On Apr 20, 4:26 am, James A. Donald <jam...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:25:53 -0700 (PDT), "*Anarcissie*"
>
> > I have a bilingual Koran which has what I think is
> > mainstream interpretive material. It states that this
> > verse means that if one has to fight with unbelievers
> > one must fight with all possible vigor, but that once
> > they are defeated and have been captured, they are to
> > be ransomed (if of high rank, as was the custom in the
> > period) or set free, instead of slaughtered as has
> > been the custom in many times and places. But so
> > what?
>
> So all Muslims must fight until all unbelievers are
> subjugated.
>
> That is what.
>
> And they do. And will. Islam presents the world with
> the same problems that Nazism did.
>
> Because of the propensity of the Nazi party to win
> elections, we made a big exception in democracy, that
> Nazis, or parties suspiciously resembling Nazis, could
> not organize, campaign, or run for election in Europe,
> and this rule has been recently applied against a party
> that won a plurality.
>
> In the end, we are going to have to make a similar
> exception in religious freedom. Religious freedom can
> only be extended to religions that have no immediate
> plans or prospects for ending it by violent means.
I think Islam will be corrupted by liberalism far sooner
than it will be defeated by militarism. Remember, there
are millions of Muslims in the West, soaking up liberal
ideas. Of course, this could be a problem -- instead of
fighting one another in tribes, parties and gangs as
has been the tradition, they might get turned on to the
nation-state.
|
