Templates for human behaviour have to come from somewhere

Submitted by markjuliansmith (Australia), Feb 8, 2010 at 21:37

The source of the continuing and rising muslim violence are the muslim texts definition of innocence. When the Islamic scholar Tariq Ramadan recently on CNN states it is wrong for innocents to be murdered it has to be realised what an adherent of the muslim text regards as innocents is necessarily a vastly different construct to innocents as derived from a secular notion of human rights.

For any non-adherent who has taken the time to read the muslim text which demonises non-adherents and promotes and rejoices in non-adherents violent demise, subjugation and humiliation would not be surprised, but expecting as the number of adherents of the muslim text rise in any community the level of violence and terror will rise relatively proportionally against non-adherents property and institutions unless strong legislative action is taken to nullify the notions of justified violence against non-adherents and a subservient state for women embedded in the muslim text.

Until humanity confront the fact beliefs, templates for human behaviour have to come from somewhere, from ideas imbedded in text and as with other human catastrophes we need to seek the root cause to actually prevent reoccurrence or amelioration of the destructive impacts against humanity, we will continue to have increasing terror as the number of adherents of the muslim text increase and/or their access to tools of violence are enabled.

The fact is proven by historic and current circumstance the muslim text promotes more than just a taunting disrespect against non-adherents. Until either the number adherents to the muslim text diminish or suddenly the adherents of the muslim text decide to delete the text which excuses violence against others the terror will continue.

Text remains violence and terror remains or increases. Text deleted violence and terror expected to diminish. Simple as that.

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".