A priori Christian apologetic stance?!

Submitted by Susan (United States), May 17, 2012 at 02:14

Are you suggesting that Robert Spencer takes an a priori Christian apologetic stance in every book he has written about Islam? If you are, you are a liar and you probably haven't even read his books. He wrote one book, 'Religion of Peace-Why Christianity is and Islam is Not' in which he compared the doctrine of both religions, with copious references, as always, to expose the inherent hatred and violence espoused by the canonical texts of Islam. But even in this book, he was excruciatingly objective, unbiased, and emotionally detached.

The non-violent, benevolence of the New Testament, compared to the bellicose, intolerant, supremacist antipathy of the Qur'an does not make Robert Spencer an a priori Christian apologist. Any decent human being with even minimal knowledge of Islam should be a Christian apologist because Islam is pure evil. One does not have to be a practicing Christian to recognize and abhor the malevolence that is the defining characteristic of Islamic ideology. In what other putative 'religion' do its followers assume a docile, ritualistic demeanor as they repetitively implore their deity to annihilate the rest of humanity in the most heinous manner?

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".