Obama's no Muslim but why no defense of Islam?: The Swamp
 
The Swamp
-
Posted January 23, 2008 12:35 PM
The Swamp

Obama%20in%20Lexington%2C%20SC%20Jan%2022%202008%20small
Sen Barack Obama in Lexington, S.C., January 22, 2008. (Photo: EMMANUEL DUNAND/AFP/Getty Images)

by Frank James

Chicago Tribune religion writer and blogger Manya Brachear asks this question on her blog, The Seeker: in underscoring that he is a Christian, should Sen. Barack Obama go further?

When he upholds his Christianity, should he emphasize for those who are Muslims and those who aren't, that there's nothing wrong with being Muslim?

Manya writes:

The repeated and false claims that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is a closet Muslim have prompted the candidate to reiterate that he is a committed Christian.

But he stops short of saying that being Muslim wouldn’t be a bad thing. In addition to setting the record straight about his own faith, should Obama also give a shout-out to his Muslim brothers and sisters and defend Islam?

Good question. Manya continues:

...But after a year of rumors, some Muslims say it’s time for Obama to take his response a step further and remind voters that his religion shouldn’t matter. They say he should take the opportunity to point out that Islam is one of the many religious traditions that makes America great.

“At this point, he should call out people’s bigotry,” said Salam al-Marayati, executive director of The Muslim Public Affairs Council. He and other religious leaders defended Obama when the rumor mill first fired up last year. A letter signed by 11 Jewish, Christian and Muslim leaders denounced the rumors as a calculated attempt to “divide us as children of God.”

As the attacks continue, though, Obama should denounce “this kind of religious litmus test in politics which is anathema to our Bill of Rights and reframe the conversation,” al-Marayati said. Being labeled a Muslim isn't an insult, he said.

A source familiar with the Obama campaign said that’s unlikely to happen. It’s not the Muslim characterization that bothers Obama. It’s that his faith, which plays a significant role in his life, has been mischaracterized. Period.

“The primary goal is truth,” the source said. “It’s important to set the record straight.”

Digg Delicious Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo

Comments

When he upholds his Christianity, should he emphasize for those who are Muslims and those who aren't, that there's nothing wrong with being Muslim?

Only if he wishes to commit political suicide. Of course most normal people would agree with a defense of Islam, but the rabid right would have him for lunch. Fear of all those different than them , including Americans, is hated. Look at the posters who continually use his middle name to emphisize that point. I must ask, because I am not familiar with Manya Brachear , was this a real question or a disingenious one?


If he did that, they'd just ignore his denial of being a Muslim and use his defense of Muslims as evidence of him being a Muslim.

He needs to rebut the lies before he takes on the prejudice behind them.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-presidential-profile-htmlstory,1,1783908.htmlstory?coll=chi_news_politics_util&ctrack=1&cset=true

There are 9 Presidential contenders being shown in the above link and "ALL" have a bio except Obama, why?


Mr. Obama will never discuss Islam in length, and that's because his brother Roy is a devout Muslim....I wonder why he never mentions his brother Roy ? Gee ! I wonder if the media will ever bring it up ?


Simple, because Obama is an opportunist who is all about image, and making a clear firm stand on supporting Muslims would blemish his image. Becauseee, Obama has been tied to the Muslim faith and it would give people one more reason to doubt his intentions, even if it is false. Maybe not Democrats, even though I too question his supporters when they put the fact "AND HE'S NOT A MUSLIM" in caps, should he be in the final election I'm sure the Republicans would keep dragging that out. I think he's just playing his cards. Sooner or later he will find it a good opportunity to make such a stand. Right now he's Christian, tomorrow he'll be reaching out to moderate Muslims....Meaning there is a chance that he actually believes that he will continue the crusade on "Islamofasicts." It might make Obama sound like Bush, again. So Obama is not taking a stand. One way or the other. It is possible, especially since Obama complemented Reagan who fought the spread of an ideology, and "Islamofascism" is an ideology in a part of the world Obama might be interested, outside of the Middle East, in Africa creating problems.


Obama's spiritual adviser, J Wright gave Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness. Louis Farrakhan. maybe for Wright and some others, Farrakhan "epitomized greatness." For Americans, Farrakhan epitomizes racism, particularly in the form of anti-Semitism. Over the years, he has compiled an awesome record of offensive statements, even denigrating the Holocaust by falsely attributing it to Jewish cooperation with Hitler "They helped him get the Third Reich on the road." His history is a rancid stew of lies. Any praise of Farrakhan heightens the prestige of the leader of the Nation of Islam. His anti-Semitism and particularly his false insistence that Jews have played an inordinate role in victimizing African Americans.
Farrakhan's dream has vilified whites and singled out Jews to blame for crimes large and small, either committed by others as well or not at all. (A dominant role in the slave trade, for instance.) He has talked of Jewish conspiracies to set a media line for the whole nation. He has reviled Jews in a manner that brings Hitler to mind. And yet Wright heaped praise on Farrakhan. According to Trumpet, he applauded his "depth of analysis when it comes to the racial ills of this nation." He praised "his integrity and honesty." He called him "an unforgettable force, a catalyst for change and a religious leader who is sincere about his faith and his purpose." These are the words of a man who prayed with Obama just before the Illinois senator announced his run for the presidency. Will he pray with him just before his inaugural?
The New York Times recently reported on Obama's penchant while serving in the Illinois legislature for merely voting "present" when faced with some tough issues. Farrakhan, in a strictly political sense, may be a tough issue for him. This time, though, "present" will not do.


