why? How can we un-do what has been done in the past? We can only promote more justice in the future by social norms, not legislation. The problem, is that many in the West do not hold religion as seriously as those in the East. And that is something that is taken seriously by political/religious ideologies. Just look at the Christian Church during its "reign of power".
Power corrupts, so there should be no priviledged race, religion, or sex. And we cannot protect from discrimination by "quotas".
Friday, September 11, 2009
Happy 9-11? The Challenge of Liberty and Justice.
Of course 9-11 was not "happy". And because we do not want to experience such a "happy" occassion again, we cannot forget what is symbolized.
9-11 symbolized such a radical faith that men and women are willing to die for it. This faith is a faith that is based not on reason, but revelation. It is not just a transcentdental view of life, but also, a political one. Islam is a politicized faith. And such a politicized faith as an absolutist, exclusivistic, and intolerant one, is dangerous indeed. It does not allow women and children basic human rights nor is it open to change. Those who impose laws that support such a faith are intolerant and authoritarian.
Our Founders found a nation based on freedoms. Freedoms from human authorities and based on the "rule of law". Men and women were willing to die for such liberties. Such radical commitment to the values that underwrote our Constitution are what gain human liberty and underwrite human rights movement. America's laws protect individual liberties and are not intolerant, unchanging and authoritarian.
Our nation is known for it opportunites and its innovation. We are a nation that absorbs all cultures and does not discriminate based upon personal convictions. Freedom of thought and speech guaruntees that the public's interest will be won at the ballot box. Our views have been so conditioned by such an environment, that it is hard for us to imagine such an oppressive religious regime. Our Founders protected our society from religious wars by the Establishment Clause.
Now, on the twilight of a decade of struggling against a religious view, our nation finds itself in a type of 'religious war' over legislation and how we should treat those who do not respect the 'rule of law'. This is a dangerous time in our country's history, but not because of "God's impending judgment" upon an ungodly nation, but because of the undermining of our country's valuing of liberty and law. We are unlike any other nation, because we are a government "for the people and by the people". Let us count our blessing todays and not forget the costs of liberty and furthering justice.
Aren't you glad that you live in America?
9-11 symbolized such a radical faith that men and women are willing to die for it. This faith is a faith that is based not on reason, but revelation. It is not just a transcentdental view of life, but also, a political one. Islam is a politicized faith. And such a politicized faith as an absolutist, exclusivistic, and intolerant one, is dangerous indeed. It does not allow women and children basic human rights nor is it open to change. Those who impose laws that support such a faith are intolerant and authoritarian.
Our Founders found a nation based on freedoms. Freedoms from human authorities and based on the "rule of law". Men and women were willing to die for such liberties. Such radical commitment to the values that underwrote our Constitution are what gain human liberty and underwrite human rights movement. America's laws protect individual liberties and are not intolerant, unchanging and authoritarian.
Our nation is known for it opportunites and its innovation. We are a nation that absorbs all cultures and does not discriminate based upon personal convictions. Freedom of thought and speech guaruntees that the public's interest will be won at the ballot box. Our views have been so conditioned by such an environment, that it is hard for us to imagine such an oppressive religious regime. Our Founders protected our society from religious wars by the Establishment Clause.
Now, on the twilight of a decade of struggling against a religious view, our nation finds itself in a type of 'religious war' over legislation and how we should treat those who do not respect the 'rule of law'. This is a dangerous time in our country's history, but not because of "God's impending judgment" upon an ungodly nation, but because of the undermining of our country's valuing of liberty and law. We are unlike any other nation, because we are a government "for the people and by the people". Let us count our blessing todays and not forget the costs of liberty and furthering justice.
Aren't you glad that you live in America?
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
The "Ideal" Sits Within the "Imperfect" World
This morning over breakfast, a friend and I had a discussion about "life". We realized that life was a "desire", as well as a "disappointment". What do we do with the disappointment? And what does the "desire" mean?
