Right Thinking From The Left Coast
I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have. - Thomas Jefferson

Politics and Islam
by Lee

Not only is Europe beginning to feel the effects of a low birth rate among their educated white population combined with high rates of immigration of ignorant, low-skilled Muslims, but now there’s a growing trend for those educated white women to go to the Dark Side.

The death of Muriel Degauque, a Belgian convert who blew herself up in a suicide attack on US troops in Iraq last month, has drawn fresh attention to the rising number of Islamic converts in Europe, most of them women.

“The phenomenon is booming, and it worries us,” the head of the French domestic intelligence agency, Pascal Mailhos, told the Paris-based newspaper Le Monde in a recent interview. “But we must absolutely avoid lumping everyone together.”

The difficulty, security experts explain, is that while the police may be alert to possible threats from young men of Middle Eastern origin, they are more relaxed about white European women. Terrorists can use converts who “have added operational benefits in very tight security situations” where they might not attract attention, says Magnus Ranstorp, a terrorism expert at the Swedish National Defense College in Stockholm.

Ms. Fallot, who converted to Islam three years ago after asking herself spiritual questions to which she found no answers in her childhood Catholicism, says she finds the suspicion her new religion attracts “wounding.” “For me,” she adds, “Islam is a message of love, of tolerance and peace.”

Here’s the interesting point.  Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and most of the other major religions are also about love, tolerance, and peace.  Of all these faiths, the only one which mandates that its love, tolerance, and peace be enforced at the point of a sword is Islam.  This is because Islam is not only a religion but a political system. The faith requires that politics and law be intertwined, whereas Western civilization is built on the backbone of a separation of church and state.  This is why Islam is so dangerous a force in the modern world, because for the most part they simply cannot make the distinction between politics and religion.

Fallot laughs when she is asked whether her love life had anything to do with her decision. “When I told my colleagues at work that I had converted, their first reaction was to ask whether I had a Muslim boyfriend,” she recalls. “They couldn’t believe I had done it of my own free will.”

In fact, she explains, she liked the way “Islam demands a closeness to God. Islam is simpler, more rigorous, and it’s easier because it is explicit. I was looking for a framework; man needs rules and behavior to follow. Christianity did not give me the same reference points.”

More evidence of my point above.  Christianity also provides rules which need to be followed in order to gain salvation and acceptance into God’s graces in the afterlife.  However, this choice is voluntary.  Free will is one of the hallmarks of Christian belief, it’s the origin of the concept of Original Sin.  God tells you the rules, and he tells you what you will gain by following them.  But the choice to whether or not to follow those rules is left to the individual.  Islam, on the other hand, offers no such choice.  The rules are laid out by God through the prophet Mohammed, and anyone who does not follow them is an abomination against God, and must be brought to heel by force.

Some converts give their decision a political meaning, says Stefano Allievi, a professor at Padua University in Italy. “Islam offers a spiritualization of politics, the idea of a sacred order,” he says. “But that is a very masculine way to understand the world” and rarely appeals to women, he adds.

There it is again, the concept of politics and religion being inexorably linked in the Islamic mind.

At the same time, says al-Toma, converts seeking respite in Islam from a troubled past - such as Degauque, who had reportedly drifted in and out of drugs and jobs before converting to Islam - might be persuaded that such an “ultimate action” as a suicide bomb attack offered an opportunity for salvation and forgiveness.

“The saddest conclusion” al-Toma draws from Degauque’s death in Iraq is that “a woman who set out on the road to inner peace became a victim of people who set out to use and abuse her.”

Unfortunately, this is the major dynamic we see at work in the Islamic world today.  I have never believed that Islam and democracy are inherently incompatible, but Muslims have to understand that in the Western world politics and religion are separate.  In the Muslim world this is not the case, and the radicalized, perverse elements of this religion have dominated it, to the point where blowing yourself up to kill others is seen as the ultimate act of religions piety.

Posted by Lee on 12/27/05 at 05:05 PM (Discuss this in the forums)

Comments


Posted by on 12/27/05 at 06:40 PM from United States

I’d argue that all religions are political systems if they are left to their own devices.  The Catholic church in particular has a long, bloody, tyrannical, and highly embarassing history of politics and empire building.

