Garry Wills on the death of the Enlightenment
Comments: 40
You’ve probably seen this, but it’s just too trenchant not to mention. Garry Wills in the The New York Times: The Day the Enlightenment Went Out.
Mr. Rove understands what surveys have shown, that many more Americans believe in the Virgin Birth than in Darwin’s theory of evolution. […] Which raises the question: Can a people that believes more fervently in the Virgin Birth than in evolution still be called an Enlightened nation?
Ouch.
The secular states of modern Europe do not understand the fundamentalism of the American electorate. It is not what they had experienced from this country in the past. In fact, we now resemble those nations less than we do our putative enemies.
Where else do we find fundamentalist zeal, a rage at secularity, religious intolerance, fear of and hatred for modernity? Not in France or Britain or Germany or Italy or Spain. We find it in the Muslim world, in Al Qaeda, in Saddam Hussein’s Sunni loyalists. Americans wonder that the rest of the world thinks us so dangerous, so single-minded, so impervious to international appeals. They fear jihad, no matter whose zeal is being expressed.
•••
Posted to General Rants • 2004.11.08 (Mon) • 01:50
Comments
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.08, 02:56
…and as soon as america blows up a cafe in france or a library in italy, those fears are justified..
Posted by jh 2004.11.08, 03:00
Iraq doesn’t count…?
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.08, 03:14
iraq doesn’t count as a reason for europeans to fear america…
iraq is a reason for iran to fear us.. iraq is a reason for syria to fear us..
madrid was a reason for europe to fear islam.. van gogh was a reason for europe to fear islam.. september 11th was a reason for everyone to fear islam.. sometimes it takes a major event to wake people up.. sometimes it takes 2 or 3…
europe will need to decide if it wants to defend it’s freedoms now, or tolerate itself into submission.. it’s too bad defending themselves against a religion, would be considered religious, and thus avoided…
Posted by MacDara 2004.11.08, 08:08
dwntmpo, you missed the point. By a mile.
It’s not about Europe fearing America. It’s about fundamentalist Christian America fearing/hating fundamentalist Islamic Arabia, and vice versa.
And as far as your tarring of all of Islam with the same brush? Well, I’m not going to feed the troll that much…
Posted by niji 2004.11.08, 08:45
thus it has begun. dwntmpo, and it appears from the election results, most americans, do not see it yet. they dont see that the biblical map of action that america is using to destroy (america would say “reshape”) islam will in fact start ww3. amercians are simply seeing the terrible events of 9.11 as a pretext to go anywhere to re-shape a world it doesnt like. how else can we explain their invading iraq in the context of such tennuous connections to bin laden. bush got away with lying. and americans see that it is now their manifest destiny to pro-actively reshape a world in its own biblical vision. they have not seen, and i dont expect them to see, that they are wrong. this is what is dangerous. the world has a superpower that is on a mission. the eagle in the wilderness has flown its nest. and is now being refuled in mid-flight for range bombing flights. america is babylon the great. can it be explained anyother way?
that is why those of us not in the usa are sick to out stomachs.
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.08, 09:11
“They fear jihad, no matter whose zeal is being expressed.”
The people fear/hate the war… but they haven’t realized which side has said the war HAS to happen. They don’t fear the side that says kill all the infidels!, they fear the side that says thou shalt not kill…
and if I’m tarring all of islam with the same brush, I’d like to see a different one.. I’d love to see a real journalist get in and out of iran without 10 years in prison.. I’d love to see newspapers in saudi where a terrorist isn’t called a martyr.. or maybe schools in palestine that don’t teach jihad as the best possible option in life.. When a cleric does speak out.. they speak to US.. they tell us islam isn’t like that.. it isn’t true islam.. but they won’t show any kind of evidence to the contrary. They won’t speak out AT them, they speak out ABOUT them..
the next time you hear “We don’t believe in the killing of innocent people..” ask if infidels are considered innocent..
Posted by Splinter 2004.11.08, 11:04
I was going to say something here about how concerned I am about this issue, how fundamentalism on both sides are taking power and how bad that would be.
But instead I thought I would say this, I live in Australia, I work with at least 3 Muslem’s, we have 4 Muslem families in our street, a Moske is in the next suburb. Never has one of these people expressed anger or hatred towards me or my family even though we are infidels.
