hmm. shocking - no comments over here. I guess Islamists are only happy when defending themselves against the evil Infidels.

Dicks.

Correction, Dawn: they're only happy when they're on the attack.

I would say that the comments on the other post were sophistry, except for the fact that the folks attacking Eric seem to really believe there is no such thing as an Islamist.

Perusing through the comments certainly makes it seem as though some of the invective came from people who didn't read past the title of the post.

Some of the other comments, from myself included, had more to do with a "one-size-fits-all" criticism of arranged marriages without either understanding or explaining that there is *such* a diverse view of what an arranged marriage is, any broad criticism is bound to be rejected.

However, Eric can be forgiven, since this is not a one-post subject by any means. I think his attempt was to draw out the practice of arranged marriages in many Islamist countries, that has devolved into a brutal suppression of individual expression.

I would have to say he succeeded rather well, judging by some of the inflamed outbursts, hehee!

And oh, those claims of increased violence and backlash against Muslims and people who "look like" muslims, are a little over-rated. Not to be dismissed, but definitely overrated.

Isn't the phrase "agitated and defensive Muslims" redundant?

What's striking to me is that there are so few instances of leading Islamic scholars overseas, and especially in the Middle East, who will confront the so-called Islamic error the Bin Ladenites are committing. Instead they focus all of their energy on how WE misunderstand Islam.

Islam is not at war with the West. It's at war with itself. The problem is, the one's who claim Islam is Peace don't know it yet. If they don't do something about it soon, they have little to complain about when the dust settles. Their religion has been hijacked and if they want us to believe what they say, the need us to be convinced that they're ready to rush the cockpit.

I'm curious, was it ever possible to trace back where all the people on the other thread came from? With minor exceptions they clearly aren't regular blog readers (imagine their reaction to LGF, DailyPundit, or the Rott!).

Good observation Ian, they came from an MSNBC link. At first I was overwhelmed thinking I had to start from absolute scratch in answering them, but it turned out for the best, and I wouldn't have done this second post otherwise.

It easy to forget that not everyone reads blogs.

For more from the moderate Muslims at Islam-Online. I emailed them when they put quotation marks around the word terrorists in an article about the Moscow terror attack.

Here's what I got back from "Aziz" :

"As to our use of quotation marks, it reflects the fact that the word is not ours, possibly for a number of reasons. In this case, perhaps it is because we do not believe that Chechen fighters are terrorists."

I explicitly asked Islam-Online, what would they call people who captured 800 completely innocent people and threatened to kill everyone of them. They ain't terrorists according the moderate Muslims.

Until I read and learned about Islam, I was sympathetic, now I believe Islam is a death cult, designed to produce psychopathic murderers.

I wish people would quit automatically labeling people who happen to have been born in certain regions as "Muslims", "Christians", etc.

On the other hand, those who do violence in the name of a religion should be called "criminals" because that's what they are, same as those who do violence for any other reason. Don't call them "Muslims" any more than racist sociopaths who bombed a synagogue and murdered some gay people should be called "Christians".

I don't identify as a "Christian" because I do not feel a part of and cannot believe in any of the religions and organizations known as such.
By some accident I happen to have been born in a country with large numbers of people calling themselves such -- but that doesn't make me in the slightest a "Christian". Some of my family members did so believe, and from the earliest age I was taken to churches where in spite of learning to sing (and enjoy) over 200 hymns and gospel songs I never really believed what they professed to believe. Later we went to some other churches that professed other ideas but while again I loved the music, the ideas did not make sense to me, nor did they comfort my earthly afflictions.

How many people really, truly believe in the myriad of so called "Christian" religions anyway? And it's impossible to tell how many of over a billion persons all over the world who get labeled as "Muslims" actually believe literally in the Koran and/or ever attend a mosque. Doing so, even regularly and for years, doesn't mean someone really believes in it. Many are simply trying to please their parents or other family members, or hoping it will help their children find strength to cope with life, and otherwise would never go. Others go just for the socializing. (Or the music, at least in many "Christian" churches. The only thing I can find meaningful about Christian churches is they usually have better music than other religions! Were religion a matter of "the best music", then I'd be a Christian for sure.)