'In underscoring that he is a [Christian] should Barack Obama go further?'

In a local Chicago hospital a baby lived through an entire eight hour shift after a failed abortion...the baby was left to die in a soiled utility room.
Illinois State lawmakers proposed a bill to make sure babies recieved proper
medical care following failed abortions.
Il. Senator Barack Hussein Obama voted [NO] on this bill.
A Christian...I think not!


Paulo


Mr. Obama will never discuss Islam in length, and that's because his brother Roy is a devout Muslim....I wonder why he never mentions his brother Roy ? Gee ! I wonder if the media will ever bring it up ?

Posted by: Don B. | January 23, 2008 01:13 PM


Sorry Donny,

Your BS swiftboat campaign of Obama is going no where...


Mr. Branchear needs to get over himself.

1st, I don't hear anybody proudly proclaiming themselves to be atheists either, even though we make up a larger proportion of the population than muslims.

2nd, Islam is truly a nasty and virulent religion. I don't recall hearing about any atheist, christianist, jewish, buddhist, shinto, etc... suicide bombers. Until muslims and their religion learn how to get along in the world with everyone else, Obama is well advised to steer clear of any sort of affiliation.


If he defends Muslims it will be used against him. If he doesn't defend Muslims he's not being true to his message of hope. Which would you do? I think I'd let Hillary or John McCain defend Muslims, they're frontrunners too.


No, he shouldn't. In fact he shouldn't even have to come out and defend his Christianity. Why don't you have Hillary and Billary come out and defend their so-called Christianity or better yet why don't you have Hillary and Billary come out and emphasize for those who are Muslims and those who aren't that there's nothing wrong with being Muslim. Why is it the media must use Obama as the punching bag? He isn't. He is a U.S. and former state Senator ll years total, and the media needs to have more respect towards him. Making him a public spectacle and football for your own newsworthyness needs to stop. Go and get Hill and Bill to give a speech about their support for Muslims. Obama has stated time and again he is for all people, not just Christians, but for all religions, including Muslim. Bill Clinton is the former president who is now campaigning for a third term. Grab him and have him give a speech on how he supports the Muslims, I'm sure he will be happy to. And you can bait him just by telling him the Muslims will vote for Hillary if he publicizes his support for them. Just because the Clintons and warped-minded people and media want to create anti-Obama smears and the Clintons and other Obama haters and media want to drive those smears doesn't mean he needs to pay any attention to them. Because as many hateful people as there are in America and throughout the world, and this includes the Clintons, anybody can create anything as the media picks it up and runs with it. So frankly I think Obama needs to tell folks, including the Clintons, to go to hell with their smear campaigns because as we all know they, including the Clintons, are doing everything in their power to bring him down.


Gee ! I wonder if the media will ever bring it up ?

Posted by: Don B. | January 23, 2008 1:13 PM

Gee ! Maybe because bigots like you would want to turn a whole religion into terrorists. How do you feel about other religions? Any you like or should we just kill them all. Should we include Christians in that also?


Of course those Islamics are all terrorists. They are the ones who commit the crime so brand them all terrorists. Would you like to also call all vets terrorists? Timothy Mcveigh was an ex military man.


In a local Chicago hospital a baby lived through an entire eight hour shift after a failed abortion...the baby was left to die in a soiled utility room.
Illinois State lawmakers proposed a bill to make sure babies recieved proper
medical care following failed abortions.
Il. Senator Barack Hussein Obama voted [NO] on this bill.
A Christian...I think not!
Paulo

Posted by: Paulo | January 23, 2008 1:50 PM


That's a cute fictional story, Paulotard.
Did you write that all by yourself or did you get that from Rush's website?


2nd, Islam is truly a nasty and virulent religion. I don't recall hearing about any atheist, christianist, jewish, buddhist, shinto, etc... suicide bombers. Until muslims and their religion learn how to get along in the world with everyone else, Obama is well advised to steer clear of any sort of affiliation.

Posted by: weinerdog43 | January 23, 2008 2:00 PM

You've obviously never heard of Northern Ireland or Israel. They may not be "suicide" bombers, but they have had their terrorists. Oh, and Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nicholls.


According to Christian scripture, they are not to defend other religions. The believers,
however, are not to condemn others, but try to get them saved. When a Christian running for office says what's politically expedient, then it becomes suspect. Sen