Find » Opinion/Editorial » The Unique Issue of Tolerating Isla...

The Unique Issue of Tolerating Islam

By Chadd De Las Casas, published Jan 24, 2008
Published Content: 262  Total Views: 138,110  Favorited By: 28 CPs
Embed:  
Rating: 3.9 of 5
Religious freedom is a given and a must in this country - and I would personally like to see it extended to the globe. But for all that said, we're seeing an absolute stress test on the level of tolerance that can be offered when it comes to Islam, and why? It really is a unique case if its to be taken at face value, because it is fundamentally asking to be approached differently from other religions. So this ushers the question: can the same level of tolerance be shown to one that admittedly asks to be treated differently than its cohorts?

I am in no way an advocate of in any way changing the First Amendment, and this should be considered first and foremost when understanding my writing. But just as importantly, one has to ask the consequence of the unfettered degree in which the Western World has begun to hand the reins over to the Islamic World, presumably on the grounds of an apology for a thousand year old slight. In the West, there's no shortage of excuses, ranging from the Crusades to the Inquisition, to the notion that we're raping the Middle East's natural resources and depriving them of their human right to prosperity. Therefore, it is reasoned, we need to remain obediently apologetic towards the Middle East.

That appears to be the thought process anyhow, and it is really the only way I can imagine that the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Belgium, and others could so willingly hand themselves over to people on the platform of double standards. I don't believe it necessary to waste time explaining the historical errors made in the claims that the West owes an apology to the East, as I've devoted nearly 200+ articles to the topic, however there is something to be said about how this is greatly affecting our current mindset, and it is important to understand how this historical distortion is directly impacting both foreign policy, and the topic at hand. Which is, specifically, does the First Amendment extend to everything that Muslims are asking for?

The Unique Issue of Tolerating Islam

A mosque in Egypt.

Credit: wikicommons

Copyright: wikicommons

Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 15 of 94
Next >>
 
Its very disgusting to know how these Muslims kill each other.These people that kill like that are not human ,these things are not also written in the quran ,how on earth they kill even their own Muslim,God know who have made their evil dirty minds.

Posted on 02/06/2008 at 6:02:15 AM

 
Iraj war is a waste of time.Bush likes to poke his nose in all the country affairs.He feels he had power and can do what he wants.He is not respected in south America,the people their make mock at him.All that money he wasted on war he should have use it to feed all those hungry kids around the world,he would have gain alot of respect more.He is an idiot not any better than Saddam.How many life's are lost because of his stupid decision.HE IS INDEED A BIG SHIT,AN ASSHOLE.

Posted on 02/06/2008 at 6:02:57 AM

 
And Paul, as much as I appreciate that you think you know my article better than I do, I insist, you really don't.

Posted on 02/04/2008 at 2:02:13 PM

 
Rallos and Chadd--Well, you two have definitely convinced me that you are both totally irrational and illogical dudes. You would have to be to think that any of the things you are talking about are overly egregious capitulations to muslims that threaten the existing power structures of the named nations. That is the thing that you two can't get through your boney, gamer dweeb heads--none of these things pose the serious threat of some sort of muslim takeover. By the way Rallos, why do you capitalize terms that don't call for capitalization--like "Taxi" and "Western LIberal Nations"?

Posted on 02/04/2008 at 12:02:29 PM

 
Paul, that's awesome, now that you can manage to quote him in context... you still seem to completely miss the point. He raises the issue of the Western World being too willing to cave in to Muslim demands, and those demands going further and further. Evidences given, and not even a large sample, heck JUST the issue of foot washing stations in airports and schools using public funds is substantial enough evidence of unacceptable capitulation. The issue of Taxi drivers refusing to carry people with alcohol or dogs and not having their licenses revoked is evidence enough of capitulation to demands that FAR overreach "religious freedom". The three pigs issue is one of many examples of capitulation to unreasonable demands. The censorship of teaching the Holocaust is absolutely immoral and wrong on so many levels that it's sickening that it's allowed, yet it is. In other words, he's pointing to examples of Western Liberal Nations capituating to the demands of a religious group in

Posted on 01/31/2008 at 1:01:32 PM

 
Thank you for quoting my article Paul, now do you have a point to make? I will reiterate for the umpteenth time - saying it doesn't make it true, especially when my entire thesis, as stated in this article, is that when a religion wants judiciary and political uniqueness it creates a "unique issue of tolerance'.

