Aruru,

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've posted before - and I know you've read it - how majority Muslim countries treat those not of the Islamic faith. I'd say the facts on the ground in some of the largest and most important Muslim countries, especially in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, and Malaysia, are a pretty good case that Muslims are acting on their supremacist ideology.

In the West we are faced with increasing demands for us to defer to Muslim sensibilities. Just in the last several weeks we have seen that American public universities are installing foot baths for Muslims, and bringing charges against those suspected of insulting Islam; a hospital of the British National Health Service has advised doctors not to eat in front of Muslims during Ramadan; and in Vancouver, Muslim taxi drivers are now allowed to deny rides to blind people with guide dogs. From the Vancouver Sun: "North Shore Taxi was ordered to immediately establish a policy forbidding any driver to refuse a fare from a blind person accompanied by a certified guide dog. The only exceptions are for drivers allergic to dogs and those who satisfy the company that they have an honest religious belief that precludes them from transporting certified guide dogs" - in other words, Muslims.

This sounds to me like Muslims are demanding - and receiving - special treatment. As I've said before, in the West the strategy is "softly, softly". No group in America would suffer from a repeat 9/11 more than Muslims, and they are well aware of that.

I’d ask you, when you say “Muslim,” what are you thinking of? 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?

When I say the word Muslim, I am thinking of a person that is in submission to the totalitarian Mohammedan ideology. That is of course what unifies Muslims, and why countries as geographically and ethnically diverse as Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, and Pakistan share their oppressive practices against non-Muslims; it is why Somalis in Minnesota and Arabs in Vancouver can agree that refusing to transport disabled people with guide dogs is a right that they should demand.

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?...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 used to think like most of you here, that Islam was a misunderstood sibling of the Judeo-Christian faiths. At a certain point in my professional life, I became acquainted with a number of Muslims, and eventually they began to open to me. I was shocked, absolutely shocked at what I heard, and I decided to put aside my pre-conceived notions of Islam and really research it with an open mind. No, it's not my job to post here; I believe that most progressives are seriously deluded about Islam. I don't mind the venom unleashed on me, as it usually reveals that I'm hitting close to the mark. At the very least, I am helping folks confront this issue. Islam is a unique threat to Western style liberalism, and we need to talk about it.

I think Aruru hit the nail on the head when he described your emotional obsession with this topic. I'll accept your claims about how you came to believe what you do, but it's difficult. You seem to have much more than an intellectual interest in convincing folks that they should be very afraid, but maybe you're just a worrier by nature.

Do you think Hitler was evil? If so, why? If not, why not?

Was what Hitler did to Jews evil or not?

In the West we are faced with increasing demands for us to defer to Muslim sensibilities. Just in the last several weeks we have seen that American public universities are installing foot baths for Muslims, and bringing charges against those suspected of insulting Islam; a hospital of the British National Health Service has advised doctors not to eat in front of Muslims during Ramadan; and in Vancouver, Muslim taxi drivers are now allowed to deny rides to blind people with guide dogs.

And did you know that all standardized tests allow people who can get a letter from their rabbi to take them on Mondays, instead of Saturday mornings? And that most universities in America do not have classes or major activities on Friday afternoon/evening, and Saturday? And the public school I attended had Rosh Hoshana and yom Kippur as holidays!

And now a federal court has ruled that pharmacists have a right not to dispense drugs that violate their religious beliefs!!!

What do you think about these Jews and Christians demanding special treatment?

And once again, I ask, do you really, honestly believe that Dave Chappelle and Malcolm X and Zaha Hadid and Mohammed ElBaradei all believe in the literal truth of the Koran? Maybe secretly but yes they do?

You write: I've posted before - and I know you've read it - how majority Muslim countries treat those not of the Islamic faith. [snip]

Yes, I’ve seen your thinking on “dhimmitude” and such. Unless you plan to take up residence in a sharia-governed Muslim country, I’m failing to see how your fears – even in the unlikely event that they're true -- present imminent threat to you or anyone in the West.

In the West we are faced with increasing demands for us to defer to Muslim sensibilities. [snip]

Political correctness is rampant everywhere. As LeCastor mentioned, we have pharmacists who don’t fill prescriptions because of religious sensibilities, doctors who won’t perform abortions, blue laws. Whether political correctness run amok, and appeasing particular religious groups’ sensibilities, are good things is a topic for another debate. But the fact is, it’s a broader movement, and not unique to Muslims.

