The following guest post was submitted by Tossman.
Tossman is a frequent M* visitor and commenter. He hails from the Lone Star State (for those of you in Rio Linda, that’s Texas) and he currently resides in Salt Lake City.
I’m worried. I’m worried about America. I’m worried about Western society. It seems that no matter what else attracts my interest or commands my attention, my mind inevitably returns to one subject. Islam. No, not the friendly Muslim janitor at my work or the owners of the Mediterranean restaurant at the mall. I’m not worried about my several colleagues at work who happen to worship Allah.
I’m worried about Islam’s radical element. The element who unabashedly seeks to destroy Israel and America. The element who is killing our soldiers in Iraq every day. I’m worried about a spreading mindset of zombie-like possession, determined without fear to destroy me. I’m worried about Iran. I’m worried about shari’a law.
These things have been weighing on my mind the last few years and, to be honest, months of study and prayer have resulted only in a confused mind and a troubled heart. Political/News articles attempting to assess Islam’s role on the world stage abound. And I know where I personally stand when it comes to the secular politics of it all.
Unfortunately, the matter is never addressed in spiritual terms other than by the Jerry Fallwell types. We don’t talk about it in church, and, no offense intended, but for whatever reason Conference speakers won’t touch the subject. Politically, I think I have a grasp on this. Spiritually, well that’s another matter completely. I’ve been hanging out here for about a year now and I’ve discovered that many of you have a lot of good insight into gospel, political, philosophical matters. So, I’d like to appeal to those here who have perhaps done more research than I or who maybe have a better personal understanding of it.
I do not want this discussion to devolve into another political spat. Those who have read my posts here know I’m sarcastic, cynical, and partisan. This is a different kind of post for me. I am sincerely looking for answers. When it comes to world issues I tend to be more political and less spiritual. But I’ve hit a political dead end. Politically, my optimism has been drained. I must now attempt to look at this through a spiritual prism. I’d like answers to the following questions:
1) Is Islam a religion of peace? Again, I’m not talking Muslim people. I know several and they’re very good and honorable people. I’m talking Islam itself. Who is a true Muslim- the guy in the next apartment who dutifully worships Allah, but who has no desire to overthrow my government, convert by force, and introduce Shari’a law? Or the guy who walks into a pizza parlor in Israel and blows himself up? Which one would Mohammed be more proud of? What does the Koran say about the infidel and Islam’s role in the world?
2) We are told time and time again that the vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving and that the radical fringes are only a fraction of the greater number of Muslims. Ok then, so why can’t the vast majority simply stamp out the radicals? These radicals, according to what we read in the news, have hijacked Islam, resulting in all kinds of persecution and wrong-doings against regular Muslims. Since 911, America has apparently waged a crusade against Islam. It seems to me then that your average Muslim would be pretty disgusted with the radical fringe. Why then can’t they simply stamp out this small fringe? Either they will not or they cannot. I don’t know which is scarier.
3) Are principles like beating women, dhimminitude, and honor killings facets of greater peaceful Islam or simply its radical circles? What does the Koran mean in its verses on the infidel, and how does the average Muslim interpret these verses?
4) As Islam spreads and grows, will not its radical fringes also? Look at Europe. European civilization is currently not reproducing at a rate that will replace itself. Immigration to European countries is almost all from Islamic states. Muslims in Europe are the ones having the kids. Various projections differ on the years, but all conclude that given the current reproduction and immigration rates, France, the UK, and Germany will all be majority Muslim fairly soon. That’s not to say these are radicals. But take for example a recent policy in Britain to not teach about the crusades or the holocaust for fear of offending Muslims. Take for example the almost daily riots in France. Take for example a recent ruling by a German judge in favor of Shari’a law. I believe that not only will Europe become majority Muslim, I believe that one by one European countries will become Islamic States.
I know what I think politically. I think Western society will die like the frog in a pan of warming water, that doesn’t think to jump out until the water is boiling and it’s too late. We’re mired in political correctness and we have not the spine to even see- let alone deal- with radical Islam. By all means, please let me know if I’m wrong on that, because I would love nothing more than to be wrong on that. But I am also looking for spiritual answers. I hope this can be a worthwhile discussion.
Please remember to be respectful of the religious beliefs of others when posting. Moreover, please avoid partisan attacks or political bashing when commenting.
Any comments that do not conform to the M* comments policy will be removed.
Ultimately, I’m only concerned about whether the Gospel succeeds, not whether America succeeds.
This isn’t a political statement. It’s a renunciation of the fear you speak of.
Seth- I’m not talking about America as much as I’m talking about Western society. Yeah, I’m concerned about the Gospel’s success, but I think people should be also worried about the decline of the society that made the restoration possible.
The Gospel will succeed. That’s guaranteed. So my main concern is liberal Western society. It seems to me that we’re so plagued by political correctness that we will eventually let Islamic Law take over. We are watching it happen to Europe right now.
I fear for my children and grandchildren for whom a world ruled by Islamic Law is a real possibility. Western culture may be degenerate and evil in a lot of ways. But I would rather live in a world where my neighbors were free to be unrighteous, than one where they are compelled.
I hope the point of my post was clear enough. I would like to look at Islam and its subgroups through a spiritual and gospel-based prism. What role will Islam play in end times? What prophesies (ancient or latter day) that may give some perspective?
Tossman,
Before I answer your questions, I want to state that I personally am not afraid of Islam, or of anyone who threatens my life. With trust in the Lord for my protection, I do not fear. People like Bin Laden have no power over me. They can rant and rave to their heart’s content; they can even kill the body, but in the end, they have no power over me. I’m giving you my perspective.
As for your questions:
1. Yes, Islam is a religion of peace, as much as Christianity is. From the perspective of Christians, it is hard to see that Christians have started numerous wars over religion over the past 2000 years, and forcibly converted millions throughout Europe and Asia. Christianity is at a point in its history where it is highly developed and highly rich. Islam is not at that point, so to compare Islam to today’s Christianity is not fair. But both religions have had violent streaks in them. That said, both religions are about peace and following God as they interpret Him.
2. Why don’t the moderates stomp out the extremists? Because that’s not the moderates’ way. Moderates are inherently non-confrontational. Secondly, Islam is not a hierarchical religion, like Christianity. There is no one (or even a group) individual who guides Islam. This is of course a problem when situations arise, like the current one, and someone authoritative needs to do something or say something to solve the problem. Clearly, however, when you read the Qu’ran, you will find that what these fundamentalists are setting out to do is not scriptural.
3. No, the beating of women is not an accurate interpretation of the Qu’ran. But much like in all other religions in the world, the men of Islam have taken advantage of their strength to subjugate women to their rule.
4. That depends on how well two things happen. 1) how well the West treats Muslims in general, and 2) how well Muslims rebuff the extremists in their midst. Both things need to happen. As far as Europe turning Islamic, don’t fear that. It won’t happen.
Basically, Christianity has for such a long time had a bit of a monopoly on religion and cultural influence among the peoples of the world that it doesn’t know how to handle the growth of a competitor. But the growth of this competitor does not in any way equate the destruction of the former. Hardly. It may actually be good for Christianity, because it will force Christianity to get better. And frankly speaking, there is a lot that Christianity must do to improve.
Dan- I appreciate your perspectives. There is a cycle that world religions seem to go through and I believe liberal Western culture has benefitted greatly from where greater Christianity is in its cycle.
How so? I don’t have stats at the moment (I can dig them up), but demographically, Many European countries are becoming de facto Islamic states.
I admire your statement that you do not fear anybody threatening your life. I believe you are sincere about that, Dan. And that helps me. I can’t honestly say I’m to that level yet, but that does help.