- They have expressed disbelief in why the US and others have decided to interfere yet again with the middle east.
- They have been dismayed as to why there Moske was firebombed
- They are understanding when people do not understand their ways
- They are hurt when people, once told their observances (food etc), tell them they are not welcome and should take what they are given
- They see the actions in the middle east as a grab for oil and nothing more
- To them fundementalism on both sides is just as confusing as it is to me
Posted by Khalid 2004.11.08, 12:21
if I’m tarring all of islam with the same brush, I’d like to see a different one
Yes, you are tarring all of Islam with the same brush. It is true that some of the Gulf countries and Iran are plagued with horrendous problems, but you have to keep in mind that those regions have not yet recovered from colonial interference. Indeed, our Western governments are still either supporting tyrants or creating chaotic conditions in which simple-minded, heretical Muslims gain rhetorical power.
Second, Islam is hardly monolithic. There is an incredible amount of cultural diversity that isn’t reflected in the media, which by its nature dwells on the troublemakers. There is a long history of Islam in Africa, China/Indonesia/Malaysia, India, Central Asia, and yes, even Europe. (Muslim Spain was Europe’s most tolerant society for the better part of a millenium.) Overwhelmingly, Muslims are like anyone else, getting on with their day and hoping for a peaceful, secure life for their families. This massive and complex diversity can’t be simplified down to the fanatics, any more than the “Western” world can be simplified to brownshirts or Texas gunslingers or the KKK. Your fearful perceptions aren’t constructive; they only make us both nervous.
As for whether “infidels” are considered innocent— Islam is unequivocally clear that everyone is presumed innocent, regardless of their religion. Furthermore, the Islamic concept of infidelity is not the same as the medieval European one; Islam is inherently pluralistic and considers all of the major religions valid to varying degrees.
I don’t have time to go on, but I can point you towards some traditional Western Muslim writers who are intimately familiar with Enlightenment thought, Western culture, and Islamic theology. They may not make it onto CNN, but they represent the majority of Muslims. If you take the time to listen, you’ll see that they have ingenious insight into Enlightenment thought, Western culture, and the sources of extremism as well as a tremendous capacity for self-criticism:
Kabir Helminski (US-based Threshold Society)
T.J. Winter (Cambridge University)
- Muslim terrorists embrace a very secular heresy
- Muslims and the European Right
- Faith in the future: Islam after the Enlightenment
- Tradition or Extradition?
- British & Muslim? (Intriguing glimpse into Chinese and Indian Islam as well)
And since this is a weblog that appreciates tasteful aesthetics:
- Serving the Guest: A Sufi Cookbook & Art Gallery
- MIT-based Islamic architecture community (with a wonderful image database)
- Fons Vitae (source of gorgeous Islamic books for English-speaking audiences)
Finally, see the University of Georgia’s Islam site for a solid online reference. And turn off your TV… get to know some actual Muslims as human beings— we’ll both feel better.
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.08, 14:57
splinter.. given the isolationist nature of the muslims, I would doubt that any of them actually consider you a friend.. to do that would make them bad muslims and hypocrites..
if I’m wrong, and you do consider some of them your friends, see if they’ll explain a verse to you..
“Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.” quran 3:28
be careful, tho.. questioning muslims can lead to violent expressions..
Posted by Timothy 2004.11.08, 15:28
Woah! Touché! And coming from an Australian. ;-)
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.09, 01:45
I’m sure there’s plenty of thoughtful, insightful muslims.. the problem is there’s also plenty of backwards terrorist muslims, that the ‘thoughtful’ ones don’t try to stop.
if someone claming to be a christian blows up an abortion clinic, they’re treated like scum. They’re denounced on the news, by the government, by the people, by the church… they’re put on trial, and end up in jail. They’re treated like a criminal. If the KKK ties a black guy to thier car and drag him around the city, they’re tried for muder, and spend the next 20 years in jail…. We police our own AND we condemn them..
your university of georgia site is cute.. they link to an article on MEMRI.. (bet they had to really scour that site to find somthing that supports islam..) the article they chose has clips from muslim papers after the beslan school terrorist attack.. some of them condemn the act.. some criticize russia, and then some blame it all on the jews..
