In the past few weeks I have argued that people must stop labeling Islam as evil, and to just focus on the issues at hand. This meant, I said, talking directly about Sharia and preventing its spread.
Clearly Sharia (and other Fascist Islamic Supremacist tools) are linked to Islam, however I believe that I can separate the two. Furthermore, I believe that by separating the foundations and constructs of Islam from the broad label "Islam" it will A) protect Muslims who do not wish to impose Sharia on us and B) be more effective at combating the spread Islamism.
I will explain further by quoting from a couple of conversations I have had in the last week.
You [Aka. Me!] claim saying 'anti-Shariaization' is better than saying 'anti-Islamization'.
Why is it better?
Robert Spencer would probably say that you cannot be a devout Muslim and NOT want Sharia to rule over everyone.
If the foundations [Sharia law etc.] are the same as the building itself [Islam]... maybe there is no difference.
I replied as follows:
I may agree with Robert Spencer there - but I don't need to discuss Islam.
Specifically fighting Sharia law will affect Islam, but it will not harm any Muslims who do not wish to impose Sharia law on our societies.
It's the difference between being against Judaism, or being against Halacha.
If someone was anti-Judaism you would be defensive.
If they were anti-Halacha, you could more easily shrug your shoulders.
I think we should fight Sharia on the specifics of what the law actually represents. Muslims can debate the theology themselves.
I believe this would be vastly more successful than the anti-Islam positions that most anti-Sharia groups are propagating.
On a previous occasion I also wrote:
I am sure most people in the UK who are not Muslim, would not take kindly to an organisation that suggests all Muslims are Islamists, unless they are afraid of leaving Islam. If I went around and said Islam is evil to the core and there are either Islamists and Muslims who want to leave Islam - I would look foolish. Muslims are everywhere here. I know Muslims who are not Islamists and don't wish to leave Islam... this simple bit of personal knowledge would be enough to completely discredit the entire anti-Sharia organisation... which is currently not doing buch more than creating climate of suspicion and fear of all Muslims.
Maybe not all these Muslims are "real" Muslims... I don't know - but even if they are not I don't really care. What I do know is that they think they are Muslim and their identities are linked to Islam... yet they are good decent people. Saying that Islam is evil doesn't get us anywhere. It is up to the theologians to discuss religious tenants - and up to the individuals to make up their own individual minds as to whether or not Islam is for them or not.
If we fight Sharia it will force Muslims to discuss Islam... but discussing Islam is their job, not ours.
I do not want to allow the establishment of a state within a state... it will not have positive ends. I think we should make efforts to fight Islamic supremisism, and that includes fighting against the establishment of Islamic law in our societies.
I am open to criticism... please share your views with me. Thanks.
2 comments:
Steven,
Several points, re Hachalic Jewish law, it is basically voluntary, if an individual gets tired of following it, they can simply not follow it or even walk away from any aspect of the Jewsih religion they don't like or even entirely from the religion. Further most aspects of Jewish law don't adverseley affect non Jews, or do so only in minor ways.
As to sharia law, the muslim religion appears to make it compulsory to members of its own religion and demands respect of sharoa law from non-muslims. This is intolerable in a free western society--where we have tradition and laws for freedom of religion, speech, etc. Our culture and society in the west are somehwat fragile and we cannot have a growing demograpich coming in that "disrespects" our culture to the poing of hostility. That is why I believe Islamists who advocate sharia law be established in the host country should be denied visa entry and that non-citizen islamists likewise be legally deported if they are sharia advocates.
Hey Felix, :)
I agree with you. The thing I was trying to touch on is seperating Sharia from Islam.
To quote two parts of your comment:
1: the muslim religion appears to make it [Sharia law] compulsory to members of its own religion and demands respect of sharoa law from non-muslims.
2: Islamists who advocate sharia law be established in the host country should be denied visa entry and that non-citizen islamists likewise be legally deported if they are sharia advocates.
When you put those two together it begs the question:
Are we fighting all Muslims (since Sharia is a core part of Islam) or are we fighting "Islamists"?
Post a Comment