It is a little like two sports teams, though it is not really a game.

One team (Muslims) keeps losing some of its players to the other side. And these players turn out to be the most intellecutally and morally alert, who have finally had enough of Islam, and find in Christianity something far superior to what they had been born into, and unable for so long to question, and afraid to leave.

The other team (Infidels) loses players too. It loses to Islam the Spiritual Searcher who takes His Own Spiritual Search Very Seriously (indeed, often wants to tell you all about it, and more than once) who finds, in Islam, What I Had Been Looking For. There are fewer of such people now; some got caught up, 20 years ago, or 10 -- one well-known example suffers from the Weiss-Schwartz Syndrome, a phrase which you may google to find out more.

But those slightly bizarre souls are so few as to be easily counted.

Less bizarre, as individuals, and more understandable, from the viewpoint of sociology and psychology and all those things you should never have majored in (but instead taken the survey course in Shakespeare, and that other one in European history), are the economically and psychically marginal (this phrase also covers the bizarre described above). Prisoners, who have a grudge against The System, some immigrants who can be persuaded that Islam offers The Other Way, all those who wish to have a Complete Guide to the Universe as well as a Total Regulation of Life (both for the same low price!), those many people who wish for the false "brotherhood" of the Umma, the Community of Believers into which, they fervently hope, they will find a way to dissolve their own being, to escape the pain of existence. Well, it's a trade-off: you stop thinking altogether, you lose some, if not all, of your moral sense, and in return -- you get that special kit, with the guide to what's Haram and what Halal, the all-purpose Qur'an, the bedtime stories of the Hadith, and the Inspirational Tale of Muhamamd, a kind of historical Superhero for -- what's that silly phrase -- "children of all ages."

Anre you one of those people who believes in Fair Trade? Well, sounds like a fair trade to me.

Posted by: Hugh at July 6, 2005 8:47 AM

This reminds me of a certain moment, a few years ago, when suddenly all the progressive and alternative red-green magazines; those that used to stand for gender equality, gay equality etc. along with all kinds of issues of justice; when they suddenly started praising the "family values" of chastity, strict gender roles, women staying at home and veiling themselves when eventually going out - they started praising these phenomena as something new and exiting, as a courageous choice made by particularly progressive young women who'd found solidarity and unity with "the Other": those who'd converted to Islam. Suddenly, the stay-at-home thing became glamorous and the veil became sexy, and the new sisters were presented as heroes who dared to do something that other, more conservative, inert and cowardly ones would never think about doing. Meanwhile, while converting to Islam, and adopting its medieval desert values, has become so sexy in the eyes of the progressives in its perceived novelty, unconventionality and rebelliousness (against the equal rights that have become oh so mainstream), we'll still remain waiting for the progressives' reports about those reverse conversions that really do take courage, and guts, and intelligence, and rebellious spirit, to go through with.

Posted by: rahel at July 6, 2005 9:28 AM

Hugh: "who have finally had enough of Islam, and find in Christianity something far superior to what they had been born into, and unable for so long to question, and afraid to leave."

King replies: Hmmm, so you've finally shown your cards and made this entire thing a "My religion is better than your religion" thing, eh?

Needless to say, Christianity is certainly not "far superior" to anything. Christianity has endured its dark times, too, some of which are not in the too distant past. The burning of crosses in the American South in the 1950's and 60's comes to mind, as does the rape and pilliage of South and Central America by the European Christians who spread their religion and language violently. Equally, French Christians spread their religion and language across Northern Africa. Ignoring all of this obvious history is being intellectually dishonest.

Islam is going through its awakening now, before our eyes. Indeed, Islam has major problems with its empowered radical right which is what I assume this website is getting at, sans the hate.

Posted by: KingTolerance at July 6, 2005 10:33 AM

Rahel: "...equal rights that have become oh so mainstream"

King: Main stream equal rights? The Christian right denies gay rights and wishes to restrict reproductive rights, some churches even forbidding condoms let alone abortion. Moreover, many Christian sects keep pronounced limits on women. Some churches in rural areas still have separate entrances for men and women (Amish and Mennonite, for example). These Christian groups have managed to challenge the separation of church and state in the US.

Islam has a radical branch that has political and military support, therefore, violence is a natural result. The IRA in Ireland had the same backing and see what happened? Christian on Christian terrorism.

"Its the politics, not the reliigon...."

Posted by: KingTolerance at July 6, 2005 10:41 AM

King Tolerance-

You are forgetting the one simple difference between a particular Christian sect and Islam.
If you don't like it, you can leave. No harm, no foul, and your head will remain firmly attached to your body.