The "desire" we both had was over the "Ideal Life". And we questioned how we came to the "ideal". Was our "ideal" the same as another's cultural "ideal"? Was our "ideal" influenced by our cultural "Disney World" standards? And what would that mean as to a "True Ideal"?
The cultural "ideal" of Islam is not what I would consider an "ideal". Honor killing for the sake of God's honor is horrendously offensive. And I told my friend that it makes me very angry. This is why I find myself curious as to the U.N.' tolerance to Islam's atrocious acts of inhumanity! How can ANY civilized society tolerate such barbariansim? The civilized world MUST defend itself against such religious zealotry! Otherwise, our disregard of injustice toward individuals will lead us down a primrose path to slavery under Sharia Law, in the name of tolerance and cultural relativity/diversity!
I told my friend that I had grown more passionate about political engagement than theological reflection, because the political realm was where people really lived. The ideals of our Constitution which defends and protects our citizens' lives are universal standards of human rights, as well as national defenses.
We are a people because we choose to live in a land that is free, but also, dependent on our commitment to freedom and justice in our public life. So, when it comes to reason, most of us would choose freedom of conscience in regards to religious conviciton and not the other way around, where religious conviction supplants reason because of some cultural understanding of "god"!
The "desire" we both had was over the "Ideal Life". And we questioned how we came to the "ideal". Was our "ideal" the same as another's cultural "ideal"? Was our "ideal" influenced by our cultural "Disney World" standards? And what would that mean as to a "True Ideal"?
The cultural "ideal" of Islam is not what I would consider an "ideal". Honor killing for the sake of God's honor is horrendously offensive. And I told my friend that it makes me very angry. This is why I find myself curious as to the U.N.' tolerance to Islam's atrocious acts of inhumanity! How can ANY civilized society tolerate such barbariansim? The civilized world MUST defend itself against such religious zealotry! Otherwise, our disregard of injustice toward individuals will lead us down a primrose path to slavery under Sharia Law, in the name of tolerance and cultural relativity/diversity!
I told my friend that I had grown more passionate about political engagement than theological reflection, because the political realm was where people really lived. The ideals of our Constitution which defends and protects our citizens' lives are universal standards of human rights, as well as national defenses.
We are a people because we choose to live in a land that is free, but also, dependent on our commitment to freedom and justice in our public life. So, when it comes to reason, most of us would choose freedom of conscience in regards to religious conviciton and not the other way around, where religious conviction supplants reason because of some cultural understanding of "god"!
Sunday, March 15, 2009
The Documentary "Obsession"
This evening my son, his fiance', my husband and I watched a documentary that my sister in law had sent us about Islam. It was filled with testimonies from actual ex-terrorists, and Muslims, themselves.
In the film, there was a dire warning of radical Islam, while supporting moderate Muslims. The similarities drawn between radical Muslims, and Nazi Germany, was eerie. The similarities were not just thier commitment to takeover the West, but also down to the details of its symbolism.
Edmund Burke said that all that needed to happen to allow evil to prevail is for good men to not act. I am afraid that our "political correctness" caused us to be inactive toward this radicalism. And it has furthered the agenda of evil dreams to transform the West into a terrotory for Allah.
Perhaps, because the roots of Islam, Judiasm and Christianity lie in the same history, the West has acquiesed to a tolerant attitude at large toward Islam. A radical tolerance is a "welcome mat" for domination, as this is the very "hope" of these radicals, taking the world for Islam! Is the West too naive, or been so far removed from religious ideology that we sleep, while the "devil" is at the door, waiting to come in?
In one segment, an ex-Nazi youth was interviewed about his submission to Hitler's ideological "mantra" of superiority. The British Prime minister at that time had signed a "peace agreement" with Hitler that he waved before the new media as a "sign" of "goodwill" and forthcoming peaceful world. Ideologies do not bow to compromise, as their absolute understanding of reality is not to be denied. It is sad to say that many have painted the West as the culprit of this evil, by demonizing the West as imperialistic, while the Islamic media use terrorizing and violent propaganda to demonize the West. The stark reality is that the West is "apologetic" toward any attempt at defending its right to exist and "be different". And we are seeing the underming of our laws in the West, because of our tolerance and deference to an ideological "evil".