"Religion" for the vast majority of people is really just a sort of ancestor respect and worship ritual, like "pagan" rites are. The same thing is just as true of so called "Jews", "Hindus", "Buddhists", and others.

Therefore, the word "Muslim" should not automatically be applied to any person because there's no way of knowing if they really believe in the various teachings and obligations of "Islam" or not.

It seems to be very important to some people to publicly label themselves as "Muslims", "Christians", etc. Why? This is anti-spiritual -- earthy, mortal, political, even racist. True faith should be a private matter between yourself and your conscience, counselor, god, etc. Were spiritual beliefs treated in this way instead of with big public displays (and buildings, labels, pride, self-righteousness, arrogance, anger, and bitterness that naturally follow them), we would truly have peace on earth.

Except, Dorothy, the current wave of Islamic violence is committed by Muslims who are doing so explicitly due to religious principals or religious-motivated reasons. They are an increasingly growing part of the Islamic movement, and it's up to their fellow Muslims to discount them and push extremism to the side. That hasn't happened yet.

This so-called "rebuttal" is pointless. You don't address the core idiocy of your prior post. You arrogantly claim that western courtship and dating rituals are somehow superior to traditional arranged marriages. You even have the gall to equate arranged marriage with genital mutilation.

Sameer, I don't believe it is "arrogant" to express your opinion on something. All I said was that I think the free, uncoerced ability to meet and form a relationship with whoever you want is a core element of modern democratic life. If people wish to allow themselves to be arranged for by their relatives, friends or a retarded TV show, that's their business.

"Voluntary" - and I mean truly voluntary and not obligatory just beneath the surface - is the key here.

I've done quite a bit of pickup reading here to get up to speed. I was amazed at comments to Eric's original post; so many seemed bound and determined to blow the nit up to the size of an elephant and beat it to death.

At least, Eric, here the Islamists can't aggitate to have you put on trial for "defaming" their religion as is/was being done in France and being pursued in England. [Note: yes, "Islamist" is a real word meaning a specific group -- aka Islamofascists.]

Ah, the Anecdote Moment ... several years back I was a friend with a woman from Kuwaiit (our children were in high school band). She was a cheerful, positive, hardworking mom. Married 22 years with 4 children. Her husband died suddenly in the 2nd year of our acquaintance. In the ensuing months she found herself at a cultural crossroads. She confided her marriage to a much older man had been an arranged one. She never really gave much thought to things like "love" or "romance." Those were not the priorities she was raised with. Duty to please the family and to be a "good wife" was something she, as a female, was inculcated with. Her feelings, her desires, were all to be sublimated to her family, then her husband, even to her children who were the "property" of her husband. Now, suddenly, she was Single in America. When she started dating, her oldest son, all of 17 at the time, was aghast. He figured HE was now the head of the house and his role was to rule his mom.

oops... another subject for another time!

Eventually, mom met a very nice American widower and married him. She confessed to me she had never been "in love" before, she had no idea through 22 years of a "good" marriage what a black hole there had been in her life until she met her new husband. She could hardly express the joy she felt at actually being treated as a valuable and equal partner, not an unpaid servant and broodmare. She vowed never to return to Kuwaiit to subject both her daughters and sons to a culture that valued males and devalued females.

BTW...she was not a Muslim, but a Coptic Christian.

Can arranged marriages "work"? Yes. Are they preferable to going the admittedly risky, fraught with drama, individualistic (and adult) way of meeting one's own partner and establishing a loving relationship? IMO..absolutely NO.

One last thing in regards to moderate Muslims being strangely silent about the atrocities committed by their fundie brethren -- Dennis Prager has a wonderful article When Silence Isn't Golden.

"Whatever our religion, we who are religious need to acknowledge that religion does not guarantee goodness. The sobering truth is that it is quite possible to believe in God, in Allah, in Christ and do great evil. A major 18th century rabbi, the Gaon of Vilna ("genius of Vilnius"), compared the Torah, the book he believed was dictated by God, to rain. Just as rain, he explained, produces both beautiful flowers and poisonous weeds, so, too, religion can produce both beautiful and poisonous human beings."

Shalom.