Please stop the moral equivalence posturing, it's a waste of everyone's time. We are quite able to understand the difference between imperfections in Christian practice and the wholesale insanity that is Islam today.

Posted by: treehugger at July 6, 2005 11:20 AM

Treehugger: "You are forgetting the one simple difference between a particular Christian sect and Islam."

King: No, I am the only one who here who can see a radical from a moderate! What you suggest is the radical interpretation and then you are applying it to the entire religion. As said in the Koran: "There is no compulsion in religion."

Treehugger: "Please stop the moral equivalence posturing, it's a waste of everyone's time."

King: Of course its a waste of your time, you are here to read "headlines" and crack jokes about them. What you call moral equivalence and posturing I call the other side of the story. Ignoring it makes you a hypocrite.

Tree: "We are quite able to understand the difference between imperfections in Christian practice and the wholesale insanity that is Islam today."

King: I don't think so. Once again, you are accepting the behaviors and interpretations of a minority to speak "wholesale" for the 1.2 billion people who practice Islam all over the globe. These people, I might add, are not goiong to change their faith because you have a problem with their religion.
Indeed, the radicals are dangerous, evil and do not speak for the whole of Islam. Turning a blind eye to the the myriad of political and cultural factors that allow radicalism to gain such strength in lieu of blaming the religion what Hitler did in the 1930's.

I'm just the messenger, sorry to bring you down a few notches.

Posted by: KingTolerance at July 6, 2005 11:59 AM

Needless to say, Christianity is certainly not "far superior" to anything. Christianity has endured its dark times, too, some of which are not in the too distant past. The burning of crosses in the American South in the 1950's and 60's comes to mind, as does the rape and pilliage of South and Central America by the European Christians who spread their religion and language violently. Equally, French Christians spread their religion and language across Northern Africa. Ignoring all of this obvious history is being intellectually dishonest.

Christianity not superior to anything? Not superior to the Aztec religions that required kidnapping people and cutting their hearts out to appease idols? If we are measuring world religions by their capacity to engender respect for human rights, then I think Christianity is going to come in way above the bottom. But this is a rather academic argument. I would argue that Christianity is the best of all religions, but your post wasn't really about Christianity, it was about Christians, and their use or abuse of religion to justify violence.

The past and present crimes of Christendom should not be forgotten. If we were Americans observing the arrival of the Conquistadors, I could apply the same argument as you have done on this site. I could say that the Christianity practiced by the invaders was a distortion of the true meaning of the religion, which is a religion of peace. I could say that most Christians lived peaceful lives and had no intention of coming to America and harming the natives. I could point out that the native American religions also involved a fair bit of violence. But although all those things are true, it would not mean that the European invaders did not pose a clear and grave threat to the peoples of the American continents!

An American might legitimately ask what role Christianity played in imperialism. The imperialists used Christianity to justify their actions. The "peaceful Christians" who populated Europe were mostly ignorant of and uninterested in imperialism, but I imagine most that knew about it were happy to see the "savages" brought under Christian domination. Therefore Christianity, as practised then, contributed to the problems of the colonised nations and provided a fig leaf for imperial aggression and greed. The fact that Christianity (and the Christians of centuries later) may not actually approve of violence is academic, because what determined the fate of empires was not Christianity, but the Christians of the time.

The same questions can be directed at Islamic terorrism. The jihadists are claiming to follow the tradition of Mohammed, and regularly use the Qur'an to justify their actions. Therefore it becomes very pertinent to ask: how credible are their claims? Can they be refuted from within Islam? We can argue all day long about whether Islam, if considered from a sufficiently abstract perspective, is peaceful. But any hypothetical version of Islam is not really relevant to the future of the struggle to maintain a free world. What matters is Islam as it is understood and practised now, how its teachings can be used to justify violence, and how peaceful elements within Islam can counter the exhortation to violence from Islamic principles. These things need to be examined thoroughly and need to inform our strategy in the present war.

Blithe statements from Bush about Islam being a religion of peace will not help one iota, because potential terrorists are not taking theology lessons from him. They are learning from people who know the Qur'an forwards and backwards and who use it to preach hatred and violence. We urgently need to confront this fact and consider what to do about it. Are there any Muslim scholars who can argue that the terrorist theology is wrong? Do you know of any?

Posted by: Viking5 at July 6, 2005 12:21 PM

KT
Ah yes, the "moderate" muslim.

If there are so many moderates, as you claim, where are their voices?
If they outnumber the radicals, where are their voices?
If they are angry about their religion being hijacked, where are their voices?
If they love this country, and believe in its founding principals, where are their voices?
If their neighbors are being abused, tortured, and murdered by radicals, where are their voices?

