Relativity

Submitted by George Laker (United States), Nov 4, 2011 at 12:35

The absence of non-conditional margins for "moderation" are strictly necessary. If we are committed to defining moderation only through a relative consideration of "extremism" we are implicitly denying the term any palpable meaning. A moderate should be judged by adherence to the law of the state, a desire to acclimate to Western cultural norms, to uphold the spirit of democracy, gender equality, race equality, and religious equality. A Muslim moderate should ideally be an individual for whom religion does not conflict with the structure of the state, even if this means abandoning parts of the religion that are irreconcilable. It seems counterproductive to adopt a definition of moderation that is relative only the next adherent who is markedly worse.

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".