Posted by Lee on 12/27/05 at 06:44 PM from United States

The Catholic church in particular has a long, bloody, tyrannical, and highly embarassing history of politics and empire building.

I agree entirely, except to say that there is a distinction between the Catholic church and Christianity.  The Catholic church is but one form of Christianity, but there is nothing in pure Christian doctrine which mandates the forced conversion of non-believers.  Islam is different in that it specifically commands this.

In a way it’s sort of like how some radical anti-gay groups latch on to a few key phrases in the Bible to justify their own hatred, when hatred of any person is the polar opposite of everything Jesus stood for.  In much the same way the radical imams of Islam have latched on to these key phrases to engender support for their religion-based political war against the West.

Posted by Thrill on 12/27/05 at 07:44 PM from United States

Ms. Fallot then had to excuse herself from the interview to be escorted to a hospital by a male relative to have her clitoris snipped off…

Posted by Lee on 12/27/05 at 07:54 PM from United States

Ms. Fallot then had to excuse herself from the interview to be escorted to a hospital by a male relative to have her clitoris snipped off…

In a loving, tolerant, peaceful manner, of course…

Posted by on 12/27/05 at 07:58 PM from United States

Yup,clip the clit,put her in a black bag and if she so much as steps one step out of line she qualifies for honor kiling. Great framework,babe,good luck with that.

Posted by on 12/27/05 at 07:58 PM from United States

This is what makes me suspsicious of any kind of faith.  A Catholic is questioning the reasonableness of her faith… so she goes and places her faith in something equally unreasonable.  Brilliant.

Posted by Lee on 12/27/05 at 07:59 PM from United States

so she goes and places her faith in something equally unreasonable

Religion has always been instinctual, never logical.

Posted by on 12/27/05 at 08:25 PM from United States

In a way it’s sort of like how some radical anti-gay groups latch on to a few key phrases in the Bible to justify their own hatred, when hatred of any person is the polar opposite of everything Jesus stood for.

Jesus was a Jew. He didn’t change anything in Judaism, only added on to it. More love your neighbor stuff. However, none of the old Jewish laws were changed under him. In the book of Leviticus, it says “If a man doth lie with another man as he doth with a woman, they both shall be put to death.” So Jesus told us Christians to love our neighbor unless they had commited a crime, then they should be punished according to the law.

We dont hate gays, they’re just criminals to us.

Posted by on 12/27/05 at 08:25 PM from United States

A Catholic questioning her faith is likely to be excommunicated.....

Posted by on 12/27/05 at 09:50 PM from United States

Lee,

This is a fantastic post.  Just to add a little, the Judeo-Christian God was against political leaders for the Israelites and the Bible does not suggest that Christians act in the political realm. From 1 Samuel: 

“This is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day.”

Jesus didn’t oppose the Romans, which would have been a political or militant opposition, and because of this he was not accepted as the Messiah by the majority of the Jewish people of the time. However, Jesus opposed the Jewish leaders and how they represented God to the rest of the people.  To address Consul’s point, Jesus actually did dismiss Levitical laws. 

18The former regulation [Levitical Law] is set aside because it was weak and useless 19(for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

.
This link gives a thorough outline of book of Hebrews, which deals with the topic rather extensively.
Posted by on 12/27/05 at 10:18 PM from United States

This reminds me of the Katherine (sp?) Hughes interview Hannity did the other night.  She mentioned that Saudi women were upset at the idea that westerners considered them oppressed.  They asked something to the effect of: “Why do you think we’re not free?”

Well, gee, off the top of my head, did you ever try to walk to the market without a male relative?  How about clothed in something sensible for a hot climate (here’s a hint: white colors don’t absorb as much sun!)?  Not to mention the fuckin’ retarded-ass swimsuits they’re supposed to wear.  They can’t drive an air-conditioned car anywhere, and for some wierdass reason, women have to be educated seperately and attend segregated religious services.  A husband can divorce them with just words, do they have the same ability?  If they marry a non-Muslim he must convert, it’s my understanding that Muslim men don’t have to do this with their wives.  Do I even need to mention those schoolgirls that had to burn alive because they dared to flee a burning building without covering their heads?

Oh yeah, and the whole, “if you get raped it’s always your fault, you feeble whore!  Stone her!” thing.

Where would they ever get the idea that other people think they’re treated like chattel?

Posted by Poosh on 12/28/05 at 05:10 AM from United Kingdom

The Catholic church in particular has a long, bloody, tyrannical, and highly embarassing history of politics and empire building.

SHOW SOME FUCKING GRATIDUTE. If the Catholic church didn’t start the Crusades etc, America certainly wouldn’t have been found by the west and WE WOULD ALL BE LIVING IN ISLAMIC-HELD LANDS.

Don’t let history stop you from attacking what you call religion though.

Religion has always been instinctual, never logical.

That’s not true, scores of the Christian scriptures go against human instinct. Religions are often used to tame our own animal instincts.

Posted by Poosh on 12/28/05 at 05:21 AM from United Kingdom

You have to understand that while I don’t make excuses for Islam, in Saudi Arbabia the offical Koran has many important words and phrases changed to support the regime’s Islamic system. Not minor words but rather the difference between being stoned and not stoned…

Random fact: in England ther grand total of prosecutions from being a witch is around 600! If memory serves only about 3 of them were burned.

And the most horrible time for being a witch was when King Charles I was removed from power and Parliament was in control.

Posted by on 12/28/05 at 07:14 AM from United States

The key distinction between Christianity and all other religions is that it is personal in nature.  One is “saved” not by adherance to rules or being “good”, but by personal faith in Jesus Christ; specifically, that through the sacrifice of His death our sins are atoned.  It is by His goodness and sacrificial death that we enter a relationship with God.  (We are saved by Grace, not by works, lest any man boast). 

Christianity is a purely individual act, apolitical and exists entirely between the individual and God.  Politics are external concerns to the Christian but do not form or influence their relationship with God.

Thus, any comparison between Christianity and any other religion, without acknowledging this essential difference, is misplaced.

Posted by on 12/28/05 at 08:20 AM from United States

The main difference between Islam and Christianity is the salvation aspect. In Islam, if I’m not mistaken, it’s all about scales. The good and bad things you do in life will be measured, and if the good outweighs the bad, you go to paradise. This, of itself, is not bad. But, when you have a religion with a violent history/tendencies (Islam), killing infidels by killing yourself is seen as an instant path to paradise.

Christianity, on the other hand, does away with scales. No matter how much evil one has done, if s/he believes Christ died on the cross for her/his sins, and repents, s/he is saved. Period.

Posted by Nethicus on 12/28/05 at 10:43 AM from United States

I want to chime in here and address some misconceptions that have been brought up.

Lee said:

God tells you the rules, and he tells you what you will gain by following them.  But the choice to whether or not to follow those rules is left to the individual.

One thing you didn’t address here is the forgiveness aspect of Christianity.  As Christians, we are supposed to forgive others.  Jesus said if someone slaps your cheek, offer the other.  Also, ‘he who is without sin cast the first stone’.  Islam’s more than happy to start casting stones about, which bothers me, as they actually hold Jesus as one of the more important prophets.

Seattle Outcast said:

I’d argue that all religions are political systems if they are left to their own devices.  The Catholic church in particular has a long, bloody, tyrannical, and highly embarassing history of politics and empire building.

Which has since changed.  I think it’s interesting to note that the Islamic world seems to parallel the Christian world about 800 years ago. 

A Catholic questioning her faith is likely to be excommunicated.....

I really hope you’re kidding…

svandals said:

To address Consul’s point, Jesus actually did dismiss Levitical laws

Actually, you are quoting Paul.  Jesus never abolished the old law, and cautioned against it.

(MATT 5:17) Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Poosh said:

That’s not true, scores of the Christian scriptures go against human instinct. Religions are often used to tame our own animal instincts.

While I’m not so sure the Crusades somehow led to the colonization of the Americas, I do support Poosh here.  It is quite clear that scripture works to put down animal instincts, such as rage and lust.