Posted on 01/31/2008 at 12:01:47 PM

 
So, there you have in context. Based on those, you tell me how you both can deny that a big part of Chadd's idea here is that "islamic culture" can literally take over, and that the west is giving in to their demands in an "unfettered" way? You can and will deny it I'm sure, but the fact remains that Chadd's only evidence to support any of this are isolated incidents, minor concessions and conspiracy theories--that amounts to a weak and unsubstantiated article.

Posted on 01/31/2008 at 6:01:18 AM

 
Here is another in context quote that suggests that the small muslim populations in the listed countries will somehow replace the "traditional cultures" with "Islamic culture": "Consider the Sharia courts in Canada, Islamberg, New York, and the increasingly hard line Western censorship of "controversial" topics, such as the U.K. banning virtual "Three Little Pigs" books for fear of angering Muslim sensitivities, or, even more harrowing, U.K. schools dropping the subject of the Holocaust because local mosques teach that it never happened. In essence, as the Muslim population of a nation increases, the level of traditional cultural values erodes equivalently, as it is replaced with Islamic culture."

Posted on 01/31/2008 at 6:01:05 AM

 
Here is a quote in context, which suggests that the western world is literally surrendering control and being "obediently apologetic" to Islam: "But just as importantly, one has to ask the consequence of the unfettered degree in which the Western World has begun to hand the reins over to the Islamic World, presumably on the grounds of an apology for a thousand year old slight. In the West, there's no shortage of excuses, ranging from the Crusades to the Inquisition, to the notion that we're raping the Middle East's natural resources and depriving them of their human right to prosperity. Therefore, it is reasoned, we need to remain obediently apologetic towards the Middle East."

Posted on 01/31/2008 at 6:01:03 AM

 
Paul, what you're not understanding is that that is nowhere near the argument he's making, you're taking quotes, and placing them into your straw man completely out of the context in which they were delivered. Seriously, you make me sad, because your avatar paints a picture of "worthy opponent", yet your arguments are less refined than a first year undergrad, sigh.. such a disappointment.

Posted on 01/30/2008 at 8:01:34 PM

 
I'm still waiting Paul. Go ahead, you can try again, you have my permission to really do it right this time. In fact, you have my invitation. Calling me names isn't going to make me change anything about this article except what is stated, which is that Islam as a judicial and political force represents a unique issue of tolerance.

Posted on 01/30/2008 at 2:01:55 PM

 
Chadd, you are the most pathetic person I've ever debated because you have totally abandoned your position--the whole Islam-is-taking-over-the-world argument. I quoted your article directly and you still deny that this is your position.

Posted on 01/30/2008 at 2:01:48 PM

 
Rallos, his argument is clearly stated at various points in his article and I already quoted him--so you straw man accusation holds no water. I'm not injecting any larger meaning--only quoting directly from the article. again, Chadd writes, that the western world "has begun to hand the reins over to the Islamic World" to an "unfettered degree", and that the western world is also "obediently apologetic" towards the Middle East". He also writes, "as the muslim population of a nation increases, the level of traditional cultural values erodes equivalently, as it is replaced with Islamic culture." How is this to be interpreted other than Chadd trying to say that Islam is literally taking over, and that western nations are handing over control to radical islam? That being said, I say again, anyone who thinks this is a moron. Also, I'm displaying none of teh ignorance you say--it is a fact that muslim populations in the countries Chadd mentions are small and it is a safe bet that an even smal

Posted on 01/30/2008 at 2:01:31 PM

 
Well Paul, my invitation for you to actually refute any of my claims with facts is still open, or you can also persist in simply saying "nuh uh" or "Oh c'mon, it's okay to not teach kids about the Holocaust" or "Yeah, they're a demographic that should have their own laws applied to them, while other religions shouldn't, just like you said in your article". But by and large, the strawmen aside, you've basically explained *exactly* what I've said is happening in my article, so thanks for being a psycho left-wing nutjob that agrees with me.

Posted on 01/30/2008 at 2:01:34 PM

 
You are an incredibly irrational person. None of those things demonstrate that exagerrated claims you've made, and that I listed, about Islam replacing and taking over western nations. If you think so you are insane. The thing about teaching about pigs in the netherlands apparently happened at one single school, and there is no government policy applied to it. The 3 Little Pigs in Britain thing is hardly an earth shattering example of "unfettered" capitulation to Islam, and is really a minor thing--and there is no evidence that anyone was fired from the Pentagon because of muslim protests--in fact, no where is there any report of this happening for this purpose, and no official source has cited that Stephen Coughlin was fired for this reason--the only people talking about this are right wing bloggers. But, if you think the Pentagon is some bastion of politically correct Islam love, you really are certifiably insane.

Posted on 01/30/2008 at 1:01:43 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 15 of 94
Next >>
Most Commented On