Perhaps for further clarification, though, I’m not as afraid of getting my head sawed off as I am living in a society where my freedom of choice is non-existent. I fear living in a society where I am a second-class citizen (dhimmi- and that is in the Koran). Frankly, that scares the crap out of me.
The play that Islamic extremist get in the media and in our national conversation is troubling. I seem to remember that we were once considered the violent (ala Danites), polygamist, repressive to women, warring, mountain meadows massacre faith. In far too many eyes, we still are.
Frankly, Salt Lake is the most divided partisan place in terms of religion this side of Belfast or Israel. Religion can divide, distrust of the other can take over, fear can make us all monsters. A quick look at history makes this obvious. Islam has plenty of truth and meaning, as much as those within it can bear. In reality, the criticisms levelled against it are very similar to the ones we see our critics use. I feel like we ought to know better.
Tossman,
This page here should be of help to you to understand Islam in Europe.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4385768.stm
In no European country (outside of the Balkans) do you have more than 10% of the population being Muslim. France has the highest (outside the Balkans) at about 9% of the population. But this has more to do with its relations over the centuries to Algeria. I bet most of those are Algerian. I don’t know which countries you see as becoming “de facto” Islamic states. Perhaps you can share what gives you that view.
After living in several Muslim countries, I don’t fear Islam in the least. I do worry about some individual Muslims, but no more than I worry about some individual Christians and Jews, particularly Christians and Jews who espouse violence to promote their religions.
Just to give a bit of perspective, there are a range of estimates on the number of Muslim insurgents around the world, from 2,000 to 100,000. This may sound like a lot, but since there are over a billion Muslims in the world, it is a relatively small percentage. This would translate into 20 to 1,000 militant Mormons or Jews. If there were 20 militant Mormons or Jews, or even 1,000, would you characterize those two religions as violent? Some would, some wouldn’t.
So why don’t the vast majority of reasonable Muslims stop the tiny but very violent minority? Lots of reasons. One is that the violent minority tends to congregate and work together. A lot of the most violent Muslims live in remote areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Another reasons is what Dan states- there is no supreme authority in Islam. Islam is an incredibly diverse religion and it would be no more possible for moderate Muslims in Indonesia to stamp out radical Islam in Pakistan than for Mormons to stamp out a hypothectical radical group of radical Christians living in Kenya. The news tends to portray the most radical and violent Muslims as being typical instead of the tiny minority that they really are.
Yes, there are some serious problems within Islam. As a whole, it is repressive of women even though there are a number of Muslim feminists who are trying to promote more tolerant readings of the Qur’an. Few Muslim countries are anything close to democratic, although you might argue than Islam isn’t to blame for government repression. Countries like Saudi Arabia that espouse repressive and downright strange interpretations of Islam are not pleasant to live in.
It will be a long time before any European country becomes majority Muslim. And even if/when some do, keep in mind that a large number of Muslims living in the West are here, not only for economic, but also for political reasons. Simply being Muslim majority does not mean that all of those Muslims will vote for Shari’a law. Far from it.
Dan- When I get home from work I’ll dig up some stats that we can discuss.
Irshad Manji comes to mind. I believe Irshad is an inspired woman. If Islam and the West will ever mesh peacefully, it’ll be because of people like Irshad. Of course she is now marked for death. There are actually fatwahs out on her head. For one thing, she actually dares criticize Islam. She’s also a woman, which makes her less of a person in the Muslim world. On top of all that, she’s a l esbian. So Ms. Manji is really sticking her neck out to say the things she is saying.
Tossman, having lived with a bunch of Muslims, including anti-Zionist Palestinians, I need to tell you that from the standpoint of our religion there’s no reason you couldn’t love these people like your brothers and sisters. They are some of the best people I’ve known. I think the problem you’re experiencing is one of scope.
The gospel works on a personal level. You will probably never possess the influence to affect the outcome of political maneuvers between an islamic fundamentalist group and a democratic society. What you can do is limited to a personal level – what you think, speak, and teach about.
This is why I worry – many of your fears are the type of things that we see coming from major news outlets who have a vested interest in persuading you to focus on one negative event or another. They have a larger scope – making people focus on groups, organizations, classes, and races. If they can get you to look at a person of middle-eastern descent and think, “Muslim,” or look at a blond-haired man from Utah and think, “Mormon,” they have succeeded. It’s only one step from there to full-on fear mongering and spiteful classification. Generalization. Persecution.
Please make a personal decision to ignore the fear mongers, the pessimists, and those who want to use your emotions to their own advantage as they seek influence. Be optimistic and get to know people you would otherwise fear. Without sounding too preachy: A spirit of fear cannot come from God.
I don’t think anyone can really adequately answer those questions you posed, Tossman, given the way you’ve phrased them. Surely I could come up with equally unanswerable questions about any group — especially one so unstructured, decentralized, and diverse. For example:
Is Republicanism (meaning “the practices of members of the US Republican Party”) a philosophy of peace? I don’t mean specific Republicans, or the Republican Party of Crawford County, but Republicanism as a whole. Are Republicans who like war “true” Republicans?
It’s hard to come up with good answers to that besides “geez, Sarah, do you have a problem with Republicans?” And Republicans can be characterized far more specifically than Islam can: it has a leader, it has a charter, it has laws which all of its members must comply with (at risk of damaging the party itself) and it’s confined to a single country, and for the most part, a single culture and landmass. None of those things are true of Islam.
Many of your specific examples are also stretches — I’ll leave the stats to the people who aren’t being called to dinner. For starters, the “policy” in Britain about the Holocaust and the Crusades was actually a set of two decisions handed down at two different secondary schools in England. Indeed, as Eugene Volokh points out in the post I linked to, the government and media are pointedly concerned about these few isolated, teacher-and-local-administrator led decisions, stating that “[i]n particular settings, teachers of history are unwilling to challenge highly contentious or charged versions of history in which pupils are steeped at home, in their community or in a place of worship.”
Core Islamic doctrines set up very powerful boundaries against Muslims accepting many core LDS beliefs. I’m not saying Muslims never convert to Mormonism. But there are very strong religious, cultural and social barriers that are difficult to deal with.
The Qur’an teaches explicitly that Jesus is not the Son of God and that God does not beget. The Qur’an directly criticizes Christians for believing in this doctrine, that is, that Jesus is the Son of God.
Islam teaches that Muhammad is the seal of the prophets and that there can be no prophet after him.
All four schools of (Sunni) Islamic jurisprudence teach that a Muslim who converts to another religion should be killed. I have never heard that the Shi’a view of Islam differs on this score, but I haven’t heard or seen anything that indicates otherwise.
I am fairly well convinced that the most prestigious Sunni hadith collections (Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim) are anti-Jewish and anti-Christian. Some of the things they have to say about the Jewish people are downright murderous. Regardless of the propaganda you hear about how much the Ahl al-Kitab (people of the Book) are respected, the hadith consign them to hell. [If you aren’t familiar with the phrase “people of the book” – it is a special Islamic categorization of Jews and Christians or the monotheists (who by strict Islamic standards are not in fact all that monotheistic).] In general, I don’t like the hadith. I’ll keep my peace for now in regards to the Qur’an itself, but many interpretations of the Qur’an are despicable.
Your Muslim neighbors and colleagues may be friendly, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t believe in radical ideas. I was quite shocked and even a little bit angered at some of the things I heard from some Muslim neighbors I befriended.
Right here in the United States I’ve heard people try to deny that Muslim Arabs had anything to do with 9/11. Right here in the United States I’ve heard someone say that he’d like to be a suicide bomber against Israelis. Right here in the United States I’ve heard more than one person say that suicide bombers go to heaven. Right here in the United States I’ve heard more than one person say that a person who converts from Islam to another religion should be killed. I’m speaking of people who I basically liked, ate dinner with on many occasions, etc. They were married, had children, attended university classes, earned advanced degrees. They knew me and felt comfortable talking to me – and in the privacy of conversations in their living rooms, they said these things unflinchingly.
