By the Anti Jihadist
There is a fundamental lack of understanding between many Muslims and non-Muslims. This problem has ballooned to gigantic dimensions, in part, because Muslims and non-Muslims think in very different ways.
Consider the concept of ‘tolerance’. The problem is that in Islam, “tolerance” means “we’re the dominant religion, and you (kafirs) practice yours according to our rules; you pay special taxes, there are restrictions on art, music, media, and so on, and, by the way, we can change our minds at any time.” Any questioning of this decidely one-way arrangement will be immediately condemned as "islamophobic", "intolerant", "fascist", "racist", or otherwise "hampering harmony between the races". Any of this sound familiar?
Thus, there is a situation where, in most countries where the population is split between Muslims and non-Muslims (like Malaysia), it is the Muslims who are doing most of the persecuting. At the same time, these Muslims insist they are doing it in self-defense, which of course makes no sense, especially to their many victims. Islamic intolerance doesn't end there. In Malaysia, as is the case in many other Muslim states, it is government policy to give Islamic law an edge over civil law. The infamous Lina Joy case is but one recent, and prominent, example of this phenomenon. It certainly won’t be the last.
For another example of Islamic tolerance, look at Saudi Arabia. In the Saudi kingdom, the heart of Islam and the location of the ‘Two Holy Mosques’, the government has long proclaimed the Quran as its constitution. Therefore, civil law does not exist and there is only religious law. In accordance with these beliefs, the Saudis have set up a religious and lifestyle police force, at government expense, to enforce draconian Islamic behaviour on everyone, both locals and foreigners alike. Some Muslims privately may not agree with this, but there is really no Islamic opposition to such long-standing policies, or even a whisper of condemnation. How can anyone condemn such proper Islamic mindsets while being followers of Mohammed? They cannot without first leaving the global gang, a.k.a the ummah.
Next, consider the Islamic version of logic. Many infidels make the presumption that logic is identical for everyone, and should certainly be the same for Muslims as it is for the kafirs. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Any reading of the Quran shows that it is filled with contradictory statements. In fact, the Quran itself refers to saying one thing at one time and another thing at another time. One verse can contradict another, so how can the Quran be true or perfect?
In the unitary logic used by infidels, if one thing contradicts another, then at least one of the things is false. If someone told you it was raining outside, and you looked and saw that the ground was dry, you would not believe that it had been raining. There is a contradiction between dry and the rain. Science and math, fields that kafirs tend excel in and Muslims do not, are based on unitary logic.
The formal way Islam deals with the contradiction is called ‘abrogation’. The later verse cancels out, or abrogates the earlier verse. But that is not the way Islam really works. In actuality, as anyone who has read Malaysia Today for awhile can readily attest to, Muslims will use any verse in the Quran when it is needed. The peaceful verses are used when needed and the (rather more copious number of) war verses are used when those are needed. Hence, in Islam, both sides of the contradiction are true. Besides, since all of the verses are the product of a ‘perfect god’, then each is true. As a Muslim would no doubt say, “How can a verse from god be false?” Therefore, Muslims do not use the same logic to determine truth as the kafir does.
This is logic and tolerance under Islam. Both are contradictory, and like Islam itself, fatally flawed.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
By the Anti Jihadist