It is very clear to me that what is called conservative Christian faith and discipleship is very similar to radical Islam. The similarities run from the "vision" of world domination to "martyrdom for the faith" as being considered "sold out to "God" (Allah)...This type of faith is not rational and cannot be appealed to based on reason. These "faithful" have left reason behind, as faith alone matters.
I fear for our country, and the West, its ideals of freedom, which Islam hates. Uniformity and unity is the mantra of the radical. I fear for the ideals of life, as "death" to self, either literally or figuratively is the "ideal" of commitment and discipleship in radical faith traiditons.
Hopefully, we have enough leadership in Washington to help shore up our defense against such radical ideologies, cultures, and faith commitments.
In the film, there was a dire warning of radical Islam, while supporting moderate Muslims. The similarities drawn between radical Muslims, and Nazi Germany, was eerie. The similarities were not just thier commitment to takeover the West, but also down to the details of its symbolism.
Edmund Burke said that all that needed to happen to allow evil to prevail is for good men to not act. I am afraid that our "political correctness" caused us to be inactive toward this radicalism. And it has furthered the agenda of evil dreams to transform the West into a terrotory for Allah.
Perhaps, because the roots of Islam, Judiasm and Christianity lie in the same history, the West has acquiesed to a tolerant attitude at large toward Islam. A radical tolerance is a "welcome mat" for domination, as this is the very "hope" of these radicals, taking the world for Islam! Is the West too naive, or been so far removed from religious ideology that we sleep, while the "devil" is at the door, waiting to come in?
In one segment, an ex-Nazi youth was interviewed about his submission to Hitler's ideological "mantra" of superiority. The British Prime minister at that time had signed a "peace agreement" with Hitler that he waved before the new media as a "sign" of "goodwill" and forthcoming peaceful world. Ideologies do not bow to compromise, as their absolute understanding of reality is not to be denied. It is sad to say that many have painted the West as the culprit of this evil, by demonizing the West as imperialistic, while the Islamic media use terrorizing and violent propaganda to demonize the West. The stark reality is that the West is "apologetic" toward any attempt at defending its right to exist and "be different". And we are seeing the underming of our laws in the West, because of our tolerance and deference to an ideological "evil".
It is very clear to me that what is called conservative Christian faith and discipleship is very similar to radical Islam. The similarities run from the "vision" of world domination to "martyrdom for the faith" as being considered "sold out to "God" (Allah)...This type of faith is not rational and cannot be appealed to based on reason. These "faithful" have left reason behind, as faith alone matters.
I fear for our country, and the West, its ideals of freedom, which Islam hates. Uniformity and unity is the mantra of the radical. I fear for the ideals of life, as "death" to self, either literally or figuratively is the "ideal" of commitment and discipleship in radical faith traiditons.
Hopefully, we have enough leadership in Washington to help shore up our defense against such radical ideologies, cultures, and faith commitments.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Honor Killing
I just heard on NPR that a man was being prosecuted for killing his wife. The Inman , who was being questioned about this "duty", basically said that when a Christian or Jew beats their wife, there are no reprecussions, whereas, if a Muslim beats his, he is persecuted.
I find that any justification of beating anyone, is unbelievable. How can anyone justify that? I guess honor and shame are really an important attribute of religious social control!
I find that any justification of beating anyone, is unbelievable. How can anyone justify that? I guess honor and shame are really an important attribute of religious social control!
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
BANNED!
My husband just came in from work and told me that Gert Wilders was invited to show his piece about Islam, in England, but was not allowed into the country. What? A free Western nation bans someone's free speech? Were they afraid of retaliation from extremists? Did they think that his criticism of a religion was inapropriate? Is tolerance to a religion, even if extreme, more important than freedom?