I’m not trying to tell you that you should be suspicious of everyone who is a Muslim. Certainly not. They are fine people in many ways. But we shouldn’t close our minds to what we see and hear and play dumb. I think it is safe to say that Islam is one of the most politicized religions anyone will ever encounter. Many try to brush this off by talking about Christian history, Christian atrocities, etc. I’m not saying there isn’t a negative comparison to be made – but making invidious comparison shouldn’t dispel the concerns we should have. The concerns should remain and the point that was originally raised should not be dropped.
I think it’s galling that people want to push the idea that Islam is a religion of peace when we see so much evidence to the contrary. After what we have witnessed in the world news, it should be impossible to generalize about Islam in that kind of feeble-minded way.
Marc- Please don’t paint me as simply a product of a fear-mongering media. I’ve done my own research and reading. I actually try to avoid major media outlets as my sources for news. That includes the networks, the cable channels, the press, and even talk radio. I would argue though that the most major of the media outlets are more interested in playing down radical Islam than making me afraid of it.
And let me also clarify that I don’t have a problem with individuals practicing Islam. I don’t have a problem loving them, being their neighbor, hiring them, or having meaningful friendships with them. I won’t say I know many Muslims, but I know several. I do not fear them. I think you’re misunderstanding me.
Am I pessimistic? Yes, but that’s a result of my own questioning and study, not from Sean Hannity or Rush Limbach. Am I afraid? Yes. Because of what I percieve as a trojan horse that will spell the end of liberal society, not because of CNN.
I’m actually fairly convinced that most religious people will justify violence in one way or another – Mormons included. So I’m not very convinced that religion is a force for making peace in the world.
We all heard a general conference talk about a group of Amish people who immediately forgave a man who had murdered their people and then committed suicide. These Amish people expressed love and condolences to the family of the murderer, attended the funeral of the murderer, invited family members of the murderer to attend the funerals of the people who had been killed. It was such a dramatic way for people to choose to follow a truly peaceful religion. If someone asked me about a religion of peace, I’d have to mention the Amish. I can’t really think of too many other religious groups that compare to them. Probably Jainism. But most religions and religious communities that I’ve encountered are able to justify violence in one way or another.
Tossman, in my opinion your current train of thought is counterproductive. Whether or not Islam by it’s nature tends to lend itself to extremism is beside the point. The fact is that religion is malleable and there are many Muslims that have learned to live it peacefully. It is in our best interest to recognize these as the legitimate Muslims and to do all in our power to marginalize the radical elements including not recognizing them as following true Islamic belief.
Don’t fall into the trap of making this a war of the West vs Islam. If we do that then we will end up fighting many that would otherwise be our allies. Keep it centralized on Radical Islam that we are fighting and always make it clear that it is a corrupted form of the religion. To do otherwise would be shooting ourselves in the foot.
As for the spiritual side of things. In God’s eyes would an Islamic Europe be any worse than a secular one? I’m not sure that it would. Native Europeans would likely not be very comfortable in such a scenario, but many times hard times brings humility which brings repentence, etc. Having said that I wouldn’t want to allow the same to happen here in America.
danithew, the amish and the anti-nephi-lehites…
You know, before the World Trade Center collapse, the LDS Church was actually doing quite a bit of outreach to the Islamic world. Prominent Muslims often were hosted at BYU, Muslim students at BYU spoke of how they selected BYU because they felt the most comfortable there (i.e. not oppressed by the overly secular, sexualized, and commercialized culture found on other campuses). The Mormons and Muslims have often found common cause in taking a stand against the assault on faith and family being pushed by the wealthy secular nations worldwide.
I wonder how much of that common cause remains today.
Seth R., there is a lot of common cause left today. And that’s a good thing, as long as we keep our eyes open to all the nuances that are going on and aren’t out to make friends at any cost. I believe at the United Nations there were LDS Church representatives who found favor with representatives from Saudi Arabia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_segregation#Saudi_Arabia) due to our shared(?) views of the family. I heard some of our representatives talk with some enthusiasm about this and I wasn’t feeling we should be so thrilled. Yes, we might agree to some extent on the importance of chastity – but last time I checked, we had nothing against women leaving the house without permission or holding a driver’s license.
Some of the most oppressive and nefarious systems we see in the world today are in areas where exponents of sharia have succeeded at obtaining government power. Sudan, Afghanistan, Palestine, Iran, Saudi Arabia. I dread the possibility that the Muslim Brotherhood may take over Egypt.
If 40 percent of British Muslims would like to see Shari’a Law in preference to British law, I wonder what the percentage is in the U.S.? Isn’t this a serious threat to our Republic?
The Muslim population of Europe has more than doubled since 1980. The UN estimates there are 25 million Muslims living in Europe today. I’ve seen projections predicting this figure, if current trends continue, will double by 2015, and that by 2050, the number of Muslims will outnumber non-Muslims in all of Western Europe.
The European Commission reports that the average birth rate for the European Union as a whole is now 1.4 children per woman, well below the 2.1 replacement rate. If this trend holds, deaths will start out-numbering births in every member state of the European Union. According to the US Census Bureau, Europe in 2000 had the highest percentage of people aged 65 and older, and this figure is set to double by 2050.
But those numbers are being balanced out by immigrants- mostly Muslim ones
Robert Leiken writes a disturbing article in Foreign Affairs:
Princeton University’s Bernard Lewis, hardly a righ-wing pundit or fear-mongering media shill, told a German newspaper, Die Welt, that ‘Europe will be Islamic by the end of the century.’
The question is at what point in this Muslim revolution do the radical wings become aggressive. And what is the likelihood that a majority Muslim state will become a full Islamic state ruled by shari’a law? I’m no expert, but I’d say much more likely than in a secular, post Christian one.
Look at the countries where radicalism reins and shari’a is the law of the land. Look at those countries danithew just mentioned and tell me with a straight face you really think an Islamic Europe would be better in God’s eyes than a secular one.
If somebody could kindly tell me how to post links without displaying the entire URL, I can post links to some of these stats and articles.
I sense the sincerity with which this post was written, but I’m deeply bothered by much of this thinking. Not that the Islamic world does not pose certain challenges to “Western” living and a global society, but I cannot believe how Euro-centric so many of the concerns are.
You’re worried about the decline of Western society? One could argue that certain “Western” values are more pervasive then they ever have been. Democracy, free market economy, and human rights are more wide spread than ever before. One of the things on the decline are the brash assumptions of these values as universal values, which in my opinion is a good thing as it leads to modifications in these concepts and attempts to check their uglier side. Along with this comes the breaking apart of Western monopolies on these concepts. The Japanese for instance seem to beat us at many of our own games, so to speak (not that they don’t have their problems, of course), and yet they are still very much “Japanese”. Dominance by governance at the hand of the West has been in decline for about a century.
IMO, core values of a culture die hard. I don’t see these liberal values being pushed aside by Islamic values. As a matter of fact, I see the number of Muslims in the Western world as hope that these two values can somehow be combined. I think some of your fear is rooted in the fact that other cultures now pose legitimate competition for the “West”. It’s not that Islamic law will replace liberal democratic law–it’s such an outside chance that one major ideology will completely replace another (and how many of the Muslims living in Europe and America would actually want that?); but that “other” cultures could in fact be “better” (defined economically, socially, politically, etc.) than Western culture. I certainly do not know you, so pardon my ranting; but far too many Mormons are used to living in an Anglo-centric society, that any possibility of something different puts “the fear of God” into them.
I’m responding via blackberry, so I’ll be brief.
