I’d like to address some ideas presented in my piece, “WWMD: What Would Muhammad Do?” To begin, allow me to take a snippet of MisterE’s comment on the piece:
“So what you are saying is that Christian extremism, white supremacy, and discrimination is okay, but radical Islam is not.” - MisterE
No, not at all. (If you missed the article, I encourage you to check it out before continuing). Extremism is terrible in all of its forms; I never said that Christian extremism was okay; it’s not.
But, there is one prime difference in Islam when compared to Christianity or Judaism, particularly when you consider the numerical value of the extremists who claim to be followers of the religion.
Most peaceful Muslims (the majority of those practicing the faith system would fall into the category) feel that their religion is being hijacked by the terrorists – by radicals setting new political agendas and using Islam to frame their objectives.
While there are radicals among the devout in every religion, those present in Islam far (by the thousands, if not more) outnumber those existing with Christianity or Judaism for the matter. This isn’t being said in order to criticize Islam, rather I am making a statement that is rooted in fact. The reason radical Islamists are a concern is because of their vast number and power, not because they happen to be Muslims.
Radical Islamic fascism is a bigger problem than the KKK, for example, in terms of number, scope and aim. These individuals want to conquer the world with a “convert of die” mentality guiding their actions and accomplishments. While the KKK should clearly be abolished, they do not account for much. In sum, Islamic extremists are a more primacy concern at this juncture.
“Let us take this moment to remember the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the Catholic Church sanctioned tortures, the death sentence of Galileo, the Vietnam war, the arms supply to Israel, the KKK, Bill O’Reily, Ted Hagard, the Dark Ages, the abortion clinic bombings…” – MisterE
The aforementioned events were horrific. I will say that Bill O’Reilly, as much as I dislike him, should not be clustered with the above, nor should the arms supply to Israel (it’s simply not comparable to the Crusades).
And let’s clarify something regarding the abortion bombings that continue to come up when these conversations are initiated. On 9/11/01, radical Islamists killed nearly 3,000 innocent Americans, whereas between 1989 and 2003, seven individuals were killed at the hands of abortion bombers. How are these numbers even comparable? I am not trying to downplay the seriousness of their horrific actions, but comparing these actions to the al Qaeda’s (or any other radical Islamic sect) would be irresponsible.
This is not attack on Islam, rather an agreement with those peaceful Muslims that something must be done before radical Islamists permanently hijack their religion.
“All religion is guilty of having radical sects, especially Christianity, that’s just part of religion.” - MisterE
Right. But when exploring the current climate, radical Muslims are the primary “sect” of concern (mostly because they are no longer isolated, have spread around the globe and pose major threats to the global community). Equalizing Christian extremism (in current times) with Islamic extremism is reminiscent of comparing the Democrats and the GOP – the contrasts far outweigh any relevant agreement in action or tone.