Sunday, June 04, 2006

Noel Guinane and I ...

... have been discussing Islam in connection with this post: I meant to post this yesterday ...
Now Dave Lull sends me a link to Roger Scruton writing about The trouble with Islam, the European Union - and Francis Fukuyama .
There are wonderful turns of phrase in this piece, but this I think is the money quote:

You can squeeze Islam into the process of universal history only if you overlook such facts as these: that the sharia does not recognise secular law; that it punishes apostasy with death; that it accords only "treaty" rights to Christians and Jews and no rights at all to pagans. Moreover it contains no intrinsic principle of reform, since "the gate of ijtihad (creative jurisprudence) is closed". For these reasons, it seems to me, Islamism is not merely a vast and growing problem for western democracies; it is also an insuperable problem for the universalist view of human history.

3 comments:

  1. Anonymous1:48 PM

    I read Roger Scruton's article and can see how his conclusion - "that the march of history towards liberal democracy is a local achievement of Christian culture" - could appear to make logical sense, but I think the best parts of liberal democracy are in fact an achievement of the secular West.

    On his assertion that Islam does not play a part in universal history, how can it not? It is a part of our human history, as are the Christian crusades. Also, Sharia law is not the governing law of all Islamic societies in the world. To overlook this obvious fact suggests a bias on Mr. Scruton's part.

    Go after and punish the people responsible for blowing people up by all means. Whether they carry out their crimes in the name of Islam or the Holy Pink Elephant of Rhode Island, they are murderers and deserve to be treated as such. I am not in favor of trying to appease or understand criminals. But I am also not in favor of condemning every believer in a religion - Christian, Muslim, Buddist or Hindu - because of the actions of a minority of their believers who are trying to hijack their religion for personal power.

    By making out that all of Islam is fatally flawed in reaction to the media's relentless criticism of Christianity, moderate Islamic believers are being turned into our enemy even though they are, essentially, on our side. No one likes to be villified for their beliefs. The Bible is as full of violence as is the Koran. A case could be made that the West is as decadent as Sodom and Gomorrah. You could say all atheists are immoral drug-taking perverts. But it's not true. And while it is not true that Christianity is the religion of choice for paedophiles, it also not true that Islam is the religion of choice for every radical crazy. Remember, the Oklahoma bombing predated 9/11 and those radicals were homegrown, with no Islamic affiliation. No one - no religion, no country, no organization - has a monopoly on insanity. That is regrettably a human condition.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, I'm certainly not in favor of condemning every member of any religion. And I completely agree that one should call murderer a murderer and act accordingly. There does, however, seem to be a significant segment of Muslims who favor the establishment of sharia law in their respective countries. I suppose one could say that if that's what they want, that's their business. But it does lead one to consider whether sharia law really should be the basis for any country's legal system nowadays. It does strike me as more than a tad brutal. I think we are largely in agreement, except that I think Islam has to exercise a good deal more control over its violent adherents, who may be a minority, but seem to be a rather large and vocal one. I have already said that I think history demonstrates that it is wise to keep religion and government at a safe distance from one another. I don't think this needs to be taken to the extreme of banning nativity scenes and insisting on "happy holidays" instead of "merry Christmas." But government ought to be secular. As somebody once said, render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, etc."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous7:00 AM

    I agree. I never say "Happy Holidays." It's "Merry Christmas!" I was often wished "Happy Hanukah!" in New York because I looked a little Jewish (something about my nose, aka the sun dial) and I always said, "Happy Hanukah!" back to be polite. I never said, "Hey, what's the matter with you? Can't you see I'm an Irish Catholic?" Can't understand why people get offended when someone wishes them any kind of happiness, whatever religion or secular holiday it belongs to, for example, "Happy 4th of July!" (to which I always respond, "Hey, what's the matter with you? Can't you see I'm an Irish Catholic?!"). And my children are always in the school play and attend the school prayers. The Jehovah's Witnesses keep their children out, but I'll save that one for another conversation.

    Sharia law does have brutal aspects and I agree that it's out of date, but the majority of the Muslim world have largely secular constitutions. Based on what you've just said and our previous conversations, it's obvious we both want to see it stay that way.

    Saudi Arabia is probably the most extreme of the Muslim states. In Iran there is a theocracy, but the only way the Mullahs can enforce it is through total control over the country's military and security system. In Saudi Arabia, the people seem to willingly subscribe to extreme Islam and much of the terrorist's recruitment occurs through Saudi Arabia, for example, exporting their system of education throughout the Middle and Central East as well as North Africa. It's the government of Iran, and its program of state-sponsored terrorism, that is a problem, but it's the people of Saudi Arabia. I understand that the government of Saudi Arabia could be considered our allies, but it is the people of Iran who in my experience are moderate in their views and admire American ideals. How we handle the problems we have with their leaders is important. Last thing America wants to build in the Middle East is a consistent reputation for foisting their culture on others through force. It would be better if the situation could be handled in a way that the people of the Middle East, especially Iranians, do not come to look at America as an aggressor that needs to be resisted.

    ReplyDelete