My husband said Wilders piece was only informing from the Koran, and showing how the Taliban implements their discipline. It takes great courage to inform such an intolerant tradition. There is no openness to another's opinions, at least, in the end. Their vision is total control and domination under God's rule.
Hirshi Aryan Ali warned that the tolerance and religious freedom of the West would allow free reign to political infilteration and finally an enslavement to a narrow view of religious tradition under Shairia Law. This is greatly disturbing to the future of our individual rights, human and otherwise.
My husband said Wilders piece was only informing from the Koran, and showing how the Taliban implements their discipline. It takes great courage to inform such an intolerant tradition. There is no openness to another's opinions, at least, in the end. Their vision is total control and domination under God's rule.
Hirshi Aryan Ali warned that the tolerance and religious freedom of the West would allow free reign to political infilteration and finally an enslavement to a narrow view of religious tradition under Shairia Law. This is greatly disturbing to the future of our individual rights, human and otherwise.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Geert Wilder's on T.V. Tonight
Geert Wilder was on T.V. tonight talking about his concern for the Dutch culture, because of the prominence of Muslims. This is of concern also for my husband as he was born and raised in the Netherlands. His family still resides there, where his brother-in-law has some of the same concerns. Wilders said he had nothing against the Muslims themselves, but he had tried to expose some of the Koran's message, which should alarm most Westerners. A radical message against our culture.
Now he is being charged with intolerance, in one of the most tolerant nations in the EU. While he is being charged, the Muslims have posters of Wilders with guns pointed at his head, yet, they are never held accountable. Why?
Why is the U.N. allowing Muslim nations to practice their "honor killings", when the U.N. is to
protect human rights? Is culture more important than human life?
I am beginning to think that this is not a war to win by creating a Christian culture, but in standing for human rights, which means the right of the individual in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
American values would be the height of arrogance and subversion of Islam's cultural values, as tradition rules the individual in every detail.
In the last six months, I have gone twice to the Newsmuseum in D.C. where the radio antenae to one of the towers is 'featured" along with actual footage and a minute by minute unfolding of the attack. The four story high wall is filled with newspaper headlines from around the world . We had worldwide sympathy.
What kind of culture can kill in the name of God because a woman is raped or goes out alone, or does not want an arranged marriage? What kind of culture creates suicide bombers, who give their life willingly for God? What kind of culture lies to the Infidels, as these do not deserve respect or dignity? What kind of culture would mutilate the female genitals and sew it shut, so that it can be known if there is inappropriate behavior? And then, in marriage, there is no pleasure, but pain in the marital bed?
America and the Western world need to understand that our culture, which allows tolerance, is hard pressed to deny even those who would seek to undermine our 'way of life". How do we hold to our values, and yet, protect ourselves? I don't know, and I'm concerned, as what is in store for our future.
Now he is being charged with intolerance, in one of the most tolerant nations in the EU. While he is being charged, the Muslims have posters of Wilders with guns pointed at his head, yet, they are never held accountable. Why?
Why is the U.N. allowing Muslim nations to practice their "honor killings", when the U.N. is to
protect human rights? Is culture more important than human life?
I am beginning to think that this is not a war to win by creating a Christian culture, but in standing for human rights, which means the right of the individual in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
American values would be the height of arrogance and subversion of Islam's cultural values, as tradition rules the individual in every detail.
In the last six months, I have gone twice to the Newsmuseum in D.C. where the radio antenae to one of the towers is 'featured" along with actual footage and a minute by minute unfolding of the attack. The four story high wall is filled with newspaper headlines from around the world . We had worldwide sympathy.
What kind of culture can kill in the name of God because a woman is raped or goes out alone, or does not want an arranged marriage? What kind of culture creates suicide bombers, who give their life willingly for God? What kind of culture lies to the Infidels, as these do not deserve respect or dignity? What kind of culture would mutilate the female genitals and sew it shut, so that it can be known if there is inappropriate behavior? And then, in marriage, there is no pleasure, but pain in the marital bed?