Given the choice between Western society with all it’s flaws and any existing Islamic society, I’ll take Western any day.
Look, I don’t care whether it’s an Anglo-ventric society or not- the society that I’d like to preserve is the one that gave us the enlightenment, advanced industry, the restoration of the Lord’s church, and a peaceful way of life.
Tossman, politically and practically I’m fully in your camp. But looking at it from the spiritual side, this would not be the first time that God allowed a people to be oppressed to remind them that he does in fact exist and they need to depend on him. What would be the difference in the number of souls that would be saved in an Islamic Europe vs a Secular Europe? I honestly don’t know, but I suspect that that is a metric that God will consider which is why I mentioned that I’m not sure that he’d prefer a spiritually-dead secular society over one ruled by an aggressive and domineering religion.
God cares more about saving our eternal souls then he does about whether we live our mortal lives in comfort and freedom. Otherwise the history of the church, both ancient and modern, would be very different with more emphasis on changing the social structure and less on personal righteousness.
Just to be clear, if I was given the choice I’d choose a Secular Europe, but I don’t know if God would make the same choice.
R. Biddulf,
#21,
Let’s put some perspective to your statistics to allay your fears. There are approximately 1.6 million Muslims in the UK, out of nearly 60 million Britons. That is about 2.8% of the population being Muslim. Now, you show a statistic that says that 40% of Muslims in Britain prefer Shari’a Law. If you take 40% of 1.6 million, you get 640,000 Muslims in Britain preferring Shari’a Law. Now, you can do the math yourself past this point. What percentage of 60,000,000 is 640,000?
In the United States, there are fewer Muslims than in any country in Europe, proportionally speaking. So no, it is NOT a threat to our Republic. I wish the fearmongering would stop. It is not helpful.
Tossman,
#22,
I’d like to know your sources. 25 million is really not that many when you consider that Europe has about 730 million people. As I showed earlier, no European country outside the Balkans do you have Muslims equaling more than 10% of the population. France has the most at 9%, most of which are Algerian. But seriously, 25 million out of 730 million. Please, let’s have some perspective here. It is impossible for Muslims to outnumber non-Muslims in Europe in less than 50 years.
Again, perspective will help. There are states in Europe that have large Muslim populations, and even one that is a Muslim country. In none of those countries is there any concern about Shari’a law. Please tone down the rhetoric, Tossman.
Again with stark black and white choices. It isn’t like this, Tossman. There are gray areas. Look at Albania. It is mostly Muslim, but is it under Shari’a Law? hardly. How about Turkey, nearly 100% Muslim. What is the likelihood of Shari’a Law popping up there? Next to nil frankly. Why are you so concerned that in countries where Muslims do not even equal 10% of the population that somehow they will get the political power to install Shari’a Law among a very secular people like the Europeans? What makes you think Europeans who are brushing off the spectre of Catholicism will jump on the Islamic bandwagon? Being a European, having traveled to Europe on numerous occasions, I see this as a possibility only if hell freezes over and pigs start to fly.
I think that is the most succinct and accurate assessment of the “concern” many Americans have about Islam. You see this in regards to “illegal immigration” from Mexico too—the whole, “threat to our culture” aspect.
Tossman,
#25,
But that’s not a choice you have to face, unless that is, you plan on moving to an Islamic society.
The bridges between our Church and Islam continue to be built and strengthen, for which I am grateful.
An excerpt from an introduction of an Islamic speaker, Dr. Alwi Shihab, by President Boyd K. Packer last October at BYU. I recommend the entire introduction by President Packer and the speech by Dr. Alwi Shihab. http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=11324 :
President Packer:
“Ahead of us, indeed already all around us, is the world of Islam. Christianity and Islam will clasp hands in cooperation and understanding or clench fists in confrontation and prejudice.
“A year or two ago, Brother Alwi and I met in San Diego. For a morning we sat, he with his Quran and I with my Book of Mormon, and compared and discussed the many things we have in common.
***********************
“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints expresses “special love and concern for the eternal welfare of all men and women, regardless of religious belief, race, or nationality, knowing that we are truly brothers and sisters because we are sons and daughters of the same Eternal Father.â€1
“We believe that “the great religious leaders of the world such as Mohammed, Confucius, and the Reformers, as well as philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and others, received a portion of God’s light. Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals.â€2
“It is not a coincidence that the world’s great religions come together at Temple Hill in modern-day Jerusalem. Known now as the Place of the Rock, it is a religious shrine for Islam, for Christianity, and for Judaism. All three great religions hold ties to this place. All three, likewise, have a common thread in a tradition that Elijah the prophet would return.3
“Knit together by world history and by Old Testament history and doctrine, the Church and the Islamic world can see each other as People of the Book, indeed Family of the Book.
“Church members and Muslims share similar high standards of decency, temperance, and morality. We have so much in common. As societal morality and behavior decline in an increasingly permissive world, the Church and many within Islam increasingly share natural affinities.
“Muslim scholars point out that the Quran does not restrict Paradise to Muslims. The Quran rewards all those of faith who perform righteousness and believe in the after-life. The Book calls Jesus Christ Messiah, Son of Mary, and by the names Messenger, Prophet, Servant, Word, and Spirit of God.4
“It is important that we in the West understand there is a battle for the heart, soul, and direction of Islam and that not all Islam espouses violent jihad, as some Western media portray.
“It is as well important that friends in the Islamic world understand there is a battle for the heart, soul, and direction of the Western world and that not all the West is morally decadent, as some Islamic media portray.
**************************
“Alwi, a devout Muslim of Arabic ancestry, and I, a Christian and devout Mormon, have agreed to symbolically walk arm in arm into the future. Together we hope to build a bridge. Except what that symbolizes is accomplished, all of us face a very dark and very dangerous future.”
Given the choice between Western society with all it’s flaws and any existing Islamic society, I’ll take Western any day.
Since you’re responding via blackberry I think I’ll wait until you’ve had a chance to fully articulate yourself, because I’m sure you’ll want to address more directly the issues that have been raised.
But as far as this line is concerned, I’m not sure why you’d have to make an either/or choice. Personally, some “days” I wouldn’t mind living in “any existing Islamic society”. I assume that they actually might have a lot to offer me. Some days it would be really interesting to live in Asian socities, etc. This is all to say that cultures are complex and syncretable, even in many cases where values easily conflict.
I’m also wondering if you do not imply that such a decision is objectively true. In other words everyone should see it this way. How much of your fear is really based in the potential loss of power (variously defined) that these “other” cultures pose in land controled by your own culture. Land of course gained by the assertion of “power” over the indigenous cultures that lived here before. Many of whom would not choose “any day” to live in such a society (not that it needs to be an either/or decision).
Just to clarify, the “decision” I refer to in my last paragraph is in regards to your decision (“choice”) as quoted in the beginning of my post.
Dan,
I disagree with your assessment that there is no threat of future Sharia law in Europe. I agree that today it is not present, but as the demographics change I suspect that it will become more commonplace. A couple examples:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/germany/article/0,,2040982,00.html – A German judge applied Sharia law in a divorce case. This time it was met with national outcry and the judge was replaced, but what will happen tomorrow when the Muslim population is larger?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/29/nsharia29.xml – Some English Muslims are choosing to handle matters through Sharia courts rather than the official court system. Today they are a minority, when they have a bigger percentage of the population what will result?
Given the demographics I think it’s inevitable that Europe will become more and more Muslim. But I don’t believe that the solution is to take on Islam itself, instead we should be ensuring that the dominant thought that emerges is that of Moderate Islam instead of Radical Islam. Not all Islamic societies are like the Taliban, let’s keep it that way.