The question is.. if terrorists are such a small plart of islam, why won’t the rest of islam do something to stop them?
simple question.. but it won’t get answered.. the terrorists have thier proof in the quran and hadith…
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.09, 04:07
fwiw..
Therefore the Lord will cut off from Israel head and tail, branch and rush, in one day. The ancient and honourable, he is the head; and the prophet that teaches lies, he is the tail. For the leaders of this people cause them to err; and they that are led of them are destroyed. Isaiah 9: 14-16
Abraham was the head.. muhammed was the tail.. and the government causes (forces) the people to follow..
Therefore the Lord chall have no joy in their young men, neither shall have mercy on their fatherless and widows: for every one is an hypocrite and an evildoer, and every mouth speaks folly. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still. Isaiah 9:17
keep in mind this was prophecy.. well before Jesus, and WAY before muhammed..
Posted by Bookie 2004.11.09, 11:49
Saying that there is justification in assuming Muslims are not interested in stopping terrorism is like saying there was no German in world war two against the Holocaust because America hardly got any wind of their movements. The concept is absurd.
Khalid, thanks for the links.
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.09, 12:08
not quite the same analogy.. I said muslims aren’t interested in stopping the violence.. I din’t say arabs.. to phrase your comparison correctly, would be saying none of the nazis were against the holocaust..
Posted by Bookie 2004.11.09, 12:51
True, but the Nazi party was headed by a living man who explicitly stated his interest in the holocaust(and still there were those who supported Hitler’s economic policy and then became appaled by his final solution), while muslims learn from a book by a dead man that can be interperated in many ways.
Thinking back to WWII, Germany at the time was synonymous with Nazism, just as those less informed today equate arabs with muslims. The same over-eagerness to create umbrella groups for the opposition applies with those who think all muslims are the same.
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.09, 13:23
again, almost.. islamists are headed by a group of living clerics interperating the words of a dead man.. and their interpreation becomes law. but that’s not really the problem.. if they choose to live under those laws.. fine.. (I guess it’s ok to choose to be slave) ?
but when they move to other parts of the world, that aren’t structured the way ‘home’ is.. they don’t like it, and they try to change it.. ONE of the methods they use is terrorism.
I saw some stats a while back.. sorry no link :/ but they were compiled from a few different intelligence sources.. ex-muslims.. moderate muslims… and they estimated the jihadist movement at about 10% of the muslim world.. and that about half of that muslim world supports or sympathizes with them. 10% may seem small.. but if there’s 1.3 billion muslims.. that would make 13 million terrorists, supported by a population of 650 million.. While they may not ALL be under the umbrella.. it’s certainly enough to be concerned about it..
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.10, 14:58
“Iran might be a hard line muslim country, but most of its population isn’t. And you can guess how hard it would be for them to express their denial, considering the kind of regime they live with.”
But muslims in chicago can.. you can try to compare to world war 2, where we had maybe 1 source of information that we had to wait a week to get.. but you can’t say the means to get a message out TODAY doesn’t exist..
I take it as refusal.. whether it’s out of their own beliefs, or out of fear of getting killed by their own, the result is still the same… or maybe.. (just maybe) they don’t have anything to say. the terrorists quote their scripture.. often.. they read scriptures that validate kidnapping, beheading, death to the jews, death to the christians, death to the infidels and just general terrorizing.. and then the ‘peaceful’ muslims just say ‘No… it doesn’t say that.. it’s out of context…’
ya know.. to admit that it does say it and says what it means, would mean all these ‘enlightened’ muslims would have to admit that their religion is a death cult… to show valid evidence to the contrary, would show contradictions in the religion.. so to prove to you that islam is peaceful, they’d have to prove to themselves it’s false..
I guess that makes the safest action, no action..
“From what I know, bombings have always occured as a response to a previous geopolitical action considered agressive by the terrorists, not as an action to interfere with local politics. If you have an example, please inform me.”
The first one I found..
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1345739,00.html
“Rizieq shares Bashir’s vision of a Taleban-style, pure Islamist state in South-East Asia stretching from Buddhist Burma to Protestant Papua, taking in all points in between. It is that vision that has Rizieq hoping — and the majority of moderate Indonesians afraid — that the recent carnage in Buddhist-governed Thailand’s Islamic south may flare into a wider communal conflict engulfing the region. “
any bets on how loud that majority speaks?
