--------------------------
Here we have another leftist informing us as to the proper way to believe, coupled with an attempt at moral equivalence.
First is Daniel Klusmann's letter.
------------------------
Christianity is a big part of the lives of most Americans. We believe in varying degrees, but even skeptics recognize that the message of brotherly love is a positive one that benefits mankind.
Our government grants non-profit tax status to religions because they are good for society. Churches in America help far more people than government ever could. Our Christian churches even preach love and acceptance of other religions. The world is now having to deal with evil on an unprecedented scale. It is blamed on Muslim extremists. This is understandable because all religions (even Christians) have extremists who defile all that is good about our religion.
As Muslims defend their religion as one of “peace,” I thought I should learn more about it. I started by studying Muhammad. Turns out he was a 7th century terrorist whose life featured 12 marriages, sex with a 9-year-old child, rapes, warfare, and unmerciful butcheries. Then I turned to the Qur’an. It contains many positive messages, but it also features endless passages that reflect the meaning of the word Islam - “submission” to the Muslim god of intolerance and hatred. Yes the Qur’an teaches love of their own, but not for me or the millions of people who follow other religions.
Two passages caught my attention – “Believers, take neither Jew nor Christians for your friends,” and “Those who reject Islam are the vilest of creatures and thus deserve no mercy.” Maybe the co-workers who held a baby shower for Tashfeen Malik should have been made aware. I guess my point is, how difficult is it to radicalize any Muslim who worships a murderer like Muhammad and studies teachings with such vile messages? Someone, please correct me if I am wrong.
Now Dr. Gourley's rebuttal:
Dan Klusmann (Dec. 12) asked for any corrections regarding his negative statements about Muslims. His point was that since the Quran contains many passages promoting violence, followers can easily be radicalized. (Actually, his point was that the Qu'ran commands Muslims to violence.)
What he failed to mention is that the Bible also contains many passages promoting violence in the name of God, (First technique of the limited mind: Moral equivalency. Those evil Christians, which will be the balance of his letter.
Mr. Gourley will never discuss Muslims again.)
and that Christian terrorism has been a significant part of the American landscape since colonial days. (More moral relativism. Quickly switching topics, the author hopes no one notices that the commands to Christians is different than the behavior of those who claim to be Christians.)
Christian theocratic colonial governments often terrorized dissenters (especially Baptists and Quakers, who for their perceived heretical faith were frequently beaten, tortured, jailed and sometimes killed) in the 17th and 18th centuries. (We search in vain for the commands of Scripture that authorize Christians to do these things.)
Some three centuries of atrocities against Native Americans were committed in the name of the Christian God. (We search in vain for the commands of Scripture that authorize Christians to do these things.)
Even after America was established as a nation devoted to principles of human freedom and equality, (From whence did this principles come? Were the Founders Muslim?)
white Christians in the South often evoked biblical literalism and the name and will of God in enslaving, beating, raping and murdering black persons. (We search in vain for the commands of Scripture that authorize Christians to do these things.)
For a century after the American Civil War and the end of slavery, the beatings, rapings and murders of black persons continued in the name of the white Christian God. (We search in vain for the commands of Scripture that authorize Christians to do these things.)
Christianity and Islam both have holy books containing violent passages, and both have a history of terrorist expressions. (He mentions Islam, but never discusses it.)
Should we stop there and draw lasting, blanket conclusions about either faith? (Apparently the answer is yes, because that is exactly what the author has done for his entire letter.)
Can we affirm the more common, peaceful and inclusive expressions of Christian and Muslim faiths? Might Christians and Muslims who reject the violent passages of their holy books be of critical help in overcoming terrorism in the name of religion? (Is there any difference between the faithful embracing the teachings of their holy book by committing evil, and those who violate their holy book by committing evil?)
And will we as Americans finally be brave enough to renounce the evils of hatred, racism and prejudice that so often lead to self-serving violence, and instead collectively hold aloft our liberating national values of human rights, freedom and equality? (Moral posturing. Upon what principles is the author relying to make these proclamations? Where did this moral certainty come from? Was it Islam or Christianity?)
and that Christian terrorism has been a significant part of the American landscape since colonial days. (More moral relativism. Quickly switching topics, the author hopes no one notices that the commands to Christians is different than the behavior of those who claim to be Christians.)
Christian theocratic colonial governments often terrorized dissenters (especially Baptists and Quakers, who for their perceived heretical faith were frequently beaten, tortured, jailed and sometimes killed) in the 17th and 18th centuries. (We search in vain for the commands of Scripture that authorize Christians to do these things.)
Some three centuries of atrocities against Native Americans were committed in the name of the Christian God. (We search in vain for the commands of Scripture that authorize Christians to do these things.)
Even after America was established as a nation devoted to principles of human freedom and equality, (From whence did this principles come? Were the Founders Muslim?)
white Christians in the South often evoked biblical literalism and the name and will of God in enslaving, beating, raping and murdering black persons. (We search in vain for the commands of Scripture that authorize Christians to do these things.)
For a century after the American Civil War and the end of slavery, the beatings, rapings and murders of black persons continued in the name of the white Christian God. (We search in vain for the commands of Scripture that authorize Christians to do these things.)
Christianity and Islam both have holy books containing violent passages, and both have a history of terrorist expressions. (He mentions Islam, but never discusses it.)
Should we stop there and draw lasting, blanket conclusions about either faith? (Apparently the answer is yes, because that is exactly what the author has done for his entire letter.)
Can we affirm the more common, peaceful and inclusive expressions of Christian and Muslim faiths? Might Christians and Muslims who reject the violent passages of their holy books be of critical help in overcoming terrorism in the name of religion? (Is there any difference between the faithful embracing the teachings of their holy book by committing evil, and those who violate their holy book by committing evil?)
And will we as Americans finally be brave enough to renounce the evils of hatred, racism and prejudice that so often lead to self-serving violence, and instead collectively hold aloft our liberating national values of human rights, freedom and equality? (Moral posturing. Upon what principles is the author relying to make these proclamations? Where did this moral certainty come from? Was it Islam or Christianity?)
No comments:
Post a Comment