By
Jacob Thomas
In Islam freedom of religion implies that members of
other faiths are encouraged to Islamize; on the other hand, a Muslim may not
convert to another religion. Early in the history of Islam, this radical
position became solidified against anyone who dared to go back on his or her
Muslim faith. It had its origin in the defection of several Arab tribes from the
Islamic Umma, soon
after news about the death of Muhammad had reached them. In the summer of 632
A.D., Abu Bakr, the first caliph, and father of the
Prophet’s favorite wife, Aisha,mounted military campaigns against the
rebels and forced them back into the fold of Islam. Abu Bakr’scampaigns
are known in Arabic as Huroob al-Radda, i.e. the wars against apostasy.
Eventually, the Four Sunni Schools for the
interpretation of the Shari’ah codified
the rules regarding the sin of apostasy (radda) and
declared that, unless an apostate repents, he or she is to be punished with
death. This harsh attitude towards Muslims who convert to other religions is
based on the belief that Muhammad was Allah’s final messenger to mankind. To go
back on Islam and renounce the Shahadah (Islamic confession of the radical unity of Allah, and the
Prophethood of Muhammad) is tantamount to committing the
unpardonable sin. Several Qur’anic verses may be adduced as a basis for this
harsh treatment of the apostates; sufficient here is the following ayah (text) from Surah (chapter)
Aal ‘Imran, a Medinan
Chapter 3:85
وَمَنْ يَّبْتَغِ غَيْرَ الْاِسْلَامِ دِيْنًا
فَلَنْ يُّقْبَلَ مِنْهُۚ وَهُوَ
فِىْ الْاٰخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخٰسِرِيْنَ
“Waman yabtaghi ghair’l Islami
deenan, flan yuqbala minhu, wa Huwa fi’l akhirati mina’l khasireen.”
“And whoever seeks a religion other than
Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be
among the losers.” (Translation mine)
From Sahih International
“And whoever desires other than
Islam as religion – never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter,
will be among the losers.”
Tafsir
al-Jalalayn, a Standard Tafsir (Commentary) on the Qur’an
“The following was revealed
regarding those who apostatized and became disbelievers: ‘Whoever desires a
religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him and in the
Hereafter he shall be among the losers, because he will end up in the Fire,
made everlasting for him.’”
http://quran.com/3/85
Considering the draconian rules pertaining to the
conversion of Muslims to other faiths, I was very impressed by an article that
was posted by an Arab intellectual on 30 May, 2010, on the reformist Kuwaiti
website, www.kwtanweer.com It had this title:
A Freedom We Don’t Understand:
The Call to Embrace a Religion or to Leave it
الدعوة الى الدين او تركه.. حرية لا نفهمها
The article was occasioned by an advertisement in the
United States that appeared on buses, calling on Muslims to apostatize. Here are excerpts from the article,
followed by my analysis and comments.
“When I read the news
about certain advertisements that appeared in America on buses calling on
Muslims to forsake Islam, I was very disturbed. I couldn’t understand why
Americans would manifest such a hostile attitude toward Islam by calling on
Muslims to leave their faith! When my emotions subsided, I reflected on the
subject and concluded that it was a reaction to the acts of violence that
Muslims had perpetrated lately
“Christian” lands. Who
can forget the events of 11 September, 2001?
“Ever since that day, the West has been asking: ‘Why
do Muslims want to attack innocent people? And why Muslims forbid
Christians to engage in mission work in their homeland, when Muslims living in
Western countries freely call on people to Islamize? And, why do Muslims enjoy
freedom of religion in the West, while adamantly opposing some of their own
people the use that freedom and embrace another faith?’
“The fact remains that we, Muslims have always been
in conflict with other religions, and have initiated unjustified wars
especially against the West. Muslims are obsessed by this antagonism, and are
unable to understand the true meaning of the word “hurriyya” (freedom); since it is absent from our
dictionaries. So how can we appreciate its value in Western
societies? Historically, we have been antagonistic to the concept of liberty;
our faith has an ambiguous attitude toward it. The West believes in your freedom to spread your religion in their
lands; shouldn’t this imply that you allow them the same freedom? And why be
angry when they place ads on buses that call on Muslims to forsake their faith,
while you possess complete freedom to call Westerners to convert to Islam?