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.11, 00:41
Thibaut’s post got deleted?
Posted by Thibaut 2004.11.11, 07:37
seems like it….
I found an example of extremist islamic action I was asking you in recent news with the murder of Theo Van Gogh in the Netherlands. That’s pretty scary, and of course extremists of the “other side” replied with the same thoughtfull and constructive actions with some bombings or vandalism of mosques and muslim schools.
The best thing to reply to these guys is to read them the lines of the quran where it speaks of tolerance to the others, the other religions and about the use of violence. Khalid, could you point us on this ?
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.11, 11:15
it’s not quite as easy as just finding verses that speak tolerance..
“By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else better than that. then I do what is better and expiate my oath.’” Bukhari:V7B67N427
So.. “Whatever I said last.. is what I meant..” but the quran isn’t in chronological order.. so there’s no way of knowing what he said first/last..
Did kill the jews come before or after love everyone..?
Posted by Khalid 2004.11.11, 11:54
islamists are headed by a group of living clerics interperating the words of a dead man.. and their interpreation becomes law.
Actually, the problem is that Islamists are not headed by any qualified Islamic scholars— the Islamists make their own interpretations largely in ignorance of the mass of Islamic scholarship, and thus read their own personal and political frustrations into the text. (The young people who killed the Dutch director are a perfect example; clearly they have failed to form a secure identity— this personal insecurity is their motivation; religion is the convenient excuse.) Proper Islamic scholars, who typically have more than 30 years of training in theology, philosophy, logic, jurisprudence, etc. have condemned terrorism in the strongest of terms. Under Islamic law, people like bin Laden or the shoe bomber or the Dutch shooter are at best simple-minded vigilantes or more likely just plain murderers. Because they are foreign to us, we focus on the religious aspect of their identity, but you’d be better off looking at them in sociopolitical terms, the way we look at people like Tim McVeigh or the Aum Shinrikiyo(?) leader.
Anyhow, the important thing in understanding who speaks for Sunni Islam is to look at whether they follow the traditional methods of interpretation or not. Islam is not like Protestant Christianity, in which individuals can make up their own interpretations without following any rigourous methodology. (That approach too often results in fanatics, be it bin Laden or dwntmpo, picking and choose verses out of context to suit their own agenda.) Nor is it like the Catholic tradition, in which an official Church and ordained clergy come up with a definitive interpretation of holy texts. The best analogy in the West is perhaps the legal/justice system. In our society, everyone can read and understand the law, but only highly trained professionals can produce the range of interpretations that carry some weight; the same holds true in Islam. So, to understand the terrorists, look to their sociopolitical situation. To understand Islam, look to its best trained scholars.
See “Bin Laden’s violence is a heresy against Islam”, an article printed in Britain’s Daily Telegraph for more on this.
cheers, Khalid
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.11, 13:51
“(That approach too often results in fanatics, be it bin Laden or dwntmpo, picking and choose verses out of context to suit their own agenda.) ” says Khalid…
but would he bother to put one of them in context? of course not.. he’ll just tell me I’m wrong and send me to a link where someone else tells me I’m wrong.. without ever showing any kind of proof as to why..
“And Allah has hated for you to ask too many questions, (in disputed religious matters)” -Bukhari V3B41N591
“Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord” -Isaiah 1:18
if you question a christian, they will answer.
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.11, 15:31
The meaning of Jihaad?
“the spending of one’s energy in fighting against the disbelievers either directly or by means of assisting the cause monetarily or by way of forwarding one’s opinion or by joining in the ranks of the Mujaahideen.”
I’m sure Khalid will email him to let him know he’s wrong..
Posted by Khalid 2004.11.11, 17:01
dwntmpo: Sorry, but a dialog with you is about as important and productive as a dialog with the crazy street preachers downtown. I actually have a life. My only objective in posting here was to give the more intelligent visitors an educated alternative to your xenophobic rantings. Mission accomplished. Farewell!
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.11, 18:34
did I take that definition out of context?
Is the Imam not qualified to answer that kind of question?
