Return Home Members Area Experts Area The best AskMe alternative!Answerway.com - You Have Questions? We have Answers! Answerway Information Contact Us Online Help
 Monday 20th May 2024 01:51:04 AM


 

Username:

Password:

or
Join Now!

 

Home/Society & Culture/Religion/Christianity

Forum Ask A Question   Question Board   FAQs Search
Return to Answer Summaries

Question Details Asked By Asked On
Speaking of change ...................... Cherab 05/17/04

    The appalling photographs of prisoner abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison have embarrassed and angered many in America and beyond. However, the cold-blooded, videotaped murder of Nick Berg by Islamic extremists has refocused attention on the nature of the enemy now literally threatening the West.

    An aberrant reading of Islam has created a nihilistic cult of coercion and death in the name of one of the world’s great religious traditions.

    Obsession with martyrdom via suicide, the intentional individual and mass murder of civilian noncombatants are neither traditional expressions of Muslim piety nor venerable instruments of Islamic statecraft. This is not the Islam of the poet Rumi, the theologian al-Ghazali, the philosopher Avicenna, or the scientist and historian al-Biruni.

    This is not the civilization that gave us algebra and Omar Khayyam and the Taj Mahal. Instead, such practices as wiring Palestinian children with explosive devices, and sending innocent Iranian pre-teens draped pathetically with symbolic “keys to Paradise” around their necks) to clear minefields with their bodies, are horrors that great heroes of Islamic history like Saladin and the Prophet Muhammad himself would have repudiated as cowardly and immoral. Muhammad is known, among other things, for his love of children.

    Societies willing and eager to sacrifice their children are profoundly dysfunctional and self-destructive.

    It is essential that murderous thugs like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and terrorist CEOs like bin Laden and al-Zawahiri be brought to justice. Terrorism cannot be stopped by platitudes or by negotiations, or ineffectual ruminations about its basic causes.

    Islamist terrorism is implacable. It is perceived Western immorality, by which is meant not only materialistic greed, Hollywood excesses, pornography and promiscuity, and high divorce rates, but such things as freedom for women and religious liberty, that infuriates Islamist zealots.

    It is not so much what we do as what we are. While much truly merits condemnation in the contemporary West, we can never negotiate enough away to appease those who hate the very foundation of our free and diverse Judaeo-Christian culture.

    In the long term, however, the battle against radical Islamism must be won within Islam itself, by Muslims themselves. In a very real sense, the primary victim of Islamist extremism is Islam and Muslims. Outsiders can hope and encourage, and occasionally help, but non-Muslims can not do what only Muslims can do.

    That is one of the reasons that perceived Muslim silence about the atrocities of 11 September and numerous other such acts has been so depressing for outsiders who wish Islam and Muslims well. Many have wondered whether their Muslim neighbors (locally and worldwide) endorse the actions of al-Qa’ida and related groups. Where is the outrage? Where are the apologies?

    In the wake of the attack on the World Trade Center, Muslim spokesmen often seemed more concerned about possible slights to girls wearing Islamic head scarves than about the fact that nineteen men claiming to act in the name of God and their common faith had just murdered 3000 innocent civilians from many nations in New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington DC.

    But perhaps the situation is changing. Spurred into action by the murder of Nick Berg, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the most prominent Islamic civil rights and advocacy group in the United States, has finally launched an online petition drive designed to disassociate the faith of Islam from the violent acts of extremists claiming to act in the name of the God of Islam.

    The petition, titled “Not in the Name of Islam,” declares:

    “We, the undersigned, wish to state clearly that those who commit acts of terror and murder in the name of Islam are not only destroying innocent lives, but are also devastating the image of the faith they claim to represent. No injustice done to Muslims can ever justify the massacre of innocent people and no act of terror will ever serve the cause of Islam. We repudiate and disassociate ourselves from any Muslim group or individual who commits such brutal and un-Islamic acts. Islam must not be held hostage by the criminal actions of a tiny minority acting outside both the boundaries of their faith and the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad.”

    “CAIR’s petition drive,” the group’s Website explains, “comes following the videotaped beheading of an American civilian in Iraq that shocked television viewers worldwide. ‘We hope this effort will demonstrate once and for all that Muslims in America and throughout the Islamic world reject violence committed in the name of Islam,’ said CAIR Board Chairman Omar Ahmad.

    ‘People of all faiths must do whatever they can to help end the downward spiral of mutual hostility and hatred that is engulfing our world.’”