“Actually, we get quickly upset by any criticism of Islam. This reveals
that Islam is weak, and unable to withstand criticism. Whether those ads on
American buses succeeded or failed to accomplish their goal, at least those who
sponsored them were exercising their freedom of expression. In the final
analysis, let’s admit that Islam has always been the beneficiary of Western
tolerance; while Christianity has not received any reciprocal treatment from
Islam. This is the verdict of history.”
Source: http://www.kwtanweer.com/articles/readarticle.php?articleID=2483#
Analysis
The author of the article deplored the total absence
of a quid pro quo in the West’s relation with Islam. While
Muslims in the West enjoy complete freedom of religion, including the right to
propagate their faith; Christians in Daru’l Islam are forbidden to call on Muslims to convert
to Christianity.
Comment
It is seldom that an Arab intellectual would go
public and point to this anomaly within Muslim lands. I applaud his courage and
integrity, and thank the Kuwaiti website for posting it.
Around two months after that article appeared on kwtanweer,
news regarding the harsh treatment received lately by Christian workers in
Morocco, this editorial was published in the Wall Street Journal on July 6: “Expelled in Morocco: A U.S.
ally mistreats American Christians.”
Here are excerpts:
“Morocco has long been considered a bastion of relative religious
tolerance in the Muslim world, but since March the government has summarily
expelled dozens of Americans for Christian proselytizing. Most were denied any
semblance of due process, and some were given only a few hours to pack their
bags. The government has provided little or no
evidence of proselytizing, which is illegal in Morocco.
“Eddie and Lynn Padilla had been foster parents in
the Village of Hope, an orphanage located in the Atlas Mountains east of the
capital of Rabat, where they were raising two Moroccan orphan boys under the
age of two. The government has long known they are Christians and had granted
them a 10-year visa.
“That changed on March 9. After three days of police
inspection and interrogation, the Padillas were given a few hours to gather
their belongings. ‘It happened so fast that you didn’t even really have time to
feel the shock of it until later,’ Mrs. Padilla told us in an interview. ‘The
worst moment of it all was handing over the boys. . . . These were abandoned by
their birth mothers. We were their parents.’”
On 9 July, 2010, the Moroccan Embassy in Washington, D.C., responded:
“Your editorial “Expelled in Morocco” (July 6) is wrong about Morocco’s recent actions to enforce its laws
against religious proselytism. Morocco guarantees its tradition of freedom of
worship in its constitution and it applies equally to Muslims, Jews and
Christians, people of faith who have lived and worked together for generations.
To maintain the balance in its society and protect the public order. Moroccan law also prohibits proselytizing.
“After a thorough investigation, Moroccan authorities were obligated to
enforce these laws. Those who want to challenge their repatriations are free to
use the legal means at their disposal, including the right to appeal.
“Morocco remains committed to interfaith dialogue, tolerance, freedom of
expression, worship and openness.”
Actually, the Moroccan ambassador’s response evaded the issue of freedom
of religion, by claiming that those strong measures against some American
Christians had to be taken in order “To maintain the balance in its
society and protect the public order. Moroccan law also prohibits
proselytizing.” In fact, no concrete proof was advanced to
demonstrate that those Christians, who were looking after Moroccon orphans, had
engaged in an illicit activity! Morocco’s action directed against Eddie and
Lynn Padilla, bely the claim that “Morocco remains committed to
interfaith dialogue, tolerance, freedom of expression, worship and openness.” The facts prove the very opposite. Islam
remains unwilling to acknowledge that true freedom is a two-way traffic; and
not only the freedom of non-Muslims to Islamize; but equally, the freedom of
Muslims to convert to other faiths.
The URL for the WSJ article is:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704862404575351790245971802.html?KEYWORDS=Expelled+in+Morocco
Source:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/articles/op-ed/true-freedom-of-religion-is-two-way-traffic/
Hello Ali,
I need your help severely…I am a Muslim till now..but I am Confused well let me
say I am one hell of a Confused man. I need to ask you some
Questions please do help me….Why did you leave Islam ???
