Better said...

There was no sense of self-irony when I entitled my last entry "Well Said..." and then proceeded to say basically nothing other than "read this because I can't explain it" Socrates or Muhammad? is the name of the article I could only fumble over in the previous post.The article's main thrust is an attempt to correctly frame the speech given to the University of Regensburg where Ratzinger quoted Paleologus as essentially saying that Muhammad has brought nothing new (emphasis added) to the table other than conversions by way of violent coercion. And so it is understandable that Muslims around the world are quite upset that he forgot to mention the crushing oppression of women, instant subjugation and taxation of non-followers (collecting jizha from dhimi), and unwavering, unabashed anti-Semitism.

The author of the article then goes on to state that atheists and agnostics believe all religion is fantasy, they don’t really see the distinction between Islam and other religions. For one thing, why would atheists bother to even look into it? And for those that have it would appear most don’t come down on the “side” of any particular religion. What the author suggests is that most other religions are able to be secularized. Islam is not one of them, and it is the fastest growing in the world.

Islam, in as much as I understand its history and origins, came to be in part because Muhammad didn’t like the existing secularization in Jewish and Christian practice. Even though The Church certainly had their hands in everything, that wasn’t enough in Muhammad’s opinion. There existed faith “loopholes” that resulted because of the existence of Man’s law and God’s law. So in Islam we have a secularization-resistant strain of religion. It dictates that Man’s law never should supersede God’s law. And so it only follows then that Sharia must also be the law of the land.

Atheists, secularists, anyone really, ought to find this disconcerting. I don’t think a lot of people do because they don’t really understand what Sharia is all about. Head scarves, beard-length, bans on music – these are all a part, yes. And no, these are not the “extreme” views, it’s in black-and-white in the Quran and the Hadith. These particular rules are not what really disturb me the most though. What I find so disdainful is the remedy for leaving the faith of Islam: beheading. There is no equivalent in the Christian or Jewish faith. I don’t think there is any like it in any of the other major religions either.

So atheists and agnostics ought to be aware: you do have a “horse” in this race. If Islam gets a foothold in your country your choices will be few:
1) Convert
2) Pretend to be Christian and pay the Jizha, all while being treated as Dhimi.
3) Die
Sorry if that sounds harsh, but hey, I didn’t make this religion up. And to be sure, I don’t idly support it by pretending it is not a grave threat to all that was achieved during the Enlightenment and the Renaissance (aka, the West).

For anyone who has read this far to comment on: if you agree that the spread of Islam is a problem, what is the remedy? Any ideas or suggestions are welcome. Furthermore, if you don’t agree that spreading Islam is a problem, then please comment why you think this.