You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Islam’ tag.
so… we all do our best to teach our children about choices and consequences.
…well, some do, and some don’t. and, naturally, it takes, and often doesn’t.
in any event, more followers of this blog, than don’t, know I discuss Laws of Natural Selection. I’m fairly liberal with both my definitions and my opinions. but, you must adore all of that because you continue to amass, here, in droves.
today, I’m using this blog, again, as a platform to take “the micky” out of Islamic Extremists. assumming they won’t like it, they can fight me. we’ve done it before, and I’ll look forward to the opportunity again. hell,it’s me that’s still the one standing, eh.
my experience in-and-around Somalia has never been good. I’m convinced they are part of the “dark continent” for a well defined set of reasons that just go on, forever – even though I suspect those people, won’t. why?
Somali Islamists ban men and women from shaking hands.
in Somalia, it’s not just following the tenants of Islam, which aren’t that bad, by design. it’s, once again, the morons that take that faith (and, any faith for that matter) to that newsworthy extreme.
it’s been recently reported out of Mogadishu that Islamist insurgents have banned unrelated men and women from shaking hands, speaking or walking together. Mind you, these aren’t people that comprise the government or are elected to drive thought leadership. these are evil minions of idiocy.
here’s an example:
residents of the southern Somali town of Jowhar are fitfully reporting that the al-Shabab insurgents threatened to whip, imprison or execute anyone found breaking the recent edicts.
I have an acquaintance that happens to reside in Jowhar that tells me he will no longer greet women he knows for fear of punishment. he also reports that gunmen are searching buses for improperly dressed women or women traveling alone. he’s seeing women beaten for wearing Somali traditional dress instead of the long, shapeless black robes favored by the fighters.
the insurgents have already banned women from working in public, leaving many families completely destitute.
the good news, here, is this may well be a terrific example of Laws of natural Selection. if those minions of mayhem and moral objectivity prevail, at all, we won’t see many left inside fifty years.
peace be to my brothers and Sisters.
brian patrick cork
There’s a sort of long-winded insanity occurring in Florida (again) as we speak. You can find news about it anywhere you like. I’m not going to provide some definitive link. This topic is hardly news and an obvious target for criticism.
Nonetheless. I’ll submit that opinions can vary, and will certainly do so in relentless fashion, but I’m intrigued by the recent image of a certain pistol packing Pastor.
Reverend Terry Jones, the Pastor of the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida will apparently kill you if yours might not align with his own.
Pastor Jones, is the leader of the small Florida church (denomination of a majority-minded fifty stalwarts (albeit a much smaller number than the infamous poison quaffing crew led by the reverend Jim Jones back in 1978) that espouses anti-Islam philosophy. He said, only today, in fact, that he was determined to go through with his plan to burn numerous copies of the Quran on Sept. 11 – despite pressure from the White House, religious leaders, and others to call it off.
Evidently Reverend Jones is of a mind that a good old fashioned book burning is just the thing to demonstrate his enlightened opinions.
It might be noted that Jones gained some local notoriety last year when he posted signs in front of his church declaring “Islam is of the Devil.” Perhaps he’s forgotten that the Quran is formed under similar lines to that of the Old Testament Bible.
OR, maybe he is Old Testament minded.
In any event… Supporters (we aren’t clear if this includes the Klan and their in-bred skin-head relatives) have been mailing copies of the holy text to his church to be incinerated in a bonfire on Saturday to mark the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
Jones says he has also received more than 100 death threats and has started wearing a .40-caliber pistol strapped to his hip since announcing his plan to burn the book Muslims consider the word of God and insist be treated with the utmost respect. The fifty-eight-year-old minister proclaimed in July that he would stage “International Burn-a-Quran Day.”
“We are still determined to do it, yes,” the Reverend Terry Jones told the CBS Early Show.
“How much do we back down? How many times do we back down?” Jones told the AP. “Instead of us backing down, maybe it’s time to stand up. Maybe it’s time to send a message to radical Islam that we will not tolerate their behavior.”
And, he is apparently prepared to place his Bible under one arm so he can whip out his .45 and kill anyone that does not care for his own radical and hate-inspiring behavior. By Gawd he might be minded to shove a cross right up their terrorist-minded hind-quarters, just to show them righteous fury!
More later. I just wonder if Pastor Jones will be blown to hell, or give someone else, hell – with an amen, brother.
Peace be to my Brothers and Sisters.
Brian Patrick Cork
I’m following the multiple lines of thought around building a Muslim Mosque near Ground Zero in New York City.
My initial reaction was to bristle. I feel this is natural. But, soon I had to at least try and think the matter through like a Jeffersonian. Mind you, Thomas Jefferson studied the Qur’ran in earnest. In fact, loyal readers of this blog know that I’ve chronicled that Jefferson bequeathed his own copy of the Qur’an to the Library of Congress upon his death. That was a great bargain. And, he understood the importance of making a public spectacle of executing wrong-doing Extremist Muslims with pigs blood-drenched ordinance. However, this raises some thoughts, and possible misconceptions driving misinterpretations of all manner of scripture around Lex Talionis, or the principles pertaining to: “an-eye-for-an-eye” /1.
Meanwhile, President Obama is being both public and clear that his position is: every American has the right to practice their religion freely anywhere on American soil. In many ways we all observe one another’s traditions. We are smack in the middle of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. Yesterday he told an intently listening crowd gathered at the White House:
“As a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country”. He added: “That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.”
And, I’ll stand in agreement with that.