Now which religion do you follow sir??? Please reply me…and I really hate Muslims..though I am also a muslim but my
friends say I am “Satan” because criticize Islam …
If Islam is false than why
it is the FASTEST SPREADING religion in the world…I myself didn’t believe it
but I was shocked because I did some Hard research on it and Ali even US
Department of Statistics confirm that Islam is the fastest spreading religion …
My life is completely out of order now a days ,You should have experienced it
that how difficult is it to think critically against ISLAM because it is such
an Powerful Ideology but I want truth.
Kindly reply me as early as possible,
thanks
regards
Akbar (name changed by Ali
Sina)
Hello Akbar
The confusion is normal. All ex-Muslims go through it. For some it lasts
a long time. I had to battle with mine for nearly two years.
The reason I left Islam is simple. I did not find any truth in it. Furthermore, I saw it is
very evil and dangerous.
I do not follow any religion. I have made up my own religion. The gist of it is, don’t do to others what you would not want to be done
to you. It is simple but it is absolute truth.
I have also devised a philosophy to go with it. What is a religion
without a philosophy? Based on my philosophy all creation is interrelated, or
to use a more fancy word, entangled. We are not distinct beings but
manifestations of one single reality. Our individuality is an illusion even
this illusion is temporary. Take the example of rain drops. They form in the
clouds and as they become heavy they gravitate towards the earth. The
individuality of a drop of rain lasts one or two minutes. It shatters when it hits the ground. But the drop does not get
destroyed. It goes back to the ocean from where it came from and becomes one
with all other drops. The rain drops last a minute or two but oceans have been
around for billions of years and will be around for billions more.
What is the purpose of this coming and going? The
rain brings life to the world. Thanks to it, plants and animals in the dry land
can flourish. For the dropm the rain cycle may mean a futile
exercize, but for the world it is everything.
Now take the example of a tree. What is the purpose of a tree? It
strives against all odds to survive and to grow. Its fruits are eaten by birds
and other animals to eventually fall to the ground, become food to ants and
compost for other trees. What was the purpose of all this? For the tree it may
have meant nothing but all trees and plants together make life possible on
earth, the insects, the birds, the four legged animals and humans depend on
trees for their survival.
Our lives as individuals may mean nothing. We come to the world only for a few short years and die. What is the
point of life? The point is that we are part of this universe, making it churn
and go around.
This is the philosophy of my made up religion. We
don’t come to the world to be tested for our stupidity and then rewarded with
virgins. We come to the world to enrich it. In fact we are never born and will
never die. We have existed always and will exist always, only in different
forms. We are part of each other. You, me, the mountains, the oceans, the
trees, the fish, the birds and the kitty that is curling on my lap, are one in
essence. But we are not aware of it, because this illusion of individuality has
separated us. If you become aware of
this oneness, you will come to see that kindness to others is kindness to
yourself. And likewise cruelty to others is cruelty to yourself. We are
like cells in the same body. Our wellbeing depends on the wellbeing of all
other cells.
Is this philosophy true? Maybe it is and maybe it is
not. But that is the beauty of a made up religion. If tomorrow I find something better I just change it. I don’t have to
believe in a foolish dogma made up by some camel herder psychopath. I am much
more smarter than him and can make up a religion than make sense.
You say you hate Muslims. Indeed, those who follow
Muhammad can be disgusting. I am baffled of how much
evil these people are capable of. But they are sill part of us. Even if a member of your body is sick and pains you, it is still your
body. You can’t chop your arm because it aches. You can’t throw away your
liver because it is sick. Muslims are sick and a pain
in the ass, but they are not separate from us.
We fight darkness not with the sword but with light.
Your friends who think you are from Satan because you
criticize Islam are fools. All those who blindly follow, do not use their
brains or maybe don’t have a brain.
Islam is false, but it is growing thanks to
procreation. Muslims procreate like rabbit. If you leave rabbits unchecked they
can multiply fast. This does not mean there is more truth to them. Muslims come
to the west, procreate and use the tax payer’s money of the non-Muslims to
raise their litters who grow up hating those very people who feed them.
I can fully appreciate how you feel. Islam is not a powerful ideology;
it is a controlling ideology. It is a fear based ideology and often getting out
of this web of fears is difficult.
You did not say whether you live in the west or in an
Islamic country. If you live in an Islamic country you have to be
very careful. Don’t discuss religion with your friends. Muslims are not your friends.
Your best friend can turn against you. Stay safe and keep your beliefs to
yourself. When we have enough people who have secretly left Islam we can bring
the change suddenly.
Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/articles/apostates/i-need-your-help/
IHS
Pakistan, the so-called
“Land of Pure” openly degrades the western culture and takes pride in
preserving modesty. The country also has banned about 17 anti-Islamic websites.
Yet, Google has revealed that Pakistan tops in
certain word search, such as “Horse Sex”, “Donkey Sex”, “Rape Picture”, “Rape
Sex”, “Animal Sex”, “Camel Sex” and “Dog Sex”.
Following the tradition of Prophet Mohammed, Pakistan
also tops in searching, “Child Sex”.
Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/features/news/pakistan-ranks-no-1-in-porn-search/
IHS
Reposting
Westerners can’t conceive of a “religion” that
demands mass murder of non-believers as a foundational pillar, so we tend to
deny its reality. FSM Contributing Editor Susan MacAllen points to British Prime Minister
Gordon Brown’s counterintuitive reaction to the failed car bombings as an
example of cognitive dissonance in the extreme.
A Terrorist by Any Other Name . . . Still
Kills
By Susan MacAllen
Cognitive Dissonance: Those who remember
their Psychology 101 will recognize this term as the widely accepted theory
describing the discomfort we feel when what we already know doesn’t agree with
what we then learn to be true. Each of us has had those moments: you think you
understand a situation and you are feeling confident when suddenly a different
reality hits you in the face. It’s what we feel when a child behaves in a way
contrary to that which we so carefully taught; it’s what we feel when we learn
that a spouse has cheated, or a trusted friend has betrayed us; it’s what
happens when the idea we had about the way our world works is confronted with a
new reality. It’s what many felt on that reality-shattering September 11.
The theory of
Cognitive Dissonance says that when we are confronted with the uncomfortable
tension between former belief and new
reality, we as individuals tend
simply to adjust our beliefs to accommodate the new facts – we don’t
bother much with the actual reality.
Unfortunately, in order to alleviate the tension we tend not to change our
behavior, but to change our belief about the situation. We humans are a crazy bunch – we simply create a new reality.
Last week’s thwarted terrorist attacks in London and
Glasgow provide a disturbing glimpse at the usual human reaction to cognitive
dissonance, and that to which many Western diplomats will resort to preserve a
pleasant little lie and avoid an uncomfortable truth.
Those living
in Great Britain were relieved when the new British Prime Minister, Gordon
Brown, responded to the attacks with firm resolve. His people, he seemed to
say, would not be moved. They would be vigilant, and alert for the dark forces
at work in their society who wished to destroy their way of life. And the
people breathed a sigh of relief – this new PM seemed to have the backbone
required to face realistically the future struggle with radical Islamist
elements that had developed over past decades – and which many believe England
to be a target as a direct result of her too-liberal immigration policies.
So it is no
surprise that many inside and outside the British government were more than a
bit disturbed when a few days later, Prime Minister Brown seemed to take a few
steps back from his resolve, when he began to speak of his government needing
to make greater effort to “win the hearts and minds of Muslims”, and word
leaked through reliable press that he had cautioned his ministers to watch
their language: apparently, they were not to use “inflammatory” language when
speaking of the two bomb-wired vehicles ready to kill hundreds in a
conflagration in London, or the fiery Jeep crashing into the Glasgow airport,
loaded with explosives.
It almost makes sense when one considers that a
“classified” EU document had been sent out by the EU to all European member
governments, cautioning them that inflammatory language would stir unwelcome
sentiment. Therefore, the EU offered a list of words it
called a “common lexicon” to use when describing terrorist events – a banal
list of words deemed “non-emotive”. The list also included normally descriptive words not
to be used – such as “Jihad”, “Islamic” and “fundamentalist”. Thank goodness
for politicians like Gerard Batten of the Independence Party, who is demanding
that the full list be published, so that the British public fully can
appreciate how the EU – from its seat afar in Brussels – is dictating to them
how they should speak English. Or like Denis MacShane of the Labour Party,
who responded that “Islamist” is an accurate description of the ideology behind
the attacks, and needs to be used.