I find it odd that the very thing I’ve been complaining about the entire time.. I’m told I’m wrong.. and then proven right.. There is hardly even an acknowledgement of terrorism being associated with islam.. it’s about “sociopolitical” problems.. or not ‘securing’ an identity.. I’m tired of hearing excuses for terrorists.
I suppose terrorism has nothing to do with a brain-washing cult that children are indoctrinated into from the moment they’re born.. it has nothing to do with the madrassas that would rather teach the child to recite the quran, than teach them to read it.. it has nothing to do with the mosques that chant death to america, death to israel, every day - year after year.. and it has nothing to do with the government run news and media glorifying all the wonderful martyrs on their way to allah…
I guess we’ll have to wait and see if the propaganda pen is mightier, or if the terrorist actions speak louder..
For help with freedom from islam, visit Faith Freedom
Posted by leezard 2004.11.12, 01:22
Khalid…you are amazing.
Instead of offering an actual argument against what dwntmpo is saying, you insult him (repeatedly, even).
I see him trying to debate certain points and you don’t answer him at all…why not?
I, for one, would love to hear what you have to say to rebut his line(s) of thinking.
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.12, 02:08
he can’t..
he’s even regressed back to the old jock vs nerd style arguements of the 1980’s - “I actually have a life.” So it must make him cooler, and therefore his opinion carries more weight..
Posted by Thibaut 2004.11.12, 07:06
What we need is an”Islam for dummies” to be published very soon.
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.12, 12:11
you mean like this one?
Posted by Thibaut 2004.11.12, 12:24
NIce one !
Posted by Bodybag 2004.11.12, 16:05
I notice how this has been steered from about the US away to being about Islam.
I’m not a Jew, Christian or Moslem, and I’d just like to say your religions are equally sucky. Just being fair to you all ;-P
Posted by jean 2004.11.12, 23:31
i believe it’s simplistic to say that islamic “leaders” should organize some kind of law and punish islamic terrorists, that the muslim masses should impugn such acts, and thus terrorism will be reined in and disappear. there are two things wrong with this argument: the assumption that any leadership has power over terrorist groups, and more importantly, the assumption that terrorist acts lie solely in blind religion.
i will not offer any sociopolitical theories here, but i don’t believe at all that islamic extremists “pushed first” and so the christians are just “pushing back.” there is a lot more history behind that, and i’m not talking biblical history (which is up to you to take as fact or not, dwntmpo). i’m referring to the recent (since the 1970s) history of oil-hungry nations and the ties between elites and governments in both the “christian” and “islamic” nations (if we want to generalize) who, while reaping tremendous profit, have left millions in poverty and substandard living conditions.
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.13, 04:53
Yes, of course there’s plenty of history outside the bible.. and in the case of wars and oppressions, there’s always at least 2 sides, for generalization.. good and bad. With free will being a part of human nature, there will always be at least 1 person on the other side.. (regardless of which one it is..) I define the ‘good’ side, as the side that allows as much of that same free will as possible. I believe america to be on that good side. No other country or population has spread freedom and free will more than america. I may not always agree with the methods some of the leaders choose, but I do believe the overall outcome is for the better.
Islam does not believe in free will. The very definition of ‘islam’ is submission.. submission to allah.. We (as an enlightened type of people) tend to take that metaphorically, like the same way a christian would submit to God. However, muslims say that a child is born into islam. From the start, you are islamic, and then your parents make you into a jew, or a christain, or whatever else.. but in the beginning, everyone is islamic. islam also says that you can not leave it. to leave islam would make you an apostate, and you should be killed… just another example of how islam says everyone else should die… and submission is enforced.
I believe the religion is the driving force behind the terrorists. I believe the general muslim population supports them and their goals. I don’t look for social problems, I don’t look for economical problems, I don’t look for geographical problems.. the religion has stated it’s goals, very clearly, and muslims have been following it to the letter for nearly 1400 years… and yet the ‘fingerprints on the still smoking gun’ are ignored, and other causes are searched for.. fingers are pointed in absolutely every other direction..
The problem I have with the original point of the article, and amplified throught the thread, is that the general population has become confused as to which side is right. The author describes america as “fundamentalist zeal, a rage at secularity, religious intolerance, fear of and hatred for modernity” He compares america to the islamic regimes, and says the rest of the world thinks WE are the dangerous ones.
