Tuesday, September 09, 2008

Forget about Islamic theology and history: it's their own daily words that convict Muslims

A good piece in that it demonstrates that nothing less than modern Muslim rhetoric exposes Islam even to those non-Muslims who refuse to take Islamic theology and history seriously. "An Historical Moment for Islam," by Dr. Richard L. Benkin for the Asian Tribune, September 9: Many argue ... that our fight is not really against radical Islam but against Islam itself. Even our enemies tell us that again and again; that what they do is mandated by their faith. I respond that is only the radicals’ warped opinion. Not true, people say, and they quote Quranic passages that mandate a universal Caliphate and prohibit friendship with non-Muslims. I retort with passages from other holy books that also call from [sic: for?] some pretty gruesome behavior. But then I am shown Islam’s history of forcing its faith on others by fire and sword; of the many killed because they would not submit. True enough, I reply, but is that essentially Islamic any more than the Inquisition is essentially Christian?

For the record, what "pretty gruesome behavior" is found in "other" holy books? What other major holy book calls for a universal empire (caliphate) or openly prohibits its adherents from befriending "others"? As for Islam's bloody history by "fire and sword" not being essentially Islamic the way the Inquisition is not essentially Christian, here's the problem with that analogy: In the Bible, one will be sorely pressed to find anything even remotely justifying the Inquisition; in the Koran -- not to mention the hadith, sira, tarikh, etc. -- one will find innumerable justifications, indeed, commands, for conquest by fire and sword. Moreover, today, one will be extremely hard pressed to find self-identified Christians who approve of the Inquisition. Conversely, in the Islamic world, today as yesterday, the initiators of the violent and bloody Islamic conquests, especially the first four "righteous" caliphs, are still venerated, and, second to the Islamic prophet himself, are often seen as role models. This is no different than if the Christian world today idolized Torquemada of the Spanish Inquisition. Subtle but important points. Here, though, is the writer's one solid observation:

There is one argument, however, for which I have no compelling answer: the consistent failure of Muslim leaders—both religious and political—to condemn Islamist terrorism unequivocally and to maintain that principled stance. That means condemning terrorism without always adding how "others" are terrorists, too; without "understanding" the terrorists’ alleged frustration; without providing a loophole to define innocent victims as potential adversaries. When Dr. Baruch Goldstein entered a mosque in Hevron, Israel and began shooting, the Jewish world including the government of Israel condemned him without trying to "explain" his actions. When extremists turned his gravesite into a place of pilgrimage, the Israeli government destroyed it.

On the other hand, what do Muslims hear at the mosque? Anti-Islamist Muslim, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury of Bangladesh says he was told, "Kill a Jew, be a good Muslim." Neither is that relegated to a small group of extremists. Muslim clerics regularly refer to Jews a "sons of apes and pigs," to Christians as "Crusaders," and to Hindus as "polytheists"; with each of those designations telling Muslims to treat those non-Muslims with contempt. Every week, these calls—and worse—are played to millions on state-run radio in Muslim countries. When Israelis released Sami Kuntar, who smashed a baby’s head with a rifle butt, Muslim clerics and political leaders hailed him as a hero. Not one dissented.

Of course, even this accurate observation can be explained away as just another example that Islam does, in fact, teach violence, intolerance, and the rest.

Today, however, Muslim leaders have a chance to reverse that shame and put to rest claims that Islam is the problem.

[...]

All of Islam now has the chance to stand on the side of justice. Will it answer the challenge?

No comments: