For starters we should openly discuss the obvious problem, that is militant Islam. Furthermore, we should acknowledge a problem contained within Islam itself, that is, that it is more than just a religion as many of us experience religion insofar as among many or most adherents, there is no church/state separation. This is a problem for western society, based as it is on said separation.
“… there is no church/state separation…” I agree with this part of your statement Denis, but it’s not inherent to Islam, it is inherent to religion…it wasn’t any different in Christian Europe at one time…the middle eastern cultures are just more than a few centuries behind.
Ed, thanks. I could quibble with the Christian Europe comparison of yestercentury, but for the sake of argument I will concede the point – Christianity had some pretty bad ass throat slashers back in the day. I hear some version of the argument frequently and do note that President Obama is a proponent of this line of discourse. But perhaps you can explain to me what difference, at this point, does it make? It seems the only reason to do so is it to cut the barbarians some slack. C’mon guys, give em a millennium or two, they’ll come around. Remember the Crusades? Well Christians changed their ways, right?
If that is your point, I think there are a few problems with the reasoning. First, anyone on earth today doesn’t enjoy the luxury of waiting a thousand years for Islam to get their shit together. And secondly, who’s to say that the passage of time will result in a more moderate version of Islam? It could get worse, no?
For starters we should openly discuss the obvious problem, that is militant Islam. Furthermore, we should acknowledge a problem contained within Islam itself, that is, that it is more than just a religion as many of us experience religion insofar as among many or most adherents, there is no church/state separation. This is a problem for western society, based as it is on said separation.
“… there is no church/state separation…” I agree with this part of your statement Denis, but it’s not inherent to Islam, it is inherent to religion…it wasn’t any different in Christian Europe at one time…the middle eastern cultures are just more than a few centuries behind.
Ed, thanks. I could quibble with the Christian Europe comparison of yestercentury, but for the sake of argument I will concede the point – Christianity had some pretty bad ass throat slashers back in the day. I hear some version of the argument frequently and do note that President Obama is a proponent of this line of discourse. But perhaps you can explain to me what difference, at this point, does it make? It seems the only reason to do so is it to cut the barbarians some slack. C’mon guys, give em a millennium or two, they’ll come around. Remember the Crusades? Well Christians changed their ways, right?
If that is your point, I think there are a few problems with the reasoning. First, anyone on earth today doesn’t enjoy the luxury of waiting a thousand years for Islam to get their shit together. And secondly, who’s to say that the passage of time will result in a more moderate version of Islam? It could get worse, no?