This is what’s scary to me. When good and bad become confused. When the definitions of words become confused, and we can no longer communicate.. (ie terrorist, martyr, peace, freedom, innocent, fundamentalist, tolerance, aggression, occupation, empire..) all of these words mean different things to the people that use them, and in turn mean different things to the people that hear them. I fear we’re trying to become tolerant of a group of people that will not tolerate us back, and I fear that even mentioning that something is wrong with a particular religion, automatically makes that person a fanatic of a different one..
If good and bad are equal and pushing against each other constantly.. which side wins when good stops pushing back..
Posted by Thibaut 2004.11.15, 11:36
hey, downtempo, seriously,… You may need to consider that seeing the world with a good/bad filter will prevent you from understanding most of it. I’m not pretending that I’m understanding all that mess, but at least, I’m trying to figure out things using other methods than binary thinking. Learn about your country’s foreign policy history and then you’ll probably stop saying that the US is spreading freedom on the planet. Makes me want to throw up. The only interest the US has is making profit, not spreading freedom. Nothing is right, nothing holds the truth, and there’s no truth. There’s as much truths as there is human beeings on this planet. The only way to go if we want to live a descent life is to find common points on wich we agree, and make the best of them. All along this thread, you’ve been remarquebly talented in finding the itchy scratchy side of the story. My guess is that if you used your time focussing on solutions that would allow muslims and christians to live together, instead of looking for arguments that opposes them, that would be a good (even if small) step towards a better tomorrow. Thank you anyway for sharing your thoughts. That’s a first step…
Bodybag : what a constructive comment. Thank you.
Jean : the Crusades are also often mentionned as an historical background of this “war on terror”. Showing how stupid man can be.
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.16, 02:41
“My guess is that if you used your time focussing on solutions that would allow muslims and christians to live together, instead of looking for arguments that opposes them, that would be a good (even if small) step towards a better tomorrow.”
You can’t go randomly looking for solutions, if you haven’t identified the probem..
If the problem lies in islam itself (as I’ve stated, I believe it does..), then it’s not going to be that easy to fix.. despite all the common ground both sides may have, they don’t agree on the main issue.. the right to exist..
“On October 24, 2004, the liberal Arab websites www.elaph.com and www.metransparent.com published a manifesto written by Arab liberals, in which they petition the U.N. to establish an international tribunal which would prosecute terrorists, as well as people and institutions, primarily religious clerics, that incite terrorism.”
They want the cleric to be held responsible when he calls for the attacks.. I don’t think it’s enough.. they don’t look at where the cleric gets his authority from. If the cleric says he gets his authority directly from the quran, then a law against him inciting violence would be supressing his religious freedom..
The ONLY options after that, are to change the quran, or ban it.
Posted by Thibaut 2004.11.16, 07:03
Yeah right…
Posted by Thibaut 2004.11.16, 09:00
Maybe you want to look at the record of atrocities commited by Christians in the name of Jesus Christ, and then propose to ban the Bible.
You can’t go randomly looking for solutions, if you haven’t identified the probem.
Well, the problem is pretty much identified : some guys trying to set up religious state. And that’s not just a muslim thing. The USA just did it. Which bring us back to the subject of this post. The danger does not lie in the Bible or in the Quran, it lies in the fact that some guys find themselves wise enough to think that they can use this texts to reach their own political egoistic goals of power. You’d better spend some time on finding out how Bush misuses the Bible to get where he wants to, because this will have larger consequences on your daily life.
Posted by dwntmpo 2004.11.16, 11:27
People have done many things in the name of many religions that aren’t what the religion itself says. Regardless of how man has interpreted anything, the bible does not say for you to kill, or terrorize anyone. The quran does.
Islam is the only major religion left in the world that has not denounced killing in the name of god.
Why.
Posted by m d 2004.11.19, 03:02
dwntmpo should get his own blog… ;)
Posted by Patrick 2004.12.03, 10:33
I do not think that where we find ourselves right now is a very clever place to be. I think there must be something wrong with our meritocracy that our present state is presented to us not only as the optimum solution but as our only solution. I feel the crushing weight of that old Chinese saying that the strongest country is the country with no enemies. How wise and wealthy the Swiss seem right now.
Post a comment:
Send This Story to an Enemy
• • •