Quite thoughtful, touching, and poignant - thanks Darleen. The rabbi quote about rain is very deep and insightful. Thanks for taking the time and effort.

Darleen's closing quote reminds me of Steven Weinberg's trenchant observation: "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil--that takes religion."

While perhaps not unexceptionally true, this is true enough ... and sad enough.

Thought you might be interested in this answer from IslamOnline.net in the interestingly entitled Fatwa " 'May Allah Curse all Americans' Never Say Amen!"

--- (quoted material begins) ---
But here comes the question: How then would one explain the attitudes of some Muslims who pour rain of curses on non-Muslims, the Jews and Americans in general?

Regarding this, it is to be stated that every occasion dictates a special way of behaving. At times of peace, it is better to supplicate Allah to guide disbelievers. But at wartime, the reality dictates supplicating Allah to grant Muslims victory over warring disbelievers, just as they themselves would normally do, seeking victory in the war they launch on Muslims. This is the normal course of war. On supplicating Allah to turn their wives into widows and their children into orphans is no more than a supplication for their defeat. It involves supplicating Allah to humiliate the arrogant people and help us vanquish the oppressors. Such supplication should never be construed as seeking the demolition of non-Muslims entirely. Rather, it is directed against the oppressors among non-Muslims, it aims those who launch war against Muslims and against humanity. When people invoke Allah's Wrath on any non-Muslim country, like the US or Israel, this is merely an outburst of anger filling their minds towards inhuman acts or schemes of oppressions orchestrated by both two countries against innocent people. So the curses are normally directed to the acts and their perpetrators, not to innocent people who have no hand in such crimes.
--- (quoted material ends) ---

In other words, instead of requesting that the Big Guy Upstairs correct the stupid infidels' erroneous ways, it's better to just let it all hang out and send a screed up to Allah the Most Gracious and Most Merciful asking Him to turn all of the infidels' women into widows and children into orphans. Makes sense to me -- sounds like just the kind of thing a gracious and merciful supreme being would be likely to do.

About arranged marriage, as a Muslim who was born and raised in a non-Arab Muslim country, I have seen all kinds of arranged marriages. They range from the family arranging the chance to meet prospective brides in cultures where there is not much intermingling of sexes to the bride and groom meeting for the first time on their wedding day to forced marriage. In my opinion, the whole concept is wrong. I have also heard a lot of arguments from defenders of arranged marriage that it results in fewer divorces which I believe is disingenuous (sp?) since those cultures do not allow people, especially women, the freedom to do what they like.

Do arranged marriages have anything to do with Islam? I am not a religious scholar, but I believe that although it is more cultural (since it is prevalent among all religions in Asia & Africa), it IS usually justified in the name of religion. So even if it is not supported by Quran, in most peoples' minds it is part of Islam.

As you go up the economic and education ladders in those countries, the prevalence of arranged marriage, especially its objectionable varieties, decreases a lot.

Now on to bigger things than arranged marriage. After the terrorist attacks of Sept 11, I have seen a lot of demands among warbloggers for Muslims to speak out against OBL and his ilk. I understand this demand and consider it necessary for moderate Muslims to act against extremists everywhere, something that is not happening much and even when some Muslim governments (as opposed to people) are taking action they are going about it in a bad way by imprisoning people without trial, torturing them, etc. (the usual practice in those dictatorships.) The only difference from before is that now we in the US like their actions since they are against our enemies.

I don't deny that there is a lot of anti-semitic sentiment in the Muslim world nowadays. There is a lot of anti-US sentiment also. Fundamentalist Islam is on the rise everywhere except probably Iran. People in Muslim countries are getting a very raw deal from their governments. However, instead of trying to better conditions a lot of them are latching onto hate. However, we should also remember that the news we get from the Muslim world is somewhat distorted (just like the news/info I got about the US when I lived there had very little to with the reality in the US). People there may not like the US but they are more concerned with their survival. In my opinion, we should let them live as they want (if they want to be religous and not like the US, so be it) as long as they remain within limits. This obviously applies to the general populace and not terrorist groups.

