Pro Rege Papers

This is a response to Percival’s post about Islam. You’d better read his entry if you want to understand anything I say here.

If you read his entry, you’d think that I said a lot of things I didn’t. He makes some important mistakes about what I said that changes the argument. If you read my post and compare it with what he says that I said, you will find plenty of errors. Some of his arguments are actually convincing if I said what he thinks, but I didn’t. Whatever, this will set him straight.

…we should try to be less comprehensive - take one thing at a time?

Sorry, that’s my style. You should see some of the debates that Axinar and I have. They go on for at least one page per reply.

1. Bigotry v. Bigot:

You accused me of bigotry. The personal form of that noun is bigot. Logically you are calling me a bigot. Don’t shy away from the term, it doesn’t mean anything to me because I know it doesn’t apply to me. You said that bigotry is defined as “to condemn a group of people by ascribing negative qualities to them.” Now that’s a connotation, but we’ll deal with it anyway. You said that we, pronouncing “anti-Islamic, anti-Muslim rhetoric” are being bigots. We are not condemning Muslims as people, except when they are terrorists (and I hope you would agree on that point). We are condemning Islam as a horrible religion. Let me repeat that: We [at least myself, I can’t speak for others] are condemning Islam, not Arabs. That’s an important point that you should pay attention to.

2. Ranting:

Okay maybe not ranting per se, but it was interesting to see all of you, especially ThursdayNext talk in a self-righteous tone about how other people are so insensitive and horrible, whereas you guys are completely rational and civil. Then you had a round of agreements with wishes for peace. Okay, it wasn’t ranting, but it was funny.

3. Poop?

You say that you are “not attacking the Muslim way of life” but rather their “ideology, doctrines, and ‘end products’.” By “end products,” do you mean poop? How about consolidating your phrase into “beliefs,” which I think is what you’re trying to talk about.

This paragraph is based on an assumption that I said something that I didn’t. I didn’t say Muslim’s ideology, etc; I said ideology etc. of Islam. The end product of Islam is not poop. The end products of Islam are destruction, terror, and tyranny. I didn’t even say “the Muslim way of life”; I said the “Arab way of life”. There is quite a difference. Arabs are people with middle-brown skin, who speak Arabic, and live roughly in the Middle East. I hold none of those things against them. Most (but not all) Arabs are Muslims. Even that, specifically, I don’t have against them. If Islam were Christianity (which of course it isn’t) then I wouldn’t mind. It is Islam that I have the problem with. Islam is a religion that encompasses an ideology, doctrine, etc that is false. Its followers are called Muslims (which is not synonymous with Arabs). Okay, I’ll call it a religion. I just wanted to make that distinction in my last post for reasons that had come up at that time. Now that we’re clear on that, I’ll use it again.

Percival goes on in the next three paragraphs to pick apart a straw man. He repeats the phrase “Muslim way of life” over and over again as if I had said that; and fails to make a distinction between Muslim and Arab.

4. Defining Bigotry:

What he describes in the next few paragraphs is hatred, not bigotry. As I explained with my illustration about racism as opposed to disagreeing with Islam, bigotry is hating someone for something that they can’t help. It is part of their existence, they can’t change it, but you still hate them for it. Muslims can change.

Yet to suggest that people who hate blacks literally hate them for the color of their skin is absurd.

Yes it is, so you’re saying you’re not a racist; that’s good. Yes, of course people hate them for other reasons besides skin color. I just said that in passing. They hate them for other things too, but they still use skin color, physical features, etc. to identify them and thus discriminate against them.

Anyone who hates black people hates them because of the negative stereotypes they hold about them. You hold negative stereotypes about Muslims and the religion of Islam.

I don’t think that racists hate blacks because they hold stereotypes against them. What was the original act that they committed that could be applied to the whole? It wasn’t anything that would be different than what whites did. Again, it goes back to just the matter of skin color, physical differences, etc. The only stereotype I hold against Muslims is that they hold to Islam. That, in fact, is the definition of Muslim.

Percival then goes on to take a couple of my statements out of context and mesh them together.

You state: “You are implying that Aunty Belle, Stogie, and I are condemning specific persons themselves. You are implying that we hate certain Arabs. I definitely do not.” I’ve never cited any particular “Arabs” that you or anyone else hates – by “Arabs” I think you mean Muslims, which is the specific group I think we’re supposed to be talking about.