So…if we don’t
call the spade a spade, it magically can be…what…a spoon? All the semantic
molding in the world won’t erase the fact that witnesses to the Jeep crash saw
one of the passengers get out, light himself on fire and scream in Arabic, “Allah! Allah!”,
over and over again. Inflammatory in itself, how is this not related – indeed
central to – Islam, Jihad, and fundamentalism?
Maybe it’s a little cognitive dissonance. We as a Western society believe all that is
“religious” in origin must ultimately be core to what we view as a religious
ethic: peace, equality, non-violence. We cannot believe that there is a
religious ideology that consciously and actively embraces violence against
non-believers, and is so committed to the inequality of religions that it would
want to replace established governments with only Islamic law. We simply can’t conceive of such a belief
system as a “religion”, so we invent a new reality – a reality with no evidence of truth or even common sense.
It goes like this:
- Islam is really a peaceful religion. (It MUST be, after all…because it IS a religion,
right?)
- Only a handful of Muslims believe in the radical
ideal. (This idea collided with some recent public polls in Europe and the U.S.
that demonstrate far too many Muslims agree with radical ideology –
establishment of Sharia Law in the West, the attack on 9-11 was a Zionist/Bush
conspiracy, etc. Oops! More dissonance!)
- Terrorism rises from Western colonialism (forget
that Muslim violent ideology and its pillaging, torturing and subjugation
existed before there even was a West).
And so on. You get the picture. Here is
one of my favorites: suicide bombers are people who struggle in poverty and
misery, and from this economic deprivation and political hopelessness comes
their anger. I, like many who study the phenomenon of radical Islam, was not
surprised to learn that the planners and instigators of the attacks in Britain
were all doctors or in the medical field, but I would imagine the general
public experienced a little cognitive dissonance. These most recent London
bombers are educated, privileged, and driven by the same insane ideology that
drives their brothers to blow up soldiers in Iraq, or nightclubs in Israel, or
subways in London, or skyscrapers in New York: a terrorist by any other name or
profession still kills innocent people.
We are standing on the brink of an earthquake – a
shaking of Western civilization and a test of its endurance and commitment to
its ideals. But we also stand witness to a shaking of the very foundations of
Islam. The war is not only between Islam and non-believers, it is within Islam
itself. It is between those who want to live by its centuries-old ethics
and those who want to live peacefully in the modern world, and embrace some of
the values of modern mankind. And yes, it was Judeo-Christian thought that shaped
those values. I have no doubt that there are Muslims who wish for peace, who
accept non-belief as valid, who understand equality between the sexes, the
value of a child’s life, and the meaning of individual freedom. But frankly, I
don’t know if they know what to do with the quagmire that Islam has
become. It is what it is – a “faith” that is more a political ideology; a
path that teaches submission to the state of Islam, not individual freedom; a
“religion” whose founder spent the last part of his life as a crazed killer. No
one can presume to guess whether these things can in fact be resolved – whether
Islam’s practitioners can find a way that moderation works within a fundamentally
non-flexible ideology. I pray for the sake of good people caught up in Islam,
who dare to hope and search for a better path without abandoning their
traditions, that it is possible.
But meanwhile, we in the West need to call Islamist
ideology for what it is. We need to look at ourselves, and think about how we
refuse to confront that which is before our eyes; how we make excuses for the
ugliness which we cannot comprehend, rather than to examine it; how we avoid
looking at that which shakes our comfortable notions of the world and its
peoples. We need to be conscious of how we would rather declare that it isn’t
real, than to be forced to deal with its hideous qualities and existential
threat to our security. If we do not, we are failing ourselves and our children’s future. We need to dare to see evil and dare to speak
its name. Its name, Mr. Brown, is ISLAM.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/articles/jihad-articles/a-terrorist-by-any-other-name-still-kills/
IHS
Diffusing the present
dangerous confrontation between Islam and the West demands rational impartial
and cool heads to untangle facts from myth, understand the Muslims’ mindset,
and redress any grievances on either side.