Posted by InsipiD on 12/28/05 at 01:12 PM from United States

But I thought that only Americans were prejudiced and judgemental.  France is giving their country away, and they’ll fight themselves over keeping it.  The only way they can keep that from happening is for this kind of news story to actually get read by their home population.

Posted by Poosh on 12/28/05 at 01:41 PM from United Kingdom

While I’m not so sure the Crusades somehow led to the colonization of the Americas

I’m saying Muslims would never have found the New World. EITHER way, there’d be no United States. Indeed if there was no Christianity there’d be no such America as you know it because Christian values were the prime movers in the ideaology that spawned the US. In case there are people stupid enough to deny this simply trace your founding fathers writings and you will see a line of philosphers who did what they did because of their Christian beliefs. Tough titties.

Posted by Nethicus on 12/28/05 at 06:56 PM from United States

Poosh--

1) The First Crusade was a political alliance between the Patriarch of the Byzintines and the Pope.  The Pope organized a crusade, and the crusaders invaded the holy land and drove out the arabs.

2) The Second & Third Crusades were organized to retake the holy land after the Arabs retook Jerusalem.

Never did the Arabs threaten to invade Europe in the Crusader era.  Later, the Moors did attempt an invasion, but were pushed back.  There has never been a risk of a Muslim takeover by Europe militarily.  In such a vein, it could never have jeopardized the colonization of the Americas.

Had there been a concerted invasion and takeover of the European empires by the Arabs in between 1000-1400 AD, then of course, the world would be very different.  But I don’t think a lack of a Crusade would have doomed Europe to Muslim domination.

Posted by Poosh on 12/29/05 at 09:37 AM from United Kingdom

The Christian Byzintines were under serious threat from Islam. A great deal of their land had allready been taken from them by the Muslim, much of this land was retaken by the Crusaders and meant to have been given back to their non-Catholic brothers. I cannot remember the exact details perhaps someone can lay them out here or when I recall them I’ll put them down here but the forces of Islam very nearly did come to close to being in a position where they could have easily trampled France but were prevented from doing so by something stupid or mild such as a castle holding out against the odds.

The First Crusade did not and never intended to “drive out arabs”. The arabs stayed where they were and most of them were allowed to get on with their lives - they simply payed their taxs to the Catholics instead of their Muslim rulers.

The Holy Land was in Christian hands during the second crusade with the exception of Edessa. The Second Crusade was an attempt to re-enforce the crusader states and put down the Muslim armies which were gaining increasing concern. This crusade failed and even made things worse. The Third Crusade WAS an attempt to retake the holy lands but failed because the King of England, along with the Knights Templar said NAY to retaking Jerusalem. It could be done but once taken how would they hold it? Thus they didn’t bother.

The thing people don’t understand about the Crusades is once you did your crusading YOU GOT THE FUCK OUT OF THERE.

Islam’s nature until recently was to expand by force (today it expands through breeding). The First Crusade in part was an attept to draw a line in the sand.

Posted by on 12/30/05 at 08:11 AM from Canada

It was my understanding the the first crusades were in reaction to bedoin bandits harassing pilgrims making their way to the holy land.

Anyway. Back to the original topic at hand. This phenonemon can be traced to two things. 1) Facination of the ‘other’. People bored or dissatified with their lives often look to something different than what they have experienced all their lives. They think that because it’s different, it must be better. Therefore, they are drawn to it. 2) Some women are turned on by ‘bad boys’. The thought of getting bitch-slapped around by an islamist boyfriend somehow turns them on. It’s a path towards getting sex without taking responsibility for it. It’s the whole rape fantasy thing. And, again, women who are into this are probably dissatified with their lives.

Posted by Poosh on 12/30/05 at 08:37 AM from United Kingdom

bedoin bandits harassing pilgrims making their way to the holy land.

No… that happened even when the Christians took the holy lands. In fact that’s why the Knights Templar formed, to protect the pilgrim routes.

Next entry: The Solution

Previous entry: Linkage is for Cool Kids

<< Back to main