Political correctness aside, since footbaths and dog-driving cabdrivers aren’t affecting your quality of life, safety or freedom, I fail to see how it impinges on you, or the West for that matter.

QUESTION: Do you see that capitulating or accommodating anyone’s religious sensibilities on non-starter issues like these as slippery slopes toward total subjugation? And, do you believe this should apply equally to all religions? -- So, no foot baths for Muslims, no special tax status for churches/synagogues, no Kwanzaa off, no pharmacist exemptions for Morning-after pill, and tough toodles to Hasidic fellows who want to wear forelocks/yarmulkes – and not work Sabbaths -- as flight attendants for Southwest?

You write: When I say the word Muslim, I am thinking of a person that is in submission [snip]

Again, if refusing guidedogs in cabs is wrong in the U.S., then you agree that refusing to fill Pill scrips bec. of religious beliefs is equally verboten? I might actually agree with you here, because I don’t believe that religious sensibilities should trump public good.

My feeling is, if you’re a Muslim, don’t be a cabdriver if you don’t want to have to drive guide dogs, and if you’re a fundie-Christian, don’t be a pharmacist if you don’t want to have to fill Pill scrips.

But this applies in America. In other countries, I don’t have a say.

But is this the watershed issue, some sort of canary in the coal mine that tells us Islam is taking over, as you suggest? I hardly think so.

Also, you still haven’t answered the core question. The vast majority of billions of Muslims are NOT doing anything that endangers or threatens non-Muslims. How is that a threat to you, to us? I don’t care what Islam “says.” It’s how it is translated into action by its followers. And for the almost all, it’s translated into peaceful coexistence. Al Qaeda, some footbaths and non-dog-driving cabbies do not make for fear of world domination. To suggest otherwise is to wildly exaggerate -- and that calls into question your motivation/objective.

You write: …I became acquainted with a number of Muslims, and eventually they began to open to me. I was shocked, absolutely shocked at what I heard,[snip]

Is it possible that the “number of Muslims” you became acquainted with are not representative of the billions of people around the world who follow this religion? Given the fervor with which you attack Muslims/Islam, I’d venture a guess that this is highly likely.

Ultimately, we all bring to the table our feelings/perceptions about things, based on our anecdotal experience in life. Given the vehemence and hostility with which you approach this issue, your experience with those Muslims you met must have been a doozy...

I don't mind the venom unleashed on me, as it usually reveals that I'm hitting close to the mark. At the very least, I am helping folks confront this issue. Islam is a unique threat to Western style liberalism, and we need to talk about it.

Actually, I believe you’re not hitting the mark, but actually profoundly alienating people and turning them away from your apparent “cause.” The venom is, in my case, an expression of utter disgust that anyone could be so categorically and unfailingly ruthless in vilifying an entire religion – one that encompasses billions of people from all walks of life from around the world.

You believe you are helping people confront the issue, but the issue you’re actually helping people confront is not Islam – it's bigotry. In reading your posts, and watching you avoid discussing solutions, you are illustrating a very clear picture what an emotion-laden bigot against Muslims and Islam looks like and sounds like.

As for threats to Western liberalism, we do need to talk about them – all of them. But we need to talk about solutions and answers.

Do you want to talk about solutions?

I wonder if you only relish marinating in the hatred and fear, and feel that your mission is solely to keep expressing this intense derision you have for Islam.

Or perhaps you just have no practical solutions for this horrendous danger you feel the West is facing, and so you are forced to simply repeat over and over what you see as the problem.

Or, more ominously, perhaps you do have solutions, but they so malignant that you – and whoever might share your views – keep these solutions close to the chest? I fear that this may be closest to the truth. I hope I'm wrong.

Sadly, in taking such an extreme, emotion-laden, illiberal and unyielding position, and in setting yourself up as a zealot here at Salon, you seem to, in the end, have far more in common with the narrow “good vs. evil” ideology of radical Islam, than with the Western liberalism you claim to want to defend.

Life, people, religion – they are all far more nuanced than you realize, GoldenBoy.

--Aruru