Dan-
You ask me to tone down the rhetoric. One thing I really tried to stress in my original post is that I didn’t want this to devolve into a political spat. Please tell me which rhetoric you thinkn I need to tone down and I’ll happily oblige.
SmallAxe, I’ll deal with your posts after some Easter festivities. But first to Dan-
You just used the examples of Albania and Turkey to argue that shari’a law is not encroaching on Europe. Let’s take a look at those examples, shall we?
Regarding Albania, this from Wikipedia:
So it’s a country full of jack Muslims. After the East European conflicts of 90’s, Salt Lake City took in thousands of Muslim Albanian refugees. My wife and I lived in one of the apartment complexes where they were housed. We got to know more than a few, and the general impression we got was that they were Muslims in name only
Now let’s talk Turkey. It is true, officially Turkey is an expressly secular state. Despite having more liberal dress codes for women, it’s still ok to beat your wife(s) there. Honor killings are frequent, and though technically against Turkish law, you’d be hard pressed to find a court there that would prosecute these things. In recent memory, a female Turkish journalist was stoned for not wearing a head scarf (http://www.turks.us/article.php?story=2006021221421729).
Being officially a secular government, Turkey has some checks in place that may make an overall shari’a takeover harder, but don’t kid yourself. Shari’a Law is alive and well in Turkey.
I can’t help but wonder if the Book of Mormon references about the modern day secret combinations and the great abominable church are actually references to radical islam. Doesn’t it seem a better match to the description than the catholic church?
Tossman, from a political perspective, I think you are right to be worried about radical Islam. I think many people are apologists for a political (not religious) movement that is all about restricting freedom and taking power. Anybody who doesn’t study what happened in Afghanistan, Sudan and briefly in Somalia (before a U.S.-inspired Ethiopian intervention ended it) is willfully unaware of a major threat to freedom in the West.
Many also are unwilling to face the fact that radical Islam, as a political movement, has declared war on the United States and the West. These people are exactly like Neville Chamberlain and his ilk in the 1930s — well-intentioned but extremely naive.
This does not mean we need invasions and massive use of U.S. force everywhere. I think we handled Somalia four months ago exactly as we should — by supporting others who were willing to do the job. Our big test is Iran, and again I don’t think we need to invade or bomb — I think we can destroy the mullahs in Iran economically through sanctions and other means, just as we did against the Soviet Union. But in the meantime, we need to be strong in Iraq so that the mullahs cannot capitalize on our weakness to buy more time for themselves.
We need to do more about the Wahabi movement in Saudi Arabia and counter that with the truth about the need for liberty and modernity.
But most of all we need to be aware that God is in control and that, while things seem frightening, He will resolve things through His means.
I personally believe that through peaceful means of discussing the Gospel with Muslims in the West, the message of the Prince of Peace can work miracles. Think of Ammon’s missionary work to the Lamanites as an example — I hope to see something like that happening in the years ahead.
The majority of Muslim people are just like you and I and want peace, happy families and liberty. But many of them are led by a small group of fanatics who want the opposite. The key is destroy the fanatical leaders while appealing to the everyday people.
I am pretty convinced that by the end of the century Europe will be majority Muslim. Russia will be the first European Muslim majority state as its Southern Russian muslim minorities continue to have children at a fast clip.
France will be next after that. I am seeing articles that are claiming that more then 1/3rd of french school children are Muslim right now. After 2 generations Muslims will most likely be the majority in France. The current French baby boom is almost completely driven by Muslim immigrants having large families.
The test case for this is the Serbian Province of Kosovo. Research the demographics and birthrates for the last 75 years.
France and Russia will be Mulsim majority states with Nuclear weapons with veto power in the UN Sometime 2050-2075
The future appears grim to me in this regard. I to be honest see some of the postings above that play down the danger that the world is heading into as hopelessly naive.
Demographics are destiny. The Pope is even concerned.
Ok- I’m back in the office in front of a laptop and I have a whole meeting that I can pretend to pay attention to while making several points here.
To respond to SmallAxe, what I meant by preferring a secular, post Christian society over an Islamic one was that I would rather live in and have economic ties with the former- not visit for a week on a cultural outing.
I think I’ve offended many of you with this post and these questions. I can tell that a few of you are rather disgusted, writing me off as some kind of naive bigot. I knew this would happen, but I also knew it would prove a larger point. One of Western society’s Achilles heals is our obsession with political correctness. We have been conditioned to regulate our words- even our thoughts, to the boundaries of what an enlightened society has deemed appropriate. I think its sad we live in a world where asking honest questions about a set of doctrines is interpreted as bigotry, even racism.
It is precisely that political correctness that I believe will be the end of Western society. Islamic radicals have taken our extreme desire not to offend and have run with it. How often is Christianity criticized openly and hatefully, with nary a response from devout Christians? But a Danish newspaper runs a few unflattering cartoons about Mohammed and it set off riots. Fatwas were issued, people were marked for death. Papers around the world refused to run the cartoons even in the context of reporting the outrage. The precedent is set- anything that could even be construed as a criticism of Islam is avoided like the plague.
So then you have things like the Muslim riots in France, which the French government finally caved to. You have schools in the UK agreeing to take the Crusades and the holocaust off the syllabus. You have non-Muslim German judges ruling against the German constitution in favor of Sharia. You have a Minnesota mosque issuing a fatwah prohibiting Muslim cab drivers from driving anybody with alcohol. You have the Arizona imams suing airlines and passengers for reporting suspicious behavior that got them thrown off a plane. You have stores like Target setting up separate non-pork checkstands for Muslim cashiers. You have authorities in Minnesota and Michigan turning a blind eye to crimes by Muslims so as to respect Sharia Law.
I’m not branding greater Islam as the enemy. I realize that we must strive to find as much common ground as possible, treat each other with respect, and try to help breed a more moderate Islamic train of thought.
But a huge part of the solution is honestly assessing the problem- realizing the real dangers posed by radical Islam, then busting through PC barriers to ask important questions. But I don’t think we (meaning Western society) have the spine to see the problem, let alone find answers. As many of you have echoed, “All is well in Zion.” Apparently the only problem is a Western superiority complex.
To be clear, if it is not already, I do not fear Islam. There are about 1.2 billion Muslims, about 2 billion Christians, and about 6.5 billion people in the world. It would take some pretty fast growth for Islam to become the predominant religion (or secular power) in the world.
I do fear fanatical Muslims, but I also fear fanatical Christians, fanatical Jews, fanatical Mormons, fanatical secularists, and fanatics of any religious stripe.
As President Packer points out, the core values of Islam are essentially the same as the core values of our religion. Yes, there are passages of Islamic scripture that nonbelievers would consider barbaric, but the same is true of the Bible, and even the Book of Mormon.
I may be wrong, but as I understand it, the predominant religion of Europe is secularism (with nominal Christianity). (Please note that I do not fear secularism, any more than I fear Islam or Christianity.) For those who adamantly oppose same sex marriage, I suspect that such marriages would less likely be recognized in a more Muslim Europe than a more secular Europe.
There have been times in the history of the Islamic world when knowledge, scholarship, religious tolerance, and progress flowered beyond that of the Christian world. If, several generations from now, Muslims outnumber secularists and Christians in Europe, or even in the US, I think that, by then, the radicals in Islam will have been tempered (like most radicals in Christianity have generally been tempered in the western world), and perhaps, with the help of God and His intervention, the balance that Islam once found will be found again. And with that tempering over time, the minds and hearts of our Muslim brothers and sisters will be more open to hear and feel the message of the restored gospel.
Tossman, I’d like to know how asking those important questions will help, especially when you admit to asking questions that are probably inciteful. How can Mormon westerners asking hard questions about Islam do anything to solve any problems? Criticism from a totally unrelated group rarely effects change. Christians can’t change Islam any more than Muslims can change Christianity.
