Chill people, chill.

Submitted by Ray B (Canada), Aug 23, 2005 at 07:25

Well alright, so by now, you guys and gals have probably heard quite a lot of points of view. From the extreme one that Jihad is an expansionist tool used by Muslims, to apologists saying that Jihad can be called upon when one is attacked, to some Muslims saying that the currect usage of the term Jihad by people on both sides of the fence. Well anyway, let's just say that there are quite a few ways of seeing this. I decided to add in my two cents.

Jihad to me, is an inspirational ideal/feeling/whatever used when one directly attacks -ISLAM-. Now using that definition, do I agree with what people like the Wahhabists, the extreme IslamISTS(note the last four letters), Al-Quaeda, violent thugs, use to condone their actions? Heck no. That's just doing the same thing as people who use political ideologies like Communism, or whatever other affiliation they might have, to condone their acts and try to gather up a following.

That said, do I believe that Jihad can be conjured up and used in a moral, legal(according to what I consider to be proper Islamic law), and just manner? Yes. It was used during the Crusades, against the Crusaders, who fought a war against ISLAM in the name of recovering "the holy land", and whose acts of barbarism would be shocking even by today's ridiculously repulsive standards. And strictly speaking, one of the most flagrant images of organized, widespread religious warfare was the Crusaders, so let's not saying that Islam invented this whole shindig.

...Now, I have heard the term 'moderate Muslims' being thrown around a lot, and I heard that there was some sort of takeover attempt by fundamentalists Muslims, and the more moderate members of this religion should wake up and smell the coffee.. Allright, so on the opposite side of the spectrum, let's look at Christianity, and specifically the United States since it is so involved with all of this. Now, recently(or at least I heard of it recently) there have been quite a few key appearances by US Senators and Congress members during religious preachings.The Two Rivers Baptist Church if I am not mistaken. And by appearances, I mean speaking up on the podium and whatnot. Now, if I remember correctly, the former democratic senator of Georgia (and let me laugh in his face) and I believe several other prominent members commented on how religious rights were being thrown aside. Now, whoever sought to talk about their political agenda in a religious meeting should be termed as fundamentalists, and I believe that in the Bible(and feel free to correct me if I am mistaken) it says "Judge not lest ye be judged". To sum up what I've been saying, no one should speak of a takeover attempt by Islamic Fundamentalists when the same thing is, in my humble opinion, happening in Christian USA.

Now, as to the reasons why I disagree with those Congress members, and Wahhabists, Islamists is because they're trying to mix up religion and state. Religion to me is a private, personal, and highly spiritual thing, anything beyond that would be too specific as to my specific religious views. People who try to impose, or even get others involved with their own religious views are just going too far.

Now, people say that Islam is an inherantly flawed religion, and personal I consider that as just delusion. Someone here said that, and I apologize if I offend that person, but this needs to be said in my humble opinion, Islam is the cause of all problems. Now, this particular phrasing was one that was utilized quite a few times before. Before the Muslims were attributed the evils of the world, there were the Jewish people, the Protestants, the Socialists, the Communists, the anti-Monarchists, the Anarchists, the Potheads, the Gays....Well you know what, problems have been existing forever, and they will continue forever. Muslims have come and gone, Jews have come and gone, Communists have come and gone, Homosexuals have come and gone. But problems are ETERNAL. Blaming your troubles on someone else has been a practice as old as time itself, it won't stop now, and Muslims are just among the latest waves of easy targets.

As for Islam itself, it is like all other religions in the world. The Quran is just like the other holy books, the Torah, the Bible, religious writings in Buddhism and Hinduism. If someone WANTS to interpret it in a way that condones their beliefs, then they easily will. Whether those beliefs be pacifism and the spreading of equality, or racism and the spreading of dissension. Whatever meaning you want to give to a holy book, or a religious, or WHATEVER, it will have that meaning, and you will be convinced of it. It hasn't started today, and it certainly won't end tomorrow. And I will draw upon the comment of Ruch saying that the Bible was used to justify slavery. Well you know what, that's exactly what I mean, people will use religions and political ideologies to justify their actions.

Personally, I'm a Muslim, I believe in the Quran, I believe in Islam, and I believe in what it says. I think that Islam is one should expect of religions, live in peace with your neighbours, do good, be good, and only use violence in extreme cases of self-defense, and even then it is only a partial victory. That is what /I/ draw from I know of my religion.

Other people can draw whatever they want of Islam, of Judaism, Buddhism and so on, and so forth. It's not the religion that is flawed, it's not the concepts that are flawed, it's the PERSON.

There are probably things that I've forgotten to write in here, in which case I'll post them as soon as I remember them. Also, if there are some contradictions in this, well it's late, I'm suffering from insomnia, and the world is contradictory.

Now, I apologize if I offended anyone, if I did know that I didn't want to, but I still had to say this, and if someone disagrees, well that's their right. And please, if anyone does disagree, please say it, I am more than eager to participate in an oganized and polite debate. ...

---

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".