I don’t know, yet, if it’s a good idea.
There are sure to be some logistical concerns. And, the Muslims intent on establishing the Mosque might be a bit insensitive, I think. There is a lot of opposition that appears to think this is a deliberately provocative act that will precipitate more bloodshed in the name of Allah. Or, maybe these are plucky Muslims hoping to set an example of some sort that might inspire positive feelings going forward.
I’m thinking we need to be open-minded, here. Once the Mosque is built and operational, tolerating activities in-and-amongst it will be a terrific example of “turning the other cheek”. Just to be clear, according to Luke 6:29 (English Standard Version from 2001):
“To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either.”
Time and again, the American people have demonstrated a rich history of rallying back, working through issues, and staying true to our core values and emerge stronger for it.
And, this is where we turn the tide on the Extremist Muslim terrorists.
When we bogged down our own airports with hyper-security measures and fear we gave the terrorists a form of victory with our inconvenience. And, we are creating enormous debt waging a global war against them on multiple theaters of battle. But, Rep. Ellison’s afore-referenced platform was one of tolerance and the requisite open-mind.
“Terrorist”, “Muslim terrorist”, “fanatical Muslim”, “fundamentalist”, and “devout Muslim” are not synonymous (we hope, any way). This is an opportunity to walk amongst and with Muslims and understand them better – and, they us. Also, if your friend is also your enemy, and is in your front yard, we have an opportunity to embrace him (and, pat him down). If he breaks faith, rank or rules, we can then offer him a round-house kick al-la Chuck Norris, or thump him soundly with an olive branch until he understands what Teddy Roosevelt meant when he advised everyone to: “speak softly and carry a big stick”.
Meanwhile, in the sprit of all this and that, both good and uncertain, I’m listening to Jaron and the Long Road to Love’s Pray for You.
Check out more of their work on iTunes. Tell’m Cork said: “hey”.
Peace be to my Brothers and Sisters.
Brian Patrick Cork
/1 – In Islam the Qur’an permits exact and equivalent retribution. The Qur’an, however, softens the law of an eye-for-an-eye by urging mankind to accept less compensation than that inflicted upon him or her by a Muslim, or to forgive altogether. In other words, Islam does not deny Muslims the ability to seek retaliation in the equal measure. But it does, however, promote forgiveness and the acceptance of blood money not as a mandatory requisite, but rather as a good deed that will be eventually rewarded (Qur’an 5:45).
On occasions, however, the “eye-for-an-eye” rule is applied quite literally.
The phrase, “an-eye-for-an-eye” is, in truth, a quotation from several passages of the Hebrew Bible (Leviticus 24:19–21, Exodus 21:22–25, and Deuteronomy 19:21), and not the Qur’an, in which a person who has injured the eye of another is instructed to give the value of his or her own eye in compensation. At the root of this principle is that one of the purposes of the law is to provide equitable retribution for an offended party. It defined and restricted the extent of retribution in the laws of the Torah.
In modern times, the phrase still loosely applies. Should a person commit a tort that results in personal injury of the plaintiff, they must pay for the repairing of the injury (e.g. an eye transplant). This is called compensatory damages.
The English word talion means a punishment identical to the offense, from the Latin talio. The principle of “an-eye-for-an-eye” is often referred to using the Latin phrase lex talionis, the law of talion.
Although Christianity has always had a significant diversity of belief, mainstream Christianity considers certain core doctrines essential. Those accepting them often consider followers of Jesus who disagree with these doctrines to be Heterodox /1, heretical, or “outside” Christianity altogether. That does not have to be the case. It’s just a position taken by many Christians that might have an unreasoned position.
On the other hand, the term heterodox is occasionally used by some Christians to refer to themselves when they are in disagreement with orthodox understandings, but voice this disagreement while still maintaining the overall value of the tradition. The heterodox Christian therefore remains in the tradition, and attempts to stimulate constructive dialog around issues with which they disagree.
Or, from my standpoint, one can value the tradition, yet not hold to some of the core beliefs – the Christ element – for example, while believing there is one God.
This is not, however, unique to Christianity:
“Most of the Kurds were Sunni Muslims, but perhaps a quarter or a third adhered to heterodox varieties of Islam that preserved traces of earlier religions. They fight with members of other faiths, who seem to challenge their claim to a monopoly of absolute truth; they also persecute their co-religionists for interpreting a tradition differently or for holding heterodox beliefs.”/2
[…] Karen Armstrong, Islam: A Short History
I address similar thoughts, albeit from a different perspective, in my (future) post: Image
Peace to my Brothers and Sisters.
brian patrick cork
1/ Heterodox comes from Greek heterodoxos, “of another opinion,” from hetero-, “other” + doxa, “opinion,” from dokein, “to believe.”
heterodox \HET-uh-ruh-doks\, adjective:
1. Contrary to or differing from some acknowledged standard, especially in church doctrine or dogma; unorthodox.
2. Holding unorthodox opinions or doctrines.
NOTES: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IX, Monotheism; William F. Albright, From the Stone Age to Christianity; H. Richard Niebuhr, Radical Monotheism and Western Culture; About.com, Monotheistic Religion resources; Jonathan Kirsch, God Against the Gods; Linda Woodhead, An Introduction to Christianity; The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia Monotheism; The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, monotheism; New Dictionary of Theology, Paul pp. 496-99; David Vincent Meconi, “Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity” in Journal of Early Christian Studies pp. 111–12
2/ Karen Armstrong, Islam: A Short History