Tonight I watched a story on 60 Minutes about this guy ^, a Muslim cleric in London. He is a radical who refuses to condemn the actions of Muslim extremists, even the sicko who beheaded a British soldier on a public street in London. He says a double standard is acceptable when viewing the actions of the oppressed vs the oppressor. He is active in the effort to recruit disaffected Muslim youths to travel to Syria and fight for ISIS, among other likely treasonable actions.
Here's what I don't understand: With billions (?) of Muslims in the world, I realize they can't ALL be bad, but why don't the supposedly huge numbers of peaceful, moderate Muslims speak up against their renegades?
Anybody....?
It reminds me of a post I saw on Facebook recently. It said, "Radical Muslims behead infidels. Moderate Muslims want radical Muslims to behead infidels."
Yet for those Muslims here in the west we have to respect and protect THEIR rights? Yes, of course we must (to the extent the law prescribes), but how much slack do we have to give them? Is it OK to be just a little suspicious?
That's a dilemma with a Capital D.
S
He is under investigation by the U.K.
ReplyDeleteBeing a secularist I’d prefer it if we didn’t have ANY religions, but given that we do, I’d say this: Is it reasonable to expect members of a group to condemn the activities of others who fall into that group? It’s something most people seem to accept, but it’s a curious concept to me. It’s along the same lines as “Should all Americans condemn the genocide of native American Indians during the formation of the modern United States?” or “Should all Germans denounce the persecution of the Jews by Nazis during the Holocaust?” or “Should the English all deplore the treatment of the Irish during the Potato Famine?”
ReplyDeleteTo me, these are all nonsense. What is the point in apologising for something you had no part in? Okay, the condemnation of people who share your religion, and who do terrible things in its name is a BIT more relevant, but not much. Do all Christians feel obliged to condemn the long list of atrocities that have been carried out in the name of Christianity, right up to the present day? Perhaps some do, but most wouldn’t. Who wants to be put on the defensive? And of course in some cases, analogous with the one you quoted, some Christians will express support for (and themselves practise) actions which other Christians regard as un-Christian, like the discrimination against homosexuals.
Getting moderate Muslims to condemn the behaviour of Muslim radicals seems to be a pointless exercise to me. I would bloody well hope that anyone with any sense would realise that not all Muslims go around beheading Christians, any more than they would regard members of the Westboro Baptist Church as being typical Christians.
Respectfully disagree, Simon. You say, "What is the point in apologizing for something (an atrocity) you had no part in?" I say it's never too late to stand up for what's right. Of course you can't re-write history, but you certainly shouldn't applaud and glorify the perpetrators. Condemn them for the evil people they are. Teach your children and apply peer pressure to all who will listen that this is NOT acceptable. And if you know someone, even of your own religion, who is planning to commit an atrocity (bombing, murder, etc), report them. To NOT report an impending atrocity makes you an accomplice.
DeleteAnd regarding the Westboro Baptist Church, you'll see Christians everywhere condemn them, and even stage counter-protests opposite theirs, as they should.
I think Moderate Muslims are afraid to speak up and lose their heads.
ReplyDeleteSo the parents have abdicated their roll as parents? They're letting the kids call the shots? What could possibly go wrong?
DeleteBill Maher is causing quite a bit of controversy by stating Islam is a violent religion, and even students at a liberal school like Berkeley are trying to un-invite him as a commencement speaker. Unfortunately, Maher makes a great deal of sense. I know of no other religion that will kill you if you fail to observe its tenets or want to leave the religion, and I'm not talking solely about the terrorists.
ReplyDeleteI'm in Simon's corner...and I'd like to compare the "lack of public outrage" of moderate Muslims to your lack of outrage to when serial killers (mostly white men - and that is a group YOU are a member of) did their killings. Did you go public and express your outrage in the media about those white men? No. Did you privately express disgust, shake your head, maybe talk at work to your co-workers about how sick those people are? Probably yes. Did famous white men (politicians, community activists, Hollywood actors, etc.) make public statements, "...this is not what white men stand for!" No. Why not? Probably the same reason moderate Muslims don't express public outrage about Muslim extremists. I worked with Muslims, and they expressed disgust and shook their heads in co-worker to co-worker conversations.
ReplyDeleteMaybe my analogy sucks...
You mean like Adolf Hitler? And yes, there was universal condemnation by virtually everyone at the time, and even by average Germans later after they learned exactly how demented the Nazi's were. The white congregants of the Westboro Baptist Church who preach hate are condemned loudly and often.
DeleteI'm not quite sure I can accept the comparison, Betina. The atrocities committed by those mostly white male serial killers were acts by loners, sick malcontents. I certainly never heard of any new white parents naming their newborn children after serial killers as an expression of admiration. They were reviled. There was no (semi) organized movement by hundreds of thousands of while male serial killers to compare with the massive displays of horror such as Muslim extremists have demonstrated. Dangerous extremists of every color, religion, nationality and gender should be condemned, period.