America and the Western world need to understand that our culture, which allows tolerance, is hard pressed to deny even those who would seek to undermine our 'way of life". How do we hold to our values, and yet, protect ourselves? I don't know, and I'm concerned, as what is in store for our future.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Conservative Evangelicals Call for Concern
I just read a friend's forwarded e-mail about a concern over the UN's passage of "Defamation of Religions" resolution. It is driven by th 57 Islamic states to protect themselves from "persecution" of practicing their religion. It calls for tolerance.
Of course, evangelical Christians are concerned because their faith is the "right one" and those who risk their lives by converting Muslims are in danger of death, as well as the converted. The question remains, can we be tolerant to intolerance? Certainly international law would promote tolerance in general, but it should protect the human rights of the individual and not give Islam the right to kill in the name of their religion (god). It is outrageous that the West cannot take a stand against intolerance such as this. It combines law and religion over conscience and demands obedience under fear of death. This type of culture is a culture of death indeed, for it leaves no room for creativity or difference and it impedes the full development and flourishing of man. Human rights have no "rights" within Islam's tight frame of identity.
There is much discussion concerning what it means to be a human being. Islam doesn't care about what it means to be a human being because their view of God is more important than man and being a human being.
Of course, evangelical Christians are concerned because their faith is the "right one" and those who risk their lives by converting Muslims are in danger of death, as well as the converted. The question remains, can we be tolerant to intolerance? Certainly international law would promote tolerance in general, but it should protect the human rights of the individual and not give Islam the right to kill in the name of their religion (god). It is outrageous that the West cannot take a stand against intolerance such as this. It combines law and religion over conscience and demands obedience under fear of death. This type of culture is a culture of death indeed, for it leaves no room for creativity or difference and it impedes the full development and flourishing of man. Human rights have no "rights" within Islam's tight frame of identity.
There is much discussion concerning what it means to be a human being. Islam doesn't care about what it means to be a human being because their view of God is more important than man and being a human being.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Circumcision, Christianity, and Common Sense
I was told tonight by a scholar of "Lost Christianities" that Christian faith was rooted in Muslim faith and that someone from this time period would have felt more comfortable in a Mosque than a Western Church and that some of the practices, such as how they pray were much closer to Christian roots. While I understand that Jewish, Islamic and Christian roots are rooted in the Hebrew text, I do not adhere to this tradition's understanding of ethics...
In "Infidel", a Somalian woman talks about how she is circumcised and sewn up to prevent premarital intercourse. She has no pleasure within her marital sexual experience as she is torn and scared by the procedure! She cannot go outside without a male accompanying her. She recites all of her geneology for generations back, as this is her identity and tribal culture.
Phillip Jenkins, a religious studies professor, as well as historian of 20th century America, etc. from PennState, spoke on his new book, "Lost Christianities". His approach was solely a religious one and I was curious as he did not talk about colonialism or politics in general. Religious studies, of course, does not necessarily cover other subjects, but I find it very limiting and narrow to view a tradition even within its own history without expanding that udnerstanding beyond the tradition. Traditions do create a "world", but a limited one....
Christianity is rooted in Judiasm and was a peasant movement. In understanding group identity and how these identities form, Christianity became a separate identity under the writers of Pauls letters and was furthered through the testimony of the scribes who wrote the Gospels. It was an attempt to create a special identity within a God framework, as Judiasm had in the past. Those who have been discriminated, the "outsider", are those who are likely to create their own story, rather than identify with those who persecute or oppose them. Was this what Dr. Jenkins purposes happened to these people under the persecution of Constantine and the Crusades? The empire persecutes the underdogs and the underdogs create a way to survive under persecution. It is an interesting thought/theory. I don't know enough about the history and have not read Dr. Jenkins book.
I do know that Hirshi Ayraan Ali is an atheist because of her abuse. Her identity is not found within a God framework, but a political one. I don't find that this is wrong, as we all desire to survive in the best environment possible, which is one that is free of oppression, whether it be religious, or political. Common sense tells us that we choose freedom for our own self-interest, as well as the interests of others! What better framework than our American identity?
