I'm still waiting...

OK, those are pretty good questions.

1) In your view, what differentiates fanatics -- who are willing to do harm to others in the name of religion -- from the rest of the practitioners of ANY religion?

My thesis is that Islam is fundamentally different from other religions in that it is a political ideology with a supremacist doctrine. If one acts in accordance with the strictures of Islam, one is - by most Western standards - a fanatic.

Ask yourself this - when we say "moderate" Muslim, what are we thinking of? I suggest that we mean "Westernized." Please think carefully about this, if you truly want to understand my argument.

2) Why are the vast majority of the billions Muslims -- most of whom believe in a literal Qu'ran -- NOT running around killing and subjugating the rest of us, despite passages from the Qu'ran that command them to do so?

Take a look at the headlines from Nigeria, Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Israel / Palestine, Thailand, the Phillipines, etc and every other country with significant numbers of Muslims, and then come back and tell me that Muslims are not in conflict with those around them. Here in the West there is a "softly, softly" campaign, dictated by the relatively fewer numbers of Muslims here. Look at how much more aggressive that campaign is in countries - think England - with many more Muslims. It is in fact a linear correlation.

3) Given that the vast majority of Muslims -- who believe the Qu'ran and its laws to be the literal word of God -- are behaving in a civilized, nonthreatening way, much like Christians who believe in a literal Bible and its associated laws, and neither group seems able or willing to act upon those laws, then exactly WHAT are you so afraid of?

I find Islam to be a violent, coercive, misogynist, brutal, illiberal political ideology masquerading as a religion. That's bad enough, but when Muslims demand that we in the West submit to their absurd supremacist ideas, and defer to Islamic taboos and strictures, we need to resolve that we will not. Fear is not exactly the emotion that I feel; in so far as I feel any emotions about Islam they are revulsion, contempt, and pity.

Which brings us full-circle to Glenn's article. Glenn set up a straw man - some fat looney redneck screaming "The Mahometans are coming" - and knocked it down by asking where the Caliphate's armies are. I pointed out that Muslims are demanding we submit to their supremacist sensibilites throughout the West, and it is not alarmist or racist to discuss or resist this.

I do have to go and do some work-related things for the next several hours, but I'll check in tonight if you'd like to keep talking.

Saw that you responded, but no time to read and process. I'm off to a meeting that will run late into the p.m. If I can get back on late tonight, I will respond, otherwise I'll need to pick back up tomorrow.

--Aruru

Then I honestly have nothing to say to you nor would I waste any time trying to. It's trite to say things like "Too often" but in fact the hard-edged liberal left intentionally ignores this distinction, in order to lump all religious folk in one pile they can spit on.

It's we who are religious folk who understand better that you the risk of ignoring fanaticism because we're the ones' who have to deal with it. You don't you get to look at it from a distance and wrap it in your own political screed. If you honestly think that all Protestant conservatism is evil and dangerous and all Islamic fundamentalism is either imaginary or innocuous then it's you who are looking at things through rose colored glasses. Sorry but you are.

By not answering my question, you've said so much.

If any are getting bored while anxiously awaiting the next elucidation from GB, here’s an interesting clip featuring another GB:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=AgBrVzbZYHY&mode=related&search=

I know it’s not fair. But it's FUNNY and I couldn’t resist.

You write: My thesis is that Islam is fundamentally different from other religions in that it is a political ideology with a supremacist doctrine. If one acts in accordance with the strictures of Islam, one is - by most Western standards - a fanatic.

I don't agree with your thesis. But, for the sake of argument, suppose the thesis were true. How then to explain that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are not acting on supremacist ideology, and not acting on fanaticism, but instead, going about their lives doing no harm to others?

I’m not asking you to speculate on what you think they're thinking or believing...I’m saying, look at their ACTIONS. Because it’s ridiculous to be afraid of what we think others believe – but won't act on. (Because by that logic, we WOULD have to be terrified of the Bible-literal Christians, for example.)