Please direct me to some substantive examples.

I keep hearing claims about moderate muslims, but they seem to be an awfully elusive species.

***Silence implies consent***

Posted by: treehugger at July 6, 2005 12:33 PM

Treehugger:

You missed KT's howler reference to "no compulsion in religion" that ignores 1400 years of conquest, dhimmitude and the ultimate punishment conferred on apostates who leave the mother faith.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at July 6, 2005 12:55 PM

Waterdragon52-
Head slap!!!

Of course, being put in prison for changing your religion isn't really coercion as defined in "Mo's Dictionary for the Islamically Impaired".

Posted by: treehugger at July 6, 2005 1:29 PM

Disregarding 'kkintolerance's silly outburst (which is negated by the fact that several of the atheist, liberal and anti-Christian members of this blog have stated that they would rather that all Muslims converted to Christianity, which is far less threatening to them than head-cutting, stone-throwing, honour-killing Islam), I would like to mention the two kinds of people whom I found most frequently converted to Islam: those who, having grown in a modern environment, have no knowledge whatever of their own religious tradition, and, coming upon Islam out of nowhere, discover in it all the things they could have discovered much less damagingly in Christianity if they had not been poisoned against it when young; and, conversely, those who, having a certain habit of religious performance, meet Muslims, are struck by their devotion and by the superficial similarities with Christianity or Hebraism, allow themselves to be drawn into Muslim practice = perhaps for sentimental reasons, wanting to marry a Muslim - and surrender to the enemy without any real notion of what they have surrendered. Islam, unlike other religions, is easy to join and very hard to leave; there is no process of initiation, no catechumenate, no ceremony of admission. And your throat cut if you change your mind. A genuine honey trap.

Posted by: Paolo at July 6, 2005 2:52 PM

Paolo:

They probably also have underlying mental health issues in order to be so mesmerized as to be blind to the very sinister side of Islam. I have to wonder, in observing this apparent resurgence of fundamentalist Islam, how people don't seem to connect it, with all its trappings, with the cult movements of the 1970s like the Moonies, the Hari Krishnas or the Scientologists, but far more pernicious and malevolent because of the romanticism of the Arabian Nights, Lawrence of Arabia, etc..

Posted by: waterdragon52 at July 6, 2005 3:57 PM

I recall about ten years ago watching John Hagee rail against the Clinton administration (on the Trinity Broadcasting Network), while thinking to myself; "What an asshole!"

Only last month, I caught one of his sermons while surfing the channels. He was contrasting quotes from the Bible and the Koran to demonstrate that Christianity and Islam are not "sister faiths." This time I thought to myself; "What happened to the backbone in the other churches?"

We owe a lot to the courage of these people who prosthletize in Islamic countries. The fact that they reject evolution and have bad taste in furniture matters little. They are civilization's unsung heroes.

Posted by: Andrei Rublev at July 6, 2005 6:12 PM

Mr. King of Tolerance -- Your habit of answering in a sort of 3rd person reminds me of Bob Dole.

Posted by: former liberal WF at July 6, 2005 6:58 PM

Former Lib: Your speech pattern reminds me of Bob Dole, Mr. King.

King: How strange. I haven't been taking my Viagra lately nor am I a wounded veteran of WWII. Perhaps Mr. Dole and I have huge egos in common...

Former Lib: Good call, King. I admire your reasoning pattern and how open you are to new ideas. By the way, do you know where I can join up to bring Muslims over to the Christian side? I think it would make the world a safer place.

King: I beg to differ. Christianity is the mother of all evil religions. Worse than the cult of Huitzilopochtli. You need to learn more tolerance, Former Lib, and admit you and your culture is twisted and wrong. That is the only way to conquer Islam -- first you must admit that your culture is inferior.

Former Lib: Gee. I bow before your superior intellect. Thank goodness you post here.

Posted by: former liberal WF at July 6, 2005 7:12 PM

KT, whatever you think of other religions, (and I don't think much of any religion either) the fact remains that there is no exit route in Islam.

This is not a radical position. This is a position that all muslims take.

That's why I don't understand those who convert to Islam, when they should know full well that they could never leave without fearing for their lives.

Posted by: Voltaire at July 6, 2005 9:23 PM

KT: Christianity is EEEEEVil!
KT: Islam isn't so bad.
KT is obviously a muslim.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at July 6, 2005 10:05 PM

Carolyn2:

Not necessarily, just someone with a few personality disorders.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at July 7, 2005 8:36 AM