Islamic Justice

By -
I am trying to understand the Islamic frame of mind. If several persons in Denmark publish a cartoon about Mohammad that Muslims find offensive, this means that Muslims all over the world are justified in rioting and random acts of violence: burning down embassies and assaulting and murdering people who had nothing to do with creating or publishing the offensive cartoon. Their only crime is that they are non Moslems; Christians, Jews and secular non believers. This is a very interesting notion of justice, don't you think?

So if one western person does something wrong, all western persons are therefore "open season?" Groups are held responsible collectively for the sins of any one member. I have heard of this sort of "justice" being carried out in Iraq. For example, if one person betrayed Saddam Hussein, the Republican Guard would seek out and exterminate all the members of the family of the miscreant, even though none of them had actually broken any law, as a sort of warning to any other persons who would be tempted to betray Saddam. Is this concept what passes for justice in Islam? The idea is that the end of upholding Mohammad's honor justifies any sort of means: killing and terrorizing innocent persons as a deterrent to ever violating the sacred person of Mohammad?

I am just trying to understand others. I am not suggesting any course of action. But in deciding what is a reasonable or prudent course of action, I would suggest that it is useful to understand the mind set of those you are dealing with.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anger Management

By -
Image
   Isn't it interesting that Religion and Politics are taboo topics in polite company?  These are very important to many people, but discussing them only seems to provoke anger in most people.  The exception seems to be that people of similar opinions can discuss with one another how much they hate, desipise, and laugh at those of different beliefs.   Apparently, religions and politics are not subjects that most people desire to consider in a calm, cool, rational manner.  Rather, for most people, religion and politics are emotional topics.  They are the subject of Faith.  People have faith in their religion.  More surprisingly, (at least to me) they have Faith in their politics.  Faith and Reason are like oil and water; they do not mix.   I am not restricting my comments to stupid people or any particular party.  My observation seems true to me of very intelligent members of various parties (although there does seems to be a tendency to judge members of parties to which you do not
Read more

War on Terror

By -
Image
by Bob Clasen Currently, the Administration is trying to wage a War on Terror. But Terror is not an entity. It is a method of warfare, like automatic weapons, or aircraft. One cannot wage war against a technique or technology. I suggest that what is needed is not more soldiers to be sent to Iraq, but greater clarity of thought. Who, exactly, is our enemy? It would appear that one of America's enemies is Fundamentalist Islam. Why is Fundamentalist Islam our enemy? Because Fundamentalist Islam defines unbelievers as infidel and urges its members to wage war against them. This is the doctrine of jihad. The problem is not with extremisist who hijacked a peaceful religion. The problem is the doctrine of Jihad, or Holy War is found throughout the Koran. This doctrine can be re-interpreted by modern liberal types as a psychological warfare against one's own sins, but that is not how many people throughout history have interpreted it. Anyone who is given to literal interpret
Read more

Rove Above the Law

By -
Opinion Pull Up a Chair, Mr. Rove Friday 11 July 2008 » by: Dana Milbank, The Washington Post Karl Rove had never been so agreeable. The former chief strategist to President Bush was the only witness listed on the agenda for yesterday's meeting of the House Judiciary Committee, and he proved to be uncharacteristically contained. Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), chairman of the subcommittee holding the hearing, declared herself "extremely disappointed and deeply concerned" about Rove's behavior. Rove was silent. Sanchez spoke of his "role in the alleged politicization of the Justice Department" and his hand in "the unprecedented firing of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006." Rove offered no defense. "If such allegations were true," said Rep. Chris Cannon (Utah), the ranking Republican on the panel, "they would be very serious." Rove did not dispute this. There was good reason for The Architect's qui
Read more