It's not that it must be the law of the land in absolute

Submitted by suitepotato (United States), Jan 13, 2009 at 22:44

...but by the choice of individuals. Christianity and Judaism both do not give wriggle room if one is strictly observant. Both have expressions of intolerance for all those who do not subscribe. The difference is that the Jews according to all archaeological evidence never practiced those intolerant aspects and have a very long legal history that engages in monumental backflips of logic to avoid meting out harsh penalties in religious jurisprudence, nevermind the death penalty in the old state of Israel. The Christian Crusades and Inquistions have been over for centuries and all Christendom is chastened by the recognition of what they in madness did.

Islam has not as a culture renounced those darker negative aspects of the religion. Composed of individuals as all agglomerations of humans are, they may choose to do so freely. Can they do as Jews and Christians do, simultaneously hold the entirety of their religious texts to be the word of G-d, and yet still hold that those things which they find repugnant in light of the findings of the evolving human society entire are inadmissible to practice and as the Jews so many times have, find a transcendent way to see them which gives another meaning that negates the plain one read out?

Well, they are humans so of course they can. But the desire to do so must be there and those darker negative things are more appealing to the baser aspects of man. All human history is an ongoing fight to overcome man's baser aspects and willfully abrogate those things.

Tolerance from a position of strength is mercy and from weakness folly and that false mercy of weakness is always the most cruel for it is done always with fear aforethought. If the only tolerance Islam can extend to the non-Muslim is from a position of absolute supremacy, then it is from the position of weakness of being unable to face opposition which is itself intolerance born of fear.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".