The Muslims’ perennial complaint is that the
imperialist West—all colonial powers of the past, as well as the United States
of America—have victimized them for decades and even centuries and continue to
do so in every conceivable way. The litany of the alleged wrongdoings by the
West is encyclopedic. To begin with, the West has shown utter contempt for the
legitimate rights of the Muslim nation by arbitrarily dividing much of the
Islamic land into fractured entities, plundering its resources, and topping
these crimes by installing in its midst its illegitimate stepchild of Israel—a
huge thorn in their side, so they complain. “A grain of truth is needed to make
a mountain of lies believable,” is an old saw. In fairness to Muslims, there is
some substance to their claims against the West. For now, let us focus on the
general mindset of Muslims which bears heavily on the hostility toward the
West—a serious hostility that may bring about the dreaded Armageddon.
* Patriarchy and
authoritarianism: The Muslim’s mind is
imprinted with authoritarianism which starts with the supreme authority, Allah,
through his one and only prophet, Muhammad, his Caliphs or Imams, and the
high-ranking religious divines all the way down to the village clergy. This
authoritarian mentality encompasses all aspects of life for the Muslim. The
king and his dominion as the viceroy of God, the Emir and his despotic ways,
the Khan and his unchallenged rule over the tribe, the village headsman and his
extensive power, and finally the father and his iron grip at home over the
women and children. All these authority figures are male.
The authoritarian type poses numerous problems and presents many
ramifications—ramifications much too important and complex to be
comprehensively treated here. For now, it is important to understand that a
person with the authoritarian personality is an extremist. He can be docility
itself under certain circumstances and a maniacal murdering brute under others.
He is the type who would just as happily kill or die, when he is
directed to do so. He would, for instance, gladly strap on an explosive vest,
in obedience to a superior’s order, and detonate it in a crowd of innocent
civilians without the slightest hesitation.
* Blind obedience: A
dangerous feature of the authoritarian personality is the relative lack of
independent thinking. This deficiency makes the person highly amenable to
manipulation. Islam, by its rigidly authoritarian make up, robs a Muslim of
independent thinking to the extent that the believer blindly adopts it as his
infallible system of belief. Hence, the religion of Islam is guilty of conditioning
masses of people as easily manipulatable instruments in the hands of authority
figures.
Studies have shown that the authoritarian personality type can be found
among all people, including Americans. The important difference is in the
degree and prevalence of the condition. Islam breeds vast numbers of
extremists, while in America, for instance, the prevalence is significantly
lower and less severe.
* Focus on goal: To Muslims,
the goal is everything. As religious fascism, Islam condones any and all means
to achieve its goals. The ultimate objective of Islam is the rule of the entire
world under the Islamic Ummah—never mind that these life-in-hand soldiers of
Allah disagree with one another regardi1ng the Ummah itself and who is going to
reign over it. That’s a “family dispute” that they will resolve by their usual
favorite method—brute force. Each Islamic sect believes that it has the Prophet
and Allah on its side and it will prevail over the other. For now they have to work diligently to achieve the intermediary goal of
defeating all non-believers. There are countless
instances that substantiate Muslims’ “End justifies the means” guiding
principle. This policy dates back to Muhammad himself. Muhammad repeatedly made
peace covenants with his adversaries, only to violate them as soon as he was in
advantageous position to do so. Betrayal, deception and
outright lies are fully condoned in furthering the work of Islam. In the
present-day world, the work of Islam is defined by a deeply-entrenched and influential
clergy who issue fatwa—rulings—that become directives and laws to the faithful.
Khomeini, the founder of the Iranian Islamic state,
for one, made extensive use of the fatwa. Widely-known in the west is
Khomeini’s fatwa condemning Selman Rushdie to death for his book. A less known
fatwa of Khomeini during the last Iran-Iraq war led to the slaughter of
thousands of Iranian children. Children, nearly all under 15 years of age, were
given plastic keys to paradise as they were commanded by the fatwa of the imam
to rush forward to clear minefields for the tanks to follow. The Islamic
murderers, in obedience to the fatwa of a bloodthirsty man of Allah, had no
problem in deceiving the clueless lads clinching made – in – China plastic keys
to paradise.
Such is the existentialistic threat of Islam. It is a
rigid stone-age authoritarian system with a stranglehold over many of the
nearly one and a half billion people under its command.
