Believing that your holy text is the exact, immutable, uncontroverted word of God does not render you incapable of critical thought and the capacity for interpretation. Muslims are just as capable of recognizing allegory and symbolism in their undiluted sacred text as Christians and Jews are. This is not the nail-in-the-coffin argument that you think it is. Conversely, Jews and Christians don't take their sacred - and often bloody - texts any less seriously than Muslims do. I don't know why that's so hard for you to get.

I commend you on your recent admission that you have "given short shrift" to the homegrown Christian variants of theocracy and the very real and immediate dangers that they pose. I will happily agree with you that all forms of fundamentalism, and their common drives for theocracy, are creeping evils that enlighened liberalism must be vigilant against. That being said, I submit to you this quote:

"My honest take on it is that I feel less threatened by Christian theocracy than I do Islamic; I suppose I feel that the Christian flavor of it is more familiar, and it seems that I can 'deal with it'easier."

This, I think, is the bottom line. You just don't like it.

P.S.: I think that a big part of the problem with Islam and the Muslim world doesn't have to do with Islam itself, but rather with the fact that, by accident of history, Islam has become the defining characteristic of middle eastern culture. It is what differentiates the Middle East from other regions of the world. This fact has made it easier for fundamentalism, and its creeping drive for theocracy, to take root there. The success of the Enlightenment as a philosophical movement in the west rescued "Christendom" from a similar situation, and created the modern western world that we know today. I remain hopeful that Muslim interaction with the West, and their exposure to western ideas and ways of life, can have a similar impact on the "Muslim World."

Hey Glenn,

Your little bit on the islamist "threat" was interesting in that you sai basically nothing.

You're amazed that some people actually believe this stuff. Well why are you amazed? Tell us why they are wrong. They are so obviously stupid to you but that's not enough. What do you base your contempt on. Give us some substance. Do some research, or if you have then tell us about it.

your amazement at the stupidity of those you disagree with is of no importance to a reasoned debate on the subject.

Cheers

Mod Con

Glenn has covered the subject. Extensively. Do some research yourself and check back when you're up to speed.

GB: “I see you have no comment on the moderate Islamic belief that the Koran is the complete and immutable word of God, even in the face of the calls to violence, coercion, and misogyny that I quoted. Nor do you have a comment on the Islamic demand - backed by violence and threats - that everyone show deference to Muslim claims of supremacy. Hey, it will never affect you, right?”

I’m familiar with most of the things you quoted. The only comment I would have is that it’s certainly not surprising that anyone professing belief in a religion, moderate or otherwise, would argue that passages in the document purported to govern their belief system represent the “complete and immutable word of God”, despite what the words may convey. I happen to also think that any differences in the references to violence, coercion and misogynistic practices are largely a matter of degree. As many others have pointed out, the keys to any effect are in the interpretation, the audience and the motivation/resources of those doing the interpreting. I believe he’s made this argument to you in the past; but please reference this recent posting by Armageddon:

http://letters.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/08/13/simon/permalink/f2a2cd7f12ce452f42911146c54bb8e0.html

I concur with Armageddon that your posts seem to be counterproductive to any resolution of this problem.

I don’t fear or needlessly concern myself with a “demand”, Islamic or otherwise, that “everyone show deference” to any “claims of supremacy”. There have been demands made for deference to claims of supremacy over others in this country in the past. Those demands and expectations for compliance were also frequently justified by certain passages in a religious document. Fear of those seen as deserving of subjugation was also a predominant component of the rationalization. A war eventually resulted and, despite that outcome, many years of injustice and frustration ensued for those deemed as inferior. Conversely, many years of privilege and economic advantage accrued to those deemed worthy of deference.

Guess what? Those WITHOUT FEAR finally got it figured out and, for the most part, the country managed to correct this problem. The passages in the religious document remain; but those still advocating that position have been mostly reduced to the fringe. I sincerely doubt that this could have happened had this country somehow been converted into a theocracy during that period of its history.

I am not unconcerned by threats of Islamic violence. I also think that most people certainly get it by now that you are clearly frightened by what that may mean for the security of the nation. I did check out your link regarding the Immigration Services employees allegedly aiding Islamist extremists. Who wouldn’t be concerned about that?

On the other hand, as the article pointed out, the people suspected of this were “exploiting the visa system for personal gain”. Seeking personal gain is a time-honored tradition in this nation and should not automatically be equated to theocratic motivation. As I suggested in my previous post, it may just be a matter of how you view the Scary Scale.

It seems to me that the “be afraid, be very afraid” card is played frequently enough by this administration to allow you a well-earned break. If you’re looking for an admission here, OK, I’ll concede that I’m less concerned at the moment about being blown up in a shopping mall by one or more of these misguided people (or the Tim McVeigh du jour) than I am about the very real prospect of the Stealth Bombers (e.g. DOJ and other government agency politicizations) that now threaten to blow up the basic premises upon which the nation was founded.

At the risk of mixing metaphors, I think we all need to keep our eyes on what's under the shell at the DOJ and elsewhere in this government while the "be afraid" card is being played.