I'm for it, Damian. There are definitely many modern Muslims who want and need our support. Until this 'jihad' element gets re-branded as Islam's enemy, it will be sold as Islam's orthodoxy.
Perhaps this is a very healthy sign - that Britain is finally listening to the moderns? Better, it puts the old-guard on the defensive.
Being "anti-German" as a Nazi makes less sense than, say, branding the bombing of abortion clinics as "anti-Catholic."
Posted at 2008-01-17 18:54:36 [PermaLink]and even less sense than labelling an AGW climate change denier as "anti-science".
Since we're veering off topic and all.
OT? I don't think so. There's a difference between a religion and one's accident of birth. One is subject to interpretation and judgment--the other isn't.
Posted at 2008-01-17 19:21:35 [PermaLink]Really,
"There's a difference between a religion and one's accident of birth."
So you have no problem with "anti-Islamic activity" as it is equivalent to "anti-Catholic in they are both identically religions.
Me. I hardly find my anti-AGW-climate change opinions an accident of birth.
What was your counter-point, again?
I don't have a counter-point. You are correct. We can discuss interpretations; we can't really discuss accidents of birth. What was your original point again? And what point are you trying to make now?
Posted at 2008-01-17 19:40:55 [PermaLink]"What was your original point again? And what point are you trying to make now?"
Well, nazi/germans are unrelated to islam/fanatics. As are Catholic/abortion clinic bombers.
And
AGW denier/ anti-scientist.
Except of course, the incidental observation that Catholic and Islam are religions. Otherwise, there is no connection and we are off topic.
Let me try to walk you through this.
We seem to agree that "anti-Islamic" does not equate to "anti-German." We are dealing with qualitatively different categories.
So we are in agreement, and I was not off-topic.
Sorry Dawg,
You misread.
Despite the headline, the thrust of the article is about Muslim fanatics....PERIOD!
You are just as off topic discussing Catholics and abortion clinic bombers as the headline is and my insertion was meant to place the exclamation point on this.
You are now dragging us further off topic by discussing your tangent instead of discussing Muslim fanatics... the topic of which I have just placed back on track.
So, what is your opinion of the thrust of the article?
OK I'll say it...this scared the sh1t outta me...the first thing I wanted to do was go and read Orwell again. I would have to buy them though. I know one is about doublespeak and oh yah..rats...Animal Farm was good...were there any cats in Animal Farm...maybe I could channel the cat and then I could handle 1984 ...no..oh..sh1t..wait...I'm still scared!!
Posted at 2008-01-17 23:34:55 [PermaLink]Ah, I get it. The *poster* was OT as well. I see.
I think it makes perfect strategic sense to go after those who commit crimes in the name of God by pointing out that they are in fact violating the tenets of the religion they claim to be serving.
There are plenty of Muslim scholars around who consider terrorism un-Islamic. The Home Secretary is on firm ground here. And denouncing the backwoods pastors and assorted yokels who throw bombs into clinics as "un-Christian" makes good sense as well.
Interesting point on Jacqui Smith's position, Dr. Dawg, and it has a certain logic to it.
However, I can also see this position leading to even more denial about the nature of Islamic terrorism by moderates and British politicians eager to avoid "giving offence" while currying favour (no pun intended) with Musim constituencies.
The radicals are firmly convinced they are acting in accord with Islam and many moderates avert their gaze and prefer to instead focus on British "Islamophobia" or, worse, tacitly justify the violence (thereby bringing into question their description as "moderates'). Sadly, the true moderates and liberals are very quiet and have little voice.
Your position gives the majority of British Muslims even more license to look the other way because if it has absolutely nothing to do with Islam why should they be concerned?
I taught for eight years in England and had many fine young British Muslims in my classes. When we talked about this issue almost to a person they said the level of denial in Pakistani communities on Islamic-motivated violence is overwhelming. In my view, relabeling the problem will do nothing and just foster more head-in-the-sand behaviour.
Queensman
You miss the Dawg's point: he likes "... denouncing the backwoods pastors and assorted yokels who throw bombs into clinics as "un-Christian" ...". Staying on point ruins his fun.
Cheers
Whenever the discussion rises to a certain level, Heinrichs can be counted on to emerge from his hole. Pay him no never-mind, Queensman.
I'm not sure that the Home Secretary's approach necessarily gives the moderate imams an out. Wouldn't it be more likely to force their hand, in the case of some, or encourage them, in the case of others? If a prominent non-Catholic politician were to pronounce on what is or isn't Catholic, could the hierarchy maintain silence? Would it be in their interest to?