Violent or non-violent opposition to Islamism must be backed by reason

Submitted by Prashant (United States), Jan 8, 2020 at 06:51

Dear Dr Pipes, violent and non-violent opposition to Islam must be backed by solid reasons. I am not aware of any imminent danger that Suleimani posed to the US but I am also not in a position to deny that he posed a danger. No one among us can claim that they have complete information about the events sorrounding Suliemani's killing.

But I am no friend of Iran. I'm no friend of Iran because it is a theocracy and does not give democratic rights to its citizens and non-citizens. I also categorically believe that Iran's opposition to secular democracy and freedom has its roots in Islamic doctrine and practice.

Therefore, though my heart goes out to the people who died in the stampede following Suleimani's funeral and I do not like the idea of Suleimani being violently killed, I hold Iran responsible of the plight that it is in.

Become a secular democracy, protect the rights of people who dissent, disengage Islam the religion from Islam the land-grabbing movement and then I will stand with you, dear Iran. Democracy is very inconvenient. Still majority of humanity chooses to offer it to others. We want you to do that as well.

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".