In "Infidel", a Somalian woman talks about how she is circumcised and sewn up to prevent premarital intercourse. She has no pleasure within her marital sexual experience as she is torn and scared by the procedure! She cannot go outside without a male accompanying her. She recites all of her geneology for generations back, as this is her identity and tribal culture.
Phillip Jenkins, a religious studies professor, as well as historian of 20th century America, etc. from PennState, spoke on his new book, "Lost Christianities". His approach was solely a religious one and I was curious as he did not talk about colonialism or politics in general. Religious studies, of course, does not necessarily cover other subjects, but I find it very limiting and narrow to view a tradition even within its own history without expanding that udnerstanding beyond the tradition. Traditions do create a "world", but a limited one....
Christianity is rooted in Judiasm and was a peasant movement. In understanding group identity and how these identities form, Christianity became a separate identity under the writers of Pauls letters and was furthered through the testimony of the scribes who wrote the Gospels. It was an attempt to create a special identity within a God framework, as Judiasm had in the past. Those who have been discriminated, the "outsider", are those who are likely to create their own story, rather than identify with those who persecute or oppose them. Was this what Dr. Jenkins purposes happened to these people under the persecution of Constantine and the Crusades? The empire persecutes the underdogs and the underdogs create a way to survive under persecution. It is an interesting thought/theory. I don't know enough about the history and have not read Dr. Jenkins book.
I do know that Hirshi Ayraan Ali is an atheist because of her abuse. Her identity is not found within a God framework, but a political one. I don't find that this is wrong, as we all desire to survive in the best environment possible, which is one that is free of oppression, whether it be religious, or political. Common sense tells us that we choose freedom for our own self-interest, as well as the interests of others! What better framework than our American identity?
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Group Identity and Prejuidice
Yesterday, in a class discussion on Wiesel's "Night", I asked the class what constituted "group identity". They listed many identifiers such as; clothing, food, beliefs, music, etc. It is in effect, culture. We talked about how we identified, if we did, with each of these identifiers. Then, I asked them how they 'judged" others based upon the differences in these identifiers.
We talked about authority , i.e., parenting, good government and what transpires when there is not good government. What responses should we take when a government is not a good one.
We then discussed how Nazi Germany saw the Jew. Did they know or have the experience of seeing some with "eyes of prejuidice". On what basis did they 'judge' the other and if that judgment was reasonable. We talked of the principle of scapegoating others, as a psychological response, instead of owning our own behavior and opinion. Prejuidice is not necessarily "bad", if their are reasonable reasons why one holds to a certain view, as we are all biased.
I asked them how they would "counsel" those who were going through suffering, as we had talked about what was important to do when someone suffered in our last class. When we talked about the reasons for suffering, I used Bart Ehrman's divisions in how Scripture understood suffering; prophetic (sin of the past, that results in present suffering), apocalytic (belief in God's sovereignty, and purpose for the future), and wisdom( cyclic view of history and an acceptance of "no reason"). I then, asked them how each of these views would be understood or felt by Wiesel, if they were "counselling" him. It was a good discussion.
I write all of this because I think it is an important discussion when the West is in crisis with understanding where proper boundaries must be defined and defended. We, in the West, have brought about our own demise in the political and philosophical arena where we have become so tolerant, that we undermine or devalue reason itself. As Christian faith has been based on personal commitment and conviction, the West can no longer hold any resistance to Islam's claim to equal "tolerance" and representation. Certain convictions cannot be tolerated when it comes to human rights. Human rights are undermined in Islam's claim on knowing "Allah's will". Allah becomes an all powerful "EGO" that over-rides rationality and demands obedience and the sacrifice of life to his "glory".
As a nation that believes in the individual's conscience and right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, we must also stand for rationality when it comes to faith and faith claims...
We talked about authority , i.e., parenting, good government and what transpires when there is not good government. What responses should we take when a government is not a good one.