No, I don’t mean Muslims. I mean Arabs, the specific people in the Middle East. I don’t mean particular people, I mean the people as a group of individuals. If you’re talking about individual Muslims too, I don’t hate them either. I disagree with them. Disagreeing with them is much, much different than hating them. I hate Islam. (How many times am I going to have to make that distinction?)

you understand yourself as not truly disliking Muslims because “they’re capable of changing their beliefs” – to yours, I presume?

I define myself as not a bigot because they’re capable of changing.

Tolerance vs. Intolerance:

Intolerance is becoming something in many people’s minds that traditionally it wasn’t. People are being labeled intolerant because they refuse to say that another person’s beliefs are just as true as theirs. They’re being labeled that because they say that another person is (God forbid) wrong. However, I have always believed in absolutes. There is absolute truth, and absolute falsehood, and so on. Those absolutes demand that some people are wrong and that you shouldn’t change just to accommodate falsehood. So, in reality, you can’t stand me because I stand strong in my beliefs. That’s intolerance toward what you view as intolerance. Not to mention that Muslims aren’t exactly the most tolerant people out there. Remember the Danish incident?

Religion:

My point was that you, as an outsider should not be saying that you know more about a religion than the insiders. Yes, you can study at one of the best religious schools in the nation, but you still don’t have the scoop of what insiders have. The imams, clerics, etc. in the West, as I have said before, want to paint a wonderful picture of Islam. The communists did the same thing all through the ‘20s, ‘30s, and early ‘40s. People had virtually no clue about what was really going on in Russia.

By the way, just so everyone knows who keeps on saying this, I don’t watch FOX News. I don’t even get cable or satellite. I get my news largely from NBC, a little bit of ABC, the News Hour, BBC, and of course the blogosphere.

Mullahs:

Now those are the minority of mullahs, imams, clerics that speak out against terror.

Scripture:

Don’t even get me started on your example. Just read my blog.

Terrorism:

That paragraph still sounds like you’re giving an excuse for terrorism.

The major difference between them is that one attacks civilians willingly, whereas the other focuses on civilians primarily for their attacks.

I’m sorry, that was a typo. I meant to say that one attacks civilians willingly, whereas the other focuses on military (guerrilla Hezbollah troops) targets primarily for their attacks. If you want to dispute it further, first read my post that I linked to.

Between 2000, the year that Israel withdrew from Lebanon, and July 2006, exactly one Israeli civilian was killed by Hezbollah. The border during that period was extremely safe and stable by historical standards. Now, just this summer, we’re closing in on a thousand combined Israeli and Lebanese civilian deaths. All over the world there have been sustained truces for long periods of time with very low intensity conflict that has served to protect civilians. North and South Korea. Taiwan and China. The US and the USSR, East and West Germany – with the conflicts there coming to an end without warfare.

What does that have to do with present situations? The border was peaceful, now it’s not. Why? Because Hezbollah flared up the whole conflict again by kidnapping Israeli troops and launching rockets.

True Religions:

It’s a matter of faith. It’s something I cannot convince you of, Percival. You can see the fruits of Christianity as opposed to Islam and compare them (rather, contrast them): Science vs. backwardness, prosperous economies vs. oil-based and largely poor economies, a resemblance of love with the poring out of charity and aid vs. hate and terrorism, etc. Even these, however will not convince you. You need the Holy Spirit to work in you.

My story on Rush Limbaugh:

I did not tell that story in self-righteousness at all. I told it to contrast Christianity and Islam. Jesus said, “There is but one way to the Father, and that by me… I am the way, the truth, and the life… I am the door.” He didn’t say you could find salvation in Allah, or Muhammad, or your good works (which is what Islam is, a religion of good works). Percival then goes on to say that I can’t think rationally, without pointing out any holes in the story why Islamic clerics didn’t condemn 9/11 and censure Al-Qaeda.

I’ll say it one more time: I don’t hate the people; I hate the ideology.

Yes, the majority of Muslims don’t go out and try to blow up as many “infidels” as they can. They have responsibilities that they have to attend to. I might add also that many, many Muslims are nominal. The fact that the majority of Muslims don’t do those things doesn’t mean that Islam is therefore kind and gentle. Islam does not condemn terror. Neither do the majority of Muslims. What about Muhammad? Are you saying that he didn’t understand his own religion? He went out and did a modern form of terrorism: the “convert or die” approach.

you do have prejudice against Muslims

How many times do I have to say this?