I think your questions, though perfectly legitimate, don’t help. We all know there are dangers from radical Islam. I think there are very few who would disagree with that. The disagreement comes in our perception of how great the danger is (especially in comparison to other dangers out there) and what to do about it.
You can’t blame those commenters here who do not see a huge risk to themselves from radical Islam any more than I blame you for (in my opinion) grossly overstating the danger to you. I get concerned when I see well-meaning people getting so worked up about specific incidents and arguing that Islam is going to take over. Yes, Muslims in America are learning how to enforce their legal rights. We set up those laws to protect the minority, and now Muslims are using them. Other groups have used them in the past. But those groups don’t become the majority because of that legal protection. I am glad the US has laws to protect the minority.
Have you ever considered Islam in America and Europe might be in more danger of assimilation than we are of being taken over? As you pointed out, Albanian Muslims are generally non-practicing. Actually, a significant number of Muslims outside the Middle East are non-practicing. They are far more likely to assimilate to their adopted country than to try to import radical Islam. But persecution, whether perceived or not, is a great way strengthen Islam (it worked wonders for the LDS Church). And there is no denying than many Muslims feel persecuted. Assimilation is our greatest tool in this conflict, but it’s one we’re not using very well at all right now.
Right. Which is my point. Only Islam can change Islam and so far, other than a few very brave souls, Islam hasn’t shown a lot of interest in confronting its radical subsets. Which is why I’m so pessimistic.
Well thank you for acknowledging that my questions are legitimate. These questions are pivotal to understanding Islam in general and assessing its impact on society. We can’t begin to look for solutions if we ignore the problem or filter our research through politically correct lenses. Are you saying it’s more helpful not to ask questions?
And those few seem to make up about 30% of the posts on this thread.
So secular/non-practicing = assimilation and reduced tendency to adopt extremism? You said it, not me.
Who said anything about persecution? And how exactly are we supposed to prevent a religiously overly sensitive group from feeling persecuted? The flying imams felt persecuted when they were detained after praying right at the gate, arranging themselves suspiciously on the plane, and asking for seatbelt extensions when they’re all skinny as rails. The most influential Islamic organization in America (CAIR) exists, it seems, solely to go around the country suing people for offending Muslims. Trying to prevent Muslims from taking offense at any cost is what has gotten Europe into so much trouble in the first place.
Let me further clarify that I do not feel I’m personally in danger. If you have read this entire thread and still think my main concern is somebody sawing my head off, I guess I’m simply really awful at clearly conveying my thoughts.
I feel Western society is. Since God specifically waited for Western society to blossom so he could restore the Gospel, it seems to me there are some core facets of a liberal society that might be important to living the Gospel.
The future appears grim to me in this regard. I to be honest see some of the postings above that play down the danger that the world is heading into as hopelessly naive.
Demographics are destiny. The Pope is even concerned.
“Grim”, are you kidding me? I’m not so sure this is even a question of statistics (which I would probably challenge, but am not necessarily interested in debating. But for those interested, this site is helpful http://www.islamicpopulation.com/europe_islam.html). Assuming that even the course you are depicting is true, why portray it so simplistically? Does a Muslim majority mean a wholesale replacement of European values? IMO this comes down to the issue of competition in the market of “power”. Is this really a “danger” that the world is headed toward, or a danger that your world is headed toward? The danger that your worldview is not the norm, is only a danger when you assume that your worldview is universalizable and you are reluctant to relinguish your position of power in asserting that world view.
BTW, of course the Pope is concerned, he’s white, male, holds economic and social capital, and is not a Muslim (i.e., he’s in a position of power). A category which I feel many making these “grim” assertions also fit into.
Ah, SmallAxe, somehow I knew your thoughts would eventually boil down to class politics.
I think I’ve offended many of you with this post and these questions. I can tell that a few of you are rather disgusted, writing me off as some kind of naive bigot. I knew this would happen, but I also knew it would prove a larger point. One of Western society’s Achilles heals is our obsession with political correctness.
This has nothing to do with being PC. I think you are neither naive or a bigot. If you are refering to my posts I don’t see how this proves any “larger point”, except your unwillingness to step up to some of the implications of your fears.
IMO fears of radical Islam are valid to a point. I think we disagree greatly where to mark this “point”. You admit that radical Islam is a small minority of Islam as a whole, but your fears extend beyond this minority to the fear of the erosion of Western society as a whole. My hunch is that this fear is not only a valid fear of a “radical” sect, but a fear of an “other” which implicitly and explicity threatens your world view. This other is Islam at large. You speak of fear of your grandchildren losing their freedoms, examples of Euro-American over accomodation, and of choosing Western society over Islamic society. What causal link do these fears have with radical Islam? To me these are problems with the whole and not the part. IMO before you can cope with the question of radical Islam, you have to come to terms with your views on Islam as a whole. Without such, your question is doomed from the get-go, due to brash assumptions of which culture is better than the other.
Tossman, don’t mistake my posts as arguments for political correctness or moral relativism. My reasons for advising against making this a conflict with Islam itself have a lot to do with what I view as the practical realities of fighting against a worldwide religion. (That and a belief that people do have to right to believe in whatever they wish).
In particular, I can only see two ways to completely defeat a religious viewpoint, both of which are morally worse than the problem you’d like to solve:
1. Genocide – For example, consider what the Israelites did to some of the Canaanite nations. But in our case we are lacking the divine approval, and thankfully we are also lacking the desire to do such a thing.
2. Extreme Occupation – Along the lines of Ann Coulters infamous comment “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them all to Christianity” (paraphrased). Again, no divine approval for such a drastic step, a lack of manpower, and also thankfully an insufficient desire to do so.
Without doing one or the other of the above to some degree I don’t think you can beat a religion really. Which means that if you are really concerned about some of the bad effects of Islam then you need to put the focus on those bad effects not the movement itself. Which is why using the Radical Islam vs Moderate Islam paradigm is effective in my opinion. Plus the truth is that there is good in Islam, just like all other religions, there is nothing wrong with working to emphasis that and to neutralize the bad.
Let me put it this way- think of radical Islam like a cancerous growth within the body of greater Islam.
Technically you could say those cancerous cells are but a small minority of the cells in your body. But because of the aggressive nature of those cells, the way they multiply, and the fact that the body cannot rid itself of them, this is cause for great concern.
The actual cancerous cells will likely never constitute the majority of cells in the body, they can certainly overtake it.
My question is simply what stage the cancer is in.
Aluwid, I get your point and I appreciate them. But I’m not advocating a conflict with Islam. What I would like is for Islam to somehow realize that the need to irradicate the radical cancer outweighs their fears of reprisal.