* Fatalism:
One of the greatest subtle, yet important differences between the Muslim’s
mindset and that of the people in the West is the extent to which Muslims are
fatalistic. There is hardly a statement that a Muslim makes
without being conditional—conditional on the will of Allah. “I shall see you tomorrow, Allah willing,” “You will make it home, Allah
willing,” “Things will work out, Allah willing,” and on and on and on. To the
Muslim, Allah is on the job—on every job. Allah, with his invisible mighty
hand, literally does and runs everything. “Allah’s hand is above all other
hands,” adorns every imaginable space in Islamic lands—a telling point about
the Muslim’s fatalism and submission to the omnipotent omnipresent hand. If
something happens, it is Allah’s will. If it doesn’t, it is Allah’s will. The
rank and file Muslim has little will of his own. It absolves him of any and all
responsibility. This mentality is in stark contrast with the “take charge” and
“can do” mentality characteristic of Americans and others.
* Psychological uniqueness:
People as a group or as individuals are different and none is perfectly healthy
psychologically. We all have a loose wheel or two as we travel the bumpy road
of life. Yet, most people manage to stay on course most of the time, with
perhaps a stop or two at a repair shop of a mental health professional.
Most psychological disorders are exaggerations, deficits or surfeits of
the generally accepted norm—whatever the norm may be. When caution, for
instance, is practiced past suspicion, then we have paranoia; when reasonable
fear is exercised beyond any justification, then there is phobia. The degree
and severity of a condition frequently determine the presence or absence of
psychopathology.
Muslims share a common Islamic psychological milieu, they are on an
Islamic “diet,” whether they live in Islamic lands or in societies
predominantly non-Islamic. The psychological condition of any Muslim group or
individual is directly dependent on the kind and amount of Islamic diet they
consume. The Islamic diet has numerous ingredients—some
of which are wholesome, some are dangerously toxic, and some are between the
two extremes.
Over the years, the Islamic leaders have found it
expedient to feed the masses mainly the toxic ingredients to further their own
interests. Individuals and groups, for instance, have used the immense
energizing power of hatred to rally the faithful; the cohesive force of
polarization to create in-group solidarity; and, the great utility value of
blaming others for their real and perceived misfortunes. Jews have been their favorite
and handy scapegoats from day one. To this day, as true fascists, like the
Nazis, Muslims blame just about everything on the Jews.
Providing a comprehensive inventory of the psychological profile of the
Muslims is beyond the scope of this article. Yet, there is no question that the
psychological makeup of a Muslim, depending on the extent of his Muslim-ness,
is different from that of non-Muslims. This difference, often irreconcilable as
things stand presently, is at the core of the clash of Islam with the West.
* Conclusion. Admittedly, the non-Islamic culture is no panacea.
It has, however, one outstanding feature the Islamic lacks—it allows for
liberty with all its attendants— good, bad, or indifferent. Those who have
experienced liberty, no inducement is likely to make them give it
up—particularly not the fictional promises of the Islamists that have failed in
the past and are doomed to fail even more miserably in the future.
The best, yet difficult resolution of the conflict is to do what hundreds
of thousands of Muslims have already done. They have abandoned the slaveholder
Islam: they broke loose from the yoke of the exploitative clergy, renounced
Islamofascisim, purged the discriminatory and bizarre teachings in the Quran
and the Hadith, and left the suffocating tent of dogmatic Islam for the
life-giving expanse of liberty.
Within the emancipating and accommodating haven of liberty, those who
wish to remain Muslim can retain and practice the good teachings of Islam but
renounce intolerance, hatred and violence. It takes great effort and courage to
ascend from the degrading pit of slavery to the mount of emancipation. Yet, it
is both possible and exhilarating to do it, since many have done so
successfully and happily. As more and more people leave the shackles of
religious slavery, more and more will follow, and the long-suffering Muslims,
victimized by Islam itself for far too long, will be a free people in charge of
their own life and destiny. It is a painful process of growing up, of asserting
one’s coming of age, and marching lockstep with the free members of the human
race.
Slavery of the mind is as evil as the slavery of the body.
Islamofascisim enslaves them both.
Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/articles/op-ed/13186
IHS
