article on radical islam
Submitted by Norb on Mon, 02/27/2006 - 3:39pm.
Another opinion
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| RealClearPolitics - Commentary - Oncoming by David Warren.htm.txt | 32.39 KB |
»
- Norb's blog
- Login to post comments
This was written by the same man who wrote this
I don't see the conflict.
I don't see the conflict. He's a severe cultural conservative both in religion and culture. He's not advocating killing muslims, but does recognize the clash of civilizations, and thinks that ours should stick up for itself or succumb to theirs.
BTW there is not one church in Saudi Arabia, not even a little chapel for foreigners. They, the Saudi, recognize the clash also.
David Warren
I have followed Warren's writings for a couple of years. He is thoughtful and has traveled far in his spiritual growth. He strikes a responsive chord with me, because he is in the tradition of Augustine, Thomas More, John Henry Newman, Tolkein, Evelyn Waugh, G.K. Chesterton, Hillaire Belloc, Edith Stein, Deitrich Bonhoefer, Richard John Neuhaus, who found that Christianlity (and Catholicism for most, but not Bonhoefer) was the inevitable resting place for their intellectual journeys--some having to capitulate almost against thier wills. The majority of the West has put 'religion' in a separate compartment--not really worth bothering about. Unfortunately, an active minority of Islam does not seem willing to relegate what they believe is the most important aspect of their lives to such an insignificant status. If one believes, as these Muslim believers apparently do, that Islam is the only way and that all society should be organized according to its principles, then why wouldn't one expect them to seek political dominance? We must recognize the values of who we are dealing with and be willing to defend the society that has grown out of 2,000 years of Christianity. Although we are now well beyond spreading Christianity by violence, I do not see the Sermon on the Mount as telling me that I must be willing to lay down the life of my family, as opposed to my laying down my own life, in the face of injustice. If I have been given authority over others, or others have been placed in my care, then I do not fulfill my obligation to them by turning their cheeks when they are attacked. I see the same responsibility on the part of any elected officials who deign to lead a government which is pledged to seek the safety of its citizens. This has taken centuries to work out--the just war theory--see Augustine through Aquinas. And by the way, the best exponents of the just war theory in today's world is the US Armed Forces in its rules of engagement and the considerations of proportionality. We must be willing to accept that Western civilization is good, should survive, is worth saving and is not the repository of all things evil. Some things are worth fighting for and I am ashamed that it has taken me so long to realize this.
I understand your comment
I agree that there is alot to despise in the way certain "muslims" are acting. But I can't agree that this is a product of the clash between religions or cultures. There are a number of muslims that think differently. See this piece by Freemuslims. We are clashing with a group of deranged people. We will not solve the problem or bridge the divide by assuming that all muslims privately wish to put an end to western civilization as we know it.
That's an interesting read.
My personal views are not against the religion of Islam nor against Muslim people. No argument that each (religion and culture) has a long and mostly good background. My argument is with radical Islam, as well noted in the article you present. The Catholic/Christian religion was also captured by a similar mindset during the middle ages.
I do believe though that a significant majority of Muslims in the world(and that's a lot of people) support the terrorists. We can't convince them to reject terror by good works. I know Christ said to turn the other cheek. That's fine on a personal basis but's no way to run a country. It hasn't worked in the past and has had disastrous consequences. It's up to moderate Muslims, such as the author, to convince his coreligionists.
I'm results oriented. If Islam wants to live in peace with me I'll live in peace with it. If radical Islam is destroying our culture, undeterred by moderate muslims who by and large keep silent in fear for their lives or positions, then we need to defend ourselves.
Recent series in the NY Times
In case you missed it, there is an interesting series in the Times on an Iman in America. It discusses the problems of practicing the muslim faith in the United States post 9/11.
NYT Imam series
Thanks Mark. It was long, but worth reading. I wondered whether clerics in Ireland had to face the same conflicts about members of the congregations who were known or suspected to be in the IRA, another terrorist organization. I especially liked his comments at the end about how he never expected to be in this position:
"That evening, the imam stood on the sidewalk outside. Rain fell in stinging drops.
"I never wanted to be a sheik," he said. "I used to think that a religious person is very extreme and never smiles. And I love to smile. I love to laugh. I used to think that religious people were isolated and I love to be among people."
The rain soaked the imam's robe and began to pool in his sandals. A moment later, he ducked inside the building.
"The surprise for me was that the qualities I thought would not make a good sheik — simplicity and humor and being close to people — those are the most important qualities. People love those who smile and laugh. They need someone who lives among them and knows their pain."
"I know them," said Mr. Shata. "Like a brother."
All clergy should be this way.
I happen to think...
I happen to think it might not be the most accurate characterization of the "conflict" that radical Islam is destroying our culture through the support of terrorists. For me, the issue is much more complicated.
Is there, perhaps, anything that the United States is doing or has done that would incite such outrage?
Noam Chomsky visited my school last semester and his knowledge was impressive. Perhaps what is called for is not a defense of Western civilization and Christianity, but a temperance of our own aggressive acts or at least a better understanding of American priorities? In the article, " It's Imperialism, Stupid", Chomsky states, "On the eve of the allied invasion, a classified report by the National Intelligence Council, the intelligence community's center for strategic thinking, "predicted that an American-led invasion of Iraq would increase support for political Islam and would result in a deeply divided Iraqi society prone to violent internal conflict," Douglas Jehl and David E. Sanger reported in The New York Times last September. In December 2004, Jehl reported a few weeks later, the NIC warned that "Iraq and other possible conflicts in the future could provide recruitment, training grounds, technical skills and language proficiency for a new class of terrorists who are 'professionalised' and for whom political violence becomes an end in itself." The willingness of top planners to risk increase of terrorism does not of course indicate that they welcome such outcomes. Rather, they are simply not a high priority in comparison with other objectives, such as controlling the world's major energy resources."
I'm proud to be an American and adore western civilization, but nothing will convince me that any conflict exploded primarily as a result of Islamic radicalists and/or the Islamic moderates' tendencies to overook the radicalists.