I have a lot of things I could say here given rather unique personal circumstances. But perhaps the best thing would be to just recommend some good books:
*The Journey of Ibn Fattouma by Nobel Prize winning Egyptian author Naguib Mahfouz
[A quick enjoyable fictional read using the medieval format of the Arabic travelogue. Available in an excellent English translation. Basically a young Arab Muslim man describes the various governing systems of the world as he sees them from his perspective as a traveller. None escape praise or criticism, but the ideal always seems to remain just out of reach. This is a great introduction to understanding how the west and many other societies look from an Arab Muslim perspective. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385423349/menavista-20 ]
*A Peace to End All Peace by David Fromkin
[Definitive work on the foundation of the modern Middle East by the European powers in the wake of WW1. Read it and you’ll discover that most of what is often referred to as as “ancient” and “eternal” conflicts or “problems with Islam” are actually overwhelmingly modern and non-religious. http://www.amazon.com/Peace-End-All-Ottoman-Creation/dp/0805068848/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-6640961-8433428?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176170402&sr=8-1 ]
*America’s Kingdom by Robert Vitalis
and
*Cities of Salt by Abdelrahman Munif
[Call these two versions of the same story, one factual and extremely well-researched, the other fictional and extremely emotionally felt from personal experience. On the coming of the American oil companies to the Gulf, the impact on Arab society, and the US-Saudi relationships and problems that resulted. Despite lots of books purporting to be exposes on the kingdom, Vitalis is one of the few researchers who has really done his work and shows how many Saudis struggled to bring *the Americans* into the 20th century, but were stifled by the combined forces of the American companies, the Saudi ruling family, and the US government. To the detriment of Saudis first and foremost and ultimately to our own as Americans. Munif – an exiled Saudi who spent much of his life in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon and one of the great modern writers of the Arab world who passed away a few years ago – writes an excellent if discombobulated (deliberately so to reflect the upheaval of the times) fictional account of how the coming of the oil companies looked from an Arab perspective. The point of both these books being to show again, as with Fromkin’s book, the root problems have everything to do with economic inequity, politics, power-grabs, rapid and ill-managed change, ill-treatment of common folks by the wealthy and powerful foreign and domestic, etc. and very little to do with religion per se. http://www.amazon.com/Americas-Kingdom-Mythmaking-Frontier-Stanford/dp/0804754462/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-6640961-8433428?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175477671&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Cities-Salt-Abdelrahman-Munif/dp/039475526X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-6640961-8433428?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176170539&sr=1-1 ]
Here is where I am coming from on the Demographics.
The test cases are Kosovo and Lebanon. Both were majority Christian 70 years ago. Both had minority muslim populations. In both cases the christians reduced their birthrates. The Muslims kept having babies. The result? Muslim majorities with a nominally christian led government.
Civil war in both cases. I am fairly confident that this is the path that Europe is heading down. Give it 50 years. The civil conflict is low grade now. Youth riots, Muslim enclaves etc. But it will get bigger as the demographics change over time. As this happens look for emigration from the native populations of Europe to Canada, NZ AUS and the US
The kicker for me is that this is what the Muslims think that they are doing themselves. They know that the Demographics favor them and are anticipating the scenario above.
Non-Arab Arab, I perused your blog last night. So far I can’t quite tell where you stand on arguments of this thread, but I disagree with your assessment of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict- especially your reaction to the Golda Meir statement, “Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us.”
Fighting for survival isn’t an excuse to send your kids to blow themselves up. I think that’s what Ms. Meir was saying. I’ll tell you right now I lean toward the Israeli side of this conflict for both political and religious reasons. I understand Israel isn’t perfect, but I don’t buy the ethnic cleansing argument, nor do I see Israel as the aggressor here. Sure, I think they deliberately enact some policies that really piss off the Palestinian side. But barbarians they are not. You have to keep in mind that virtually the entire world would like to see them destroyed, and that some of their closest neighbors are actively working toward that end.
Religiously, I believe Israel is a chosen people who deserve the land of their inheritance. There was a book I read on my mission called something like “Prophecy and Modern Times” by Somebody Skousen. The foreward was written by Spencer W. Kimball. It was basically a collection of prophecies about the latter days from the Standard Works and modern prophets.
My memory of the book is sketchy, but it talked about Gog and Magog, Armageddon and the Anti-Christ. It talked about nations rising up against Israel determined to wipe it out. It talked about Russia aligning with Persia to eliminate Israel. There were some very specific quotes.
A couple of months ago I found a later edition of this book at a bookstore that seemed very, very edited down. Gone were the specific quotes about Russia and Islam. Why has this book been edited? Does anybody have an older copy of the book to compare it to the newer one? I’m going on memory here, so I may not be totally accurate, but there were definately some things in that book that are currently absent. Anyway, all I know is the more I read about the last days the more I think we’re in them.
The thing is, only extreme measures would ever stop this. You’d have to kick every Muslim out of the country, and forbid anymore to enter. Number are on their side, eventually they will overcome everyone else. Everything will work out in the end.
jjohnson,
“Everything will work out in the end.”
yes it will when Jesus comes. I also think you concede my main point. The solutions seem impossible to you and also to me mostly
I think there are solutions for Europe. However they will not be implemented and if so to late to avoid civil war.
1. Increase birthrate to 3 kids per woman like in the 50’s
2. Return to Practicing Christianity
3. Dismantle the cradle to grave benefits scheme. Its clearly supressing the birthrate. No need to have kids anymore or be concerned about anything when the Gov. is your daddy.
No birthrate means no future civilization. The result is a replay of the battle of Vienna in 1683 without the Poles (current birthrate 1.2 kids per woman) and a subsequent occupation and dhimmitude
I also think that the end of the proclamation points out what happens to degenerate populations.
“Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.”
We are seeing this warning play out both in Europe and America. Europe seems further down the path but the US is running down it as well.
By the way jjohnson I enjoy your comments and like interacting with you.
Tossman, I suggest you read these two books:
Palestine by Joe Sacco
[It’s in comic book format but very powerful reading. True stories. An American guy takes a trip to the Palestinian Territories in the early 90s as the first Intifada is waning and records what he sees and hears. Great 101 on the topic. http://www.amazon.com/Palestine-Joe-Sacco/dp/156097432X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/103-6640961-8433428?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176250667&sr=8-2 ]
Perceptions of Palestine by Kathleen Christison (former CIA analyst)
[A history of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict from the viewpoint of American politics, going by each US president from a century ago until recent times. You’ll learn a great deal here. http://www.amazon.com/Perceptions-Palestine-Influence-Updated-Afterword/dp/0520217187/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-6640961-8433428?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176251034&sr=1-1 ]
Fill yourself with some knowledge of those of God’s children whose shoes you may never have walked a day in before, then I’m sure we can have a meaningful discussion.
Non-Arab, I have actually read some of the Sacco comic book. Not surprisingly, he blames everything on the Zionists.
Great advice. So I’m assuming you’ve also immersed yourself pro-Israeli literature, so that you may fill yourself with some knowledge of God’s Israeli children?
Speaking of putting yourself into another’s shoes, last night I was reading through the archives of the Wall Stree Journal and happened upon a very interesting article. If anybody understands the nature of radical Islam, it’s this guy. Why? His name is Tawfik Hamid. And he’s a former terrorist.
I rest my case.
I’d recommend reading the entire article at http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009890.
It is not irreconcilable to love American or the Western Civilization and there is evil among us too. Or rather we can, as Mormon did, love his people but mourn their fall and stand with them all the way down. I think that we are called to be Mormons in that sense.
Oddly, Mormon loved the Lamanites too. He wrote specifically to them and of their destiny. We can love the other side and still pick up our swords and lead our side to battle. Personally, because I grew up in Dubai, I don’t see the there must be a time to literally take up swords against Islam qua Islam. But I do see a real mounting ideological conflict. We can pick a side and still love those on both sides.
Our Muslim brothers and sisters will one day receive the gospel. In there home countries, the entrenched power systems will prevent effective proselytizing until they liberalize (fill in your own theory on how they will be destabilized). So the Muslims living abroad are assimilating inasmuch as they are buying into to liberalism. Among these will be the best tools for introducing the gospel to Muslims.
Geoff,
#37,
I know I’ve been away, and maybe someone else has already chided you on this comment, but please, I thought we were to keep this particular thread respectful. Calling those who disagree with you on how to deal with Islam “Neville Chamberlains” is not helpful and inflammatory. Have you learned nothing yet?