On a more personal note, I sometimes find the demand for condemnation of the fundamentalists on the blogs to be problematic. I read blogs (both left and right) regularly and I find the repitition annoying. In real life, nobody has ever asked me to condemn terrorists I guess because they know me and my views in general.

Then how does John Carpenter's "Vampires" fit into this, seeing as according to Mr. Carpenter Vampires were created by the Catholic Church? If you want to talk about taking misleading information and making movies, television shows, books, etc. out of them, The Catholic Church takes as big of a pounding as anyone, and what's more, they do it on every major network and magazine. What if someone was making fun of Jewish people on David Letterman? The only way it would fly is if he was Jewish. The fact that Catholics get dumped on is not so surprising, what is surprising is that it is totally, 100% PC and socially acceptable for people to do so.

It is sad when we catergorize people by religion and when people choose freinds, groups, etc based on religion.

Like here in Indonesia, they took Abu Basyir into custody, his followers rioted against police. It is also common in Indonesia for people to be paid to join demostrations, so we dont know which ones were really his true followers.

Muslim leaders of this country spoke out against the way he was handled, 'how they could do this to a muslim?', they were saying.

It is sad that because Abu Basyir is a criminal that happens to be a muslim, or a muslim that happens to be a criminal, muslim leaders are immediatley condemning this as an attack against islam. They dont see that he is a CRIMINAL, but that he is a muslim.

Jabba the Tutt said it the best, "True faith should be a private matter between yourself and your conscience, counselor, god, etc." Personally, I like to see what positive parts of each religion I can relate to, whether that is Islam, Hindu, Buddha, Christian, etc.

So I hope that everyone, including muslims, can see each person for what they TRULLY are, whether they are a genuine, caring, sensitve person or a heartless, murdering criminal, look beyond the label they've been given with. Like the Palestinian children being taught about suicide bombs, they dont know right from wrong. They are robots being feed the wrong information.

Here in Bali, people are hoping for the best in the future. People here arent attacking Islam, but are believing that God will guide us all back to happy days and protect us from anymore evil.

It wasnt long ago that people were victimizing asians for the Vietnam war. It seems we have a new trend now. Haven't we learnt yet?

Whether "the protocol" was forged or not, is not meaningful. Clearly, many Jews have their eyes on a much wider Jewish state than exists and Israel has gone way beyond its original gifted boundaries, where the "west" (US & UK) gave historical multi-ethnic, multi-religious land to a specific religious group.

The Zionist Jews, even if only a few, have carried all Jews, Israel, and the US in a religious war against the world.

Why is the US, while clearly stripping religion from government to be replaced by economic materialism, pushing so hard to further the cause of a self-proclaimed religious state?

If an Islamic religious group tried to form a country, watch out for the cruise missiles. A bunch of Jews, send them cash and arms.

The Jewish and their US cohorts in power positions of media and government (take a look, they are everywhere) threaten the stability of the world far more than Islam.

That said, thank you for having this forum and letting me post.
FH

Whether "the protocol" was forged or not, is not meaningful. Clearly, many Jews have their eyes on a much wider Jewish state than exists and Israel has gone way beyond its original gifted boundaries, where the "west" (US & UK) gave historical multi-ethnic, multi-religious land to a specific religious group.

The Zionist Jews, even if only a few, have carried all Jews, Israel, and the US in a religious war against the world.

Why is the US, while clearly stripping religion from government to be replaced by economic materialism, pushing so hard to further the cause of a self-proclaimed religious state?

If an Islamic religious group tried to form a country, watch out for the cruise missiles. A bunch of Jews, send them cash and arms.

The Jewish and their US cohorts in power positions of media and government (take a look, they are everywhere) threaten the stability of the world far more than Islam.

That said, thank you for having this forum and letting me post.
FH

I disagree entirely with the notion that it doesn't matter if the "Protocols" were forged: they have been used for over a century to justify and whip up anti-Semitism and murder. I would say this is rather relevant.

Re Islamic states, unlike Israel, the lone Jewish state, which is also a democracy, there are MANY Islamic states so that statement makes no sense. Israel has grown only because it has been attacked from the outside (and the inside of course, but that's another matter) and won each of the wars in which they have been attacked.

I would say your view is rather skewed, Faisal.