People + Religion = Culture vs Society - Religion = People

Submitted by Abraham (United States), Feb 12, 2007 at 14:01

Dear Mr. Dhimmi No More:

I am another US infidel who has silently observed, but did not want to get in the middle of the "heated" debate.

Reading your posts, It seems to me that you base your entire argumentation on a paradox, meaning, that if a Muslim wanted to be a "true" Muslim, he had to live his religion to the letter of the Q'uran. If he did so, he could not be at the same time, what we call a member of our modern society. Therefore he can not be a Muslim and at the same time proclaim to accept and promote co-existence, be peaceful and productive US citizens - basically that he is our enemy by design.

According to you the same paradox applies, as far as moderate Islamists are concerned, hence they can, if I understood you correctly, by definition not exist.

You obviously are an expert on the Q'uran which you can even quote in Arabic.

You further identified Michael as a Muslim.

He stated that he did not claim to be an expert on the topic, and promoted "moderate", meaning relativist, liberal, restraint approaches. Doesn't that make him exactly the type of Muslim you so adamantly deny exists?

I scanned the news links he provided in support of existence of moderate Islam and ended up thinking that there are at least some voices within the Islamic world, reasoning for modern world principles. Even few such voices are proof of life, wouldn't you think so?

I feel that you approach the debate from mainly a theological and theoretical angle and, if you bear with me, will tell you, why I see it that way.

I am a Christian who tries to follow the basic Ten Commandments, but otherwise do not know much about the content of the book.
In the eyes of the Pope or even the standard preacher, priest or experts on the Bible, such as some of the people within my own community, who study and discuss the Bible extensively several times per week, I am considered as imperfect, to say the least.

Some of my political views are in direct opposition to Christianity, as framed by the Vatican for instance. Assuming that you, Noah or Susan live in the same cultural environment, I would hypothesize, that you all have encountered the same. Some practice their religion "by the book", whereas most others are laymen, most of the time absorbed by day-to-day challenges, but certainly not by their religion.

Therefore Christianity consists of a small group of "fanatic" followers, such as the people harassing us at the check-out of the local grocery store, trying to spread the gospel, and a larger group of imperfect Christians like us, who do not see religion as an all encompassing driving force.

Having established that, why is it so inconceivable that the same could not apply for instance to the Islamic minority here in the United States?

I mean, in the end doesn't it boil down to the people's actions?
Therefore I could not care less, if most of them were imperfect Muslims – that's their own dilemma, as it is mine to live my life to the best of my abilities somewhere between the gravity points of my spirituality and pragmatic requirements of our competitive materialistic society.

Not trying to qualify or compare either religion, your argumentation, Dhimmi No More, that accepting above mentioned fragmentation (silently) as a given within our Judeo-Christian society, while dismissing even the possibility of the same applying to US Muslims, could be perceived as a double standard or hypocritical. Why should they be so different from us?

The Muslim Population in the US is seemingly estimated at 2 – 10 Million people, outpacing white Caucasians by a factor of 2-4 in terms of population growth.
I found many differing estimates on the internet and don't know the correct number.
Whatever it may be though, we all seem to agree that even 2Million Muslims alone would constitute a significant amount of people.

It would surpass the often mentioned critical mass with regards to legislating a ban, enforce the latter and /or deport Muslims on a grand scale, since our Defense Forces are already at their limits for geo-political reasons and Law Enforcement isn't even able to combat gang related crimes or a handful of Columbian drug cartels, let alone is able to stem the tide of standard criminality. Considering the current political climate, as well as legal frame, in this country such legislation could never make it beyond the level of a petition.

Assuming that educated people like you see the logic of your Modus Operandi at best being a non-starter, what do you suggest instead?

Michael , Plato or Chris may be naïve, but I have yet to read about a pragmatic idea originating from the hard, right wing core of this Blog.

Until such is presented, I for my part think that the small group of people who support a multi-facetted, moderate approache, at least, as far as our US Muslims are concerned, are right.

---

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".