We then discussed how Nazi Germany saw the Jew. Did they know or have the experience of seeing some with "eyes of prejuidice". On what basis did they 'judge' the other and if that judgment was reasonable. We talked of the principle of scapegoating others, as a psychological response, instead of owning our own behavior and opinion. Prejuidice is not necessarily "bad", if their are reasonable reasons why one holds to a certain view, as we are all biased.
I asked them how they would "counsel" those who were going through suffering, as we had talked about what was important to do when someone suffered in our last class. When we talked about the reasons for suffering, I used Bart Ehrman's divisions in how Scripture understood suffering; prophetic (sin of the past, that results in present suffering), apocalytic (belief in God's sovereignty, and purpose for the future), and wisdom( cyclic view of history and an acceptance of "no reason"). I then, asked them how each of these views would be understood or felt by Wiesel, if they were "counselling" him. It was a good discussion.
I write all of this because I think it is an important discussion when the West is in crisis with understanding where proper boundaries must be defined and defended. We, in the West, have brought about our own demise in the political and philosophical arena where we have become so tolerant, that we undermine or devalue reason itself. As Christian faith has been based on personal commitment and conviction, the West can no longer hold any resistance to Islam's claim to equal "tolerance" and representation. Certain convictions cannot be tolerated when it comes to human rights. Human rights are undermined in Islam's claim on knowing "Allah's will". Allah becomes an all powerful "EGO" that over-rides rationality and demands obedience and the sacrifice of life to his "glory".
As a nation that believes in the individual's conscience and right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, we must also stand for rationality when it comes to faith and faith claims...
Thursday, September 11, 2008
National Identity, the Palestinians, and Religion
I have recently been thinking about Islam, as it is 9/11. A professor from Bethlehem Bible College in "Palestine" came to our university twice and talked about the injustices of Israel against the Palestinians.
What was this injustice? Most of us have read and heard about the occupied territories and the constant warring between these two "brothers". This professor from Bethlehem Bible College said that the understanding of the territories is different, of course, than what we now know as Israel. Are these people without an identity because they have no "nation-state"? What does justice look like when it comes to these kinds of disputes? Is Muslim identity soley a religious one and that is the problem concerning terrorism? Are they seeking an identity only in Shairia Law, that they try to export into Western nations? And what about Western nations that have difficulties in knowing how to integrate a "people" whose identity is so tightly bound to their religion?
These questions, I'm sure, have been studied by the State Department and our diplomats. What do you think the solution is? A dissolution of national identity? Whose law will rule, then? Is a Democracy congruent with Islamic Law? Is a one world government possible? How are the nations to resolve these issues when the U.N. and international law has not? What do you think?
What was this injustice? Most of us have read and heard about the occupied territories and the constant warring between these two "brothers". This professor from Bethlehem Bible College said that the understanding of the territories is different, of course, than what we now know as Israel. Are these people without an identity because they have no "nation-state"? What does justice look like when it comes to these kinds of disputes? Is Muslim identity soley a religious one and that is the problem concerning terrorism? Are they seeking an identity only in Shairia Law, that they try to export into Western nations? And what about Western nations that have difficulties in knowing how to integrate a "people" whose identity is so tightly bound to their religion?
These questions, I'm sure, have been studied by the State Department and our diplomats. What do you think the solution is? A dissolution of national identity? Whose law will rule, then? Is a Democracy congruent with Islamic Law? Is a one world government possible? How are the nations to resolve these issues when the U.N. and international law has not? What do you think?
Monday, June 30, 2008
"Law and Order"?
The Afghan government is holding a 23 year-old journalism student for "speaking against Islam". There is a petition out by the Center for Inquiry against his imprisonment. What did he do?
He distributed information about the oppression of women under Islam. And some think that we can "reason" with people who hold Islamic Law above reason. Faithfulness is not an option in a regime that maintains power in the name of God.
He distributed information about the oppression of women under Islam. And some think that we can "reason" with people who hold Islamic Law above reason. Faithfulness is not an option in a regime that maintains power in the name of God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)