Geoff,
#37,
We didn’t “defeat” the Soviet Union through sanctions. I am glad to see that a Republican admits that we bested the Soviet Union through our economy, and not through Reagan’s silly defense buildup, though. That is a marked improvement over recent years.
bbell,
Russia has about 15-20% of its population be Muslim. It will take far longer than by the end of the century for that number to increase beyond 50%. And France? The Muslim population in France is at 9%. It is impossible for that number to surpass 50% in just 50 years, or even 100 years, all things being equal of course. One has to control for such things as unnatural acts, like war. But war is not coming to Europe, unless America does something stupid in the Middle East.
And those who see enemies where there are none are dangerously ignorant. Can we stop with the name calling now? I thought this post was supposed to be free of such.
Tossman,
#40,
It’s not the questioning of a religion that sets one apart as a bigot or a racist, but the way the question is asked. I can show you numerous examples of anti-Mormons who question many aspects of our theology, but because of the way the questions are worded, we cannot think of that person but a bigot. I’m not calling you a bigot Tossman, but your fears about Islam are unfounded, and unhelpful. In fact, the continual pursuit of this fear, of this concern about Islam only makes Muslims distrust us more. Take a look at it from their point of view, as best as you can, and see what they see. Perhaps then you might understand why they look at us the same way you look at them: with distrust.
Tossman,
#48,
And I’m sure they will turn right around and call your own words against them as an example of a cancerous growth within the body of greater Christianity. Don’t you see this?
bbell,
#51,
Can you share your evidence of this please.
Tossman,
#58,
You’re going to trust a terrorist’s interpretation of Islam? That’s like entrusting the interpretation of Christiantiy to the KKK. Dude, he doesn’t speak for Islam.
Dan, You’re taking what Geoff said out of context…he said:
And how is it disrepectful and inflammatory to compare those who choose to ignore radical Islam with a man who ignored Nazi Germany? Seems to be a fair comparison.
Dan-
With all due respect, Dan, you make me want to bash my head against a brick wall. Are you saying that radical Islam is not a cancer to greater Islam? Or are you playing a relativity game? One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter, right? Either the radical elements of Islam is a cancer or it isn’t. What’s important is how Islam sees it. If Islam can see radicalism as a cancer, perhaps they will move to eradicate it. If they don’t, they won’t- and that is bad. If you can’t see that Dan, I honestly don’t know how to have an intellectual conversation with you.
FORMER terrorist. Mr. Hamid was a regular Muslim. Then he turned into a radical Muslim and a terrorist. After he discovered it wasn’t all it was cracked up to be, he became a secular Muslim. So the guy has rounded the bases. I don’t know if he speaks for Islam (because apparantly nobody does), but I think he may have a better grasp of the religion and its subsets than you do.
Dan, I realize there have been a lot of posts since you last visited, but please do me the favor of actually reading them and taking them into consideration before posting a barrage of shotgun replies.
#62.
Dan. there is lots of research on Demographics in Russia and France. The French Muslim population grew by 100% between 1989 and 1998 per PBS
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/shows/france/info2.html
10% now, 20-25% in 2030 and a majority or close to a majority in 2050-2060 or so in France
Russia is at 20% now and with a native Ethnic russian birthrate of 1.2 children per woman and a crazy high early death rate and high emigration rate they also look on track for majority muslim in 2050-2060.
I even saw the 2050 date for Russia on CNN once earlier this year.
Bernard Lewis of Princeton considers it a done deal as well. He has been giving lots of speeches about the topic in the last few years. The following is from 2004
“But on July 28, Princeton historian Bernard Lewis told the conservative Hamburg-based daily Die Welt that Europe would be Islamic by the end of this century “at the very latest,” and continental politics has not been the same since.”
All the demographic data could be wrong but if I was a betting man I would bet on an islamic majority in most of Europe by the end of the century and many key parts around mid century.
Native mass emigration from Europe or a considered slow down of immigration could change things either way.
Brian,
#67,
Because he set up a straw man. I know of no “leftist” who “ignores” radical Islam, the part that has declared war on us. In fact, we’re really wondering what we are doing in Iraq, when that “radical Islam” happens to be hanging out in Pakistan. Few Americans were against the war in Afghanistan. That’s where our “radical Islam” enemy was. It’s ironic, see, that we’re supposedly at war with the radical portions of Islam, and we go invading a secularist, in Saddam Hussein. That just don’t make sense, yo!
Fair enough, Dan. Let’s burn the strawman: The left is not ignoring Islam, they are taking a pathway of appeasement, which is simillar to what Chamberlain did with Nazi Germany.
Tossman,
Of course radical Islam is a “cancer” to the religion. The way this debate is playing out though, with statistics showing the increase of Muslim populations around the world, I think many wonder if you can differentiate between the “radical” portions of Islam and the normal Muslims. For example R. Biddulph in comment #21, stated that 40% of Muslims in Britain believed in Shari’a Law, and asked, “I wonder what the percentage is in the U.S.? Isn’t this a serious threat to our Republic?” 40% of Muslims in Britain turns out to be only 1% of the entire British population. I don’t see that as a threat. If 40% of the American Muslim population believed the same as their British counterparts (which I might add they do not), then you’re talking about not even a half percent of the entire American population believing in Shari’a Law. How is that a threat to our fine nation?
It is my own personal belief that Americans have gotten too used to having an “enemy.” We had the Soviet Union for 50 years as a constant enemy. When it dissolved, we began looking around for other “enemies,” because that’s how we knew life. I remember many conversations and debates going on throughout the 1990s about China. Could China be our new enemy? That was the talk. I think Americans have found their “enemy.” So many Americans are perfectly happy at warring against this enemy, in the ways they could only dream of against the Soviet Union. We couldn’t fly planes over the Soviet Union to threaten them when they did something we didn’t like. So unlike today. For example:
http://thegooddemocrat.wordpress.com/2007/04/07/blair-to-bush-stay-out-and-shut-up/
The Americans were highly disappointed the British did not start a war with Iran over the seizure of 15 British soldiers.
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/06/a-question-for-our-british-readers/
Calling them “cowards”, “stupid”, “disreputable”, “despicable,” and so on.
This is not the way of peace. The way of peace and of living in peace with our neighbors around the world is to be reasonable and rational about the rise of one religion over another. Yes, there are extremists amidst Muslims, and yes they will do what they can to get their way. But they are a small minority, and will continue to be so as long as we do not ostracize the rest of the Muslim population with our distrust. This is no “appeasement” crap. Please, shove the Chamberlain crap back where it belongs. This is about getting regular Muslims to accept us, and us accept them, so as to root out extremists. This can only happen if we look at Islam through a better light than we currently are. If we continue down this road, the war becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Brian,
Who are the “left” trying to appease?
Tossman,
#73,
Who says those are our only options? I only hear this out of your mouth, Tossman.
Actually you should be more afraid of Bush and Cheney than Bin Laden. Bin Laden has no power over you. He holds no law over you. He has no power of coercion over you. Bush and Cheney, however do. They can force you to pay taxes. They can force you to be thrown in prison without regard to your rights. They can force you to join the army (albeit it hasn’t gotten this bad yet, to the point where the draft has to return). However, they have that power. Bin Laden does not.
The evidence aqainst the 600,000 dead in Iraq is very strong. Its more like 60K. The 600,000 study has been discredited.
bbell,
can you provide the evidence against the claim that 600k Iraqis have been killed since the war began?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_surveys_of_mortality_before_and_after_the_2003_invasion_of_Iraq
Here’s a recent article:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1469636.ece
This was discussed at length at T&S and the conclusion was the lancet study was a politically motivated study that was off by a multiple of 8-10
60K dead is nothing to sneaze at of course.
Dan,
#78
You’re being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative. Knock it off!
The intent of this post was NOT to get into a heated political discussion. Unfortunately the discussion is no longer about the original posts but more about the politics of the Middle East. Accordingly, I will be closing the comments on this post.
Thank you Tossman for submitting this post! And thank you to everyone for your comments.