First, you asked, “What particularly interested me with regards to the 'Frontpage Interview' post about political Islam?” That is quickly answered.
I felt that the theme exemplified by the following quotation gave me a new and interesting perspective: “Warner: Our enemy is the civilization of dualism. The ultimate nature of Islamic civilization is duality. Dualistic Islamic ethics and politics propose one behavior for Muslims and another behavior for the unbelievers (kafirs). Islam has declared that the civilization of dualism must annihilate that civilization which is based upon a unitary view of humanity-ours. It is logically impossible for a civilization based upon a unitary view of humanity to co-exist with a civilization based upon duality.
Moving on – slowly -- You have raised so many thought-provoking points that it is impossible to respond to them all at once and remain coherent within the time and posting space available. I am not ignoring all the other points which seem to narrow the region of our actual disagreement – ie., Jefferson, etc.
Let me try to respond by tossing out some thoughts in response to your suggestion -- “honestly examine the presuppositions of another view point.” That is not an easy task
With that said, I would suggest that there are serious voids in cross-cultural and religious communication that appear universal. The holocaust, which most sane individuals accept as an historical given, was not the spawn of islam. Animosity was the rule between Jews and Christians and between the various subsets of Christianity – Catholic vs. Protestant – and this persisted for centuries. The same is apparent within Islam – Shiite, Sunni, etc.
Language/Semantics difficulties may explain a lot of the blocks to mutual understanding between such disparate groups as Islam and Judeo-Christianity. What one group says makes no sense to the other – at least some of the time.
Rational and sane westerners do not deny the immorality you mention, rape, murder, assault, and sexual perversions – this consensus appears based upon the Ten Commandments handed down by Moses. Allegedly in western society, such behaviors as mentioned all carry draconian penalties prescribed by law. I admit these standards seem to be withering.
One might wonder if such perceptual variance as exists between Islam and the west may be attributed solely to cultural value judgments? Perhaps. If so, how can the dissonance be remedied?
Looking at American, or western culture from within, and denying the reality of the various social problems is non-productive, non-corrective, and possibly a defense mechanism not totally dissimilar to holocaust denial. Conversely, I would submit that Islam is no less obscene and their denial of some internal situations no less apparent.
To the westerner it appears that beheadings and honor killings are condoned Islamic traditions; after all there is no evidence of adverse consequence arising from within islam. To a westerner such behavior seem beyond the pale of normal humanity. Speaking for myself as a westerner, I have never heard of any islamic nation, and am unaware of Shirah law, prescribing stern punishment for such murder. Similarly from the western perspective, some types perversions appear generally acceptable within Islam. For example, it is difficult to condone the behaviors of the oshneese (Spelling ??) in Afghanistan; these are homosexual males who, without apparent consequence, take young, pre-pubescent boys as long-term sexual partners and lovers?
I guess the point here is that social acceptance within one culture cannot be used to justify abhorrent acts within another – to some westerners, including myself I guess, many other islamic behaviors are morally incomprehensible from my moral perspective.
Just punishment seems to be another, similar issue. Where is the public stigma and what is the penalty for some of the Islam’s more heinous seeming crimes, like as murder? On the other hand (no pun intended) bodily mayhem is prescribed for crimes consider by westerners as less evil – ie., theft. Inexplicable fatwa’s (SP?) surface addressing bestiality; these seem ludicrous from the western perspective. I refer to the alleged directive that a man take a sheep or goat – don’t recall which -- as a wife after having sex with that animal – more recently a fatwa directive was issued concerning the disposition and sale of animals after having sex with them. As a westerner, such behaviors are seriously unacceptable. Converse, different seemingly benign situations within western culture may seem abhorrent from the Islamic perspective.
It appears that some of these values are irreconcilable, especially between extreme factions of either sides. |