Healthy concern for all extremist religious/political subgroups is warranted. But that doesn't translate to utter contempt for Islam.

I’d ask you, when you say “Muslim,” what are you thinking of? You continue to lump all Muslims – billions of people – into one homogeneous category. That’s mistaken. Look at a few subcategories -- Black Muslims, Arab Muslims, Sunni, Shia, Salafists, Wahhabis, Sufis, Indonesians, Sudanese, Syrians, Saudis – where is the evidence that members of these various groups -- or billions of people around the world for that matter -- are following a homogeneous political agenda?

You write: Take a look at the headlines from Nigeria...[snip]...and then come back and tell me that Muslims are not in conflict with those around them.

Of course they are in conflict with those around them. So are Americans. EVERYONE is in conflict around the world, except maybe those cheese-eating pacifists in Switzerland. (I bet if I Googled, I'd find conflict there too!) There are racial/economic/political/religious conflicts everywhere in the world. The fact that Muslims disagree with each other or anyone else doesn’t prove anything, except that they're human.

You write: I find Islam to be a violent, coercive, misogynist, brutal, illiberal political ideology masquerading as a religion. That's bad enough, but when Muslims demand that we in the West submit to their absurd supremacist ideas, and defer to Islamic taboos and strictures, we need to resolve that we will not. Fear is not exactly the emotion that I feel; in so far as I feel any emotions about Islam they are revulsion, contempt, and pity.

You’ve summarized quite succinctly and passionately exactly how you feel. There is obviously no room for empathy or appreciation for Islam -- that is clear. In your time posting as GoldenBoy, you've been remarkably consistent , I’ll give you that. You are not a waffler.

But what you are expressing is emotion – not a logical, intellectual conclusion. You have passionate, intense feelings. "Revulsion, contempt, absurd..." -- these are expressions of intense, primal emotion. It’s obvious that this is far more than an intellectual argument for you, and that there's strong emotional underpinning, or religious/political zealotry, driving the position you have adopted.

Maybe someday you'll share HOW and WHY you came to this remarkably rigid position – because while you do seem to relish the debate process itself, you're also so firmly entrenched that there isn’t any room for productive discussion or argument.

I’m actually not sure what you’re wanting to accomplish, to be honest. Because your position is so intransigent, and you argue it so intensely, I think you know it’s unlikely that you're winning converts here at Salon. The few who agree agree. As for the rest, you’re having an opposite effect, pushing people who might genuinely mistrust Islam into publicly defending it or privately sympathizing with it, because you have taken such a rabidly negative position.

You write: I pointed out that Muslims are demanding we submit to their supremacist sensibilites throughout the West, and it is not alarmist or racist to discuss or resist this.

Again, you've lumped all “Muslims” into a homogeneous army of billions, when they are in actuality many nationalities, living around the world, and are minorities in many of their home countries. As for what Muslims “demand,” so what? Let ‘em demand all they want -- who says anyone has to comply? At this point, America is demanding that people submit to OUR supremacist sensibilities. We’re claiming rights to oil under the North Pole, dictating which countries have rights to nuclear power, abrogating the Geneva convention, and adopting a policy of pre-emptive war/attack. And as other nations are discovering, sadly, there’s even bite to our bark. But just because we demand (and make threats to back up demands) does that mean others have to listen?

In the end, the thing about this whole discourse that is most intriguing to me at this point is you.

What caused you to have such an emotional and passionate feelings against Islam/Muslims? (Or, conversely, if you are a keyboard-for-hire, who are you working for. I suspect – not sure why, but I sense -- that you come by this position not as a job, but you genuinely believe what you write. That makes it all the more indecipherable, because money/job would easily explain a lot.)

Why do you feel so passionately about this issue that, at least at Salon’s letters pages, you're compelled to argue your cause, and have set yourself up to debate with many people who clearly find your viewpoints ugly and loathsome, and have no problem saying so?

I know you probably won’t tell us the answers to these questions. But, tonight, I’ll leave it at that.

--Aruru