    Such an effort, though unfortunately long overdue, is most welcome. A forthright condemnation, by devout Muslims, of extremist violence perpetrated in the name of Islam, is both the right thing to do and absolutely essential to preserve the good name of Islam against those within the Muslim community who seem determined to destroy it.

    Muslims need to sign it in great numbers, and it needs to be heard loud and strong by people in America and the West generally.

    As Edmund Burke observed, “all that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing.”



    Check out the CAIR website is at:
    http://www.cair-net.org/default.asp

    The petition is on CAIR's website at:

    http://www.cair-net.org/asp/article.asp?id=1071&page=NR


    Is this turn of events welcomed by many Muslims also welcomed by non-Muslims? What do you think?

    No racist overtones, please.

      Clarification/Follow-up by HANK1 on 05/18/04 6:22 am:

      Paraclete: If the shoe fits, wear it!

 
Answered By Answered On
HANK1 05/17/04


When it comes to Islam, I have become a CYNIC since 9/11. My cynisism is not directed towards Americans but toward barbarians who get there 'kicks' from dispatching those who don't believe thier philosophy:

"Seven Rules of Cynical Optimism"


"Rule 1"
Never Trust Anyone. Trust yourself only as much as you truly know yourself. You can never truly know others, therefore others cannot be trusted in any strong sense of the term.

"Rule 2"
All individuals are motivated to act by self-interest. The individual is a necessary condition for the existence of the collective. Some individuals behave rationally, others irrationally. A rational individual makes use of all information available before making a decision, and only makes a decision when the benefit is determined to outweigh the cost. Irrational individuals ignore or poorly use information and make decisions without any regard to benefits or costs, or they make decisions according to belief that costs can be avoided in the long-run. Irrational behavior is an anathema to the preservation of the individual; any perceived short-run benefit is undermined and subverted from the burden of long-run costs accrued as the consequence of irrational behavior. the most rational strategy of dealing with any circumstance must always be sought.

"Rule 3"
Every event is an end in itself and serves some strategic purpose. Play the strategy best served by any event that will wield the greatest return. Believing most events are isolated only feeds complacency and weakens the ability of an individual to wield their power of agency.

"Rule 4"
Individual conscience is above any collective more. A meta-ethic will only be derived when all individuals are fully expressing their power of agency without the intent to harm. Harm occurs when an action trespasses upon the circumference of influence of other individuals. Only continued engagement and conflict of interests will flesh out the living signs of a meta-ethic because every individual is separated in meaning from every other individual. Thus all individuals will continually trespass on the rights of others until each individual answers to a conscience that is in harmony with the intent of other. Answering to individual conscience maintains the level of discourse necessary to precipitate the structure of the coming meta-ethic.

"Rule 5"
Every individual is a unit of agency free to not only choose their course of activity, but also free to change most given sets of circumstances that may hinder that individual's ability to express, or wield, the power of agency. Further, every individual and collective has its unique circumference of influence. This power of agency must be wielded with prudence and with regard for conservancy, especially when the power is centralized into a collective; but the power of agency must not be restrained when individual conscience commands its use. The power of agency should be granted to a collective body conservatively, and the power to change immediate circumstances to achieve optimal conditions of planetary life should be wielded liberally.

"Rule 6"
Any action of agency, whether individual or collective, is subject to the resistance of either a direct or indirect expression of collective use of agency. This is especially true when an action interferes with an individual's ability to wield their power of agency within their own circumference of influence. Resistance must always be expected and countered according to strategy.

"Rule 7"
Communication is the most effective method of wielding the power of agency. Therefore the outcome of any intended action is completely dependent on the choice of words one uses to characterize that event. Words can create, destroy or neutralize. A cynical optimist chooses his words carefully and with full intent to realize the strategic ends of every event that occurs. Planetary life will improve, but every individual is capable of making choices that undermine collective good. Therefore the cynical optimist must work to always neutralize the damage done my careless actions or ill intent; to always create new circumstances to bring the world closer to fulfilling its global purpose of unity; and to always destroy obstacles that may prevent the cynical optimist from achieving his ends!"

Source: The Somni Forum - Poppies.com

HANK

Additional Options and ratings are only visible when you login!

viewa   © Copyright 2002-2008 Answerway.org. All rights reserved. User Guidelines. Expert Guidelines.
Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.   Make Us Your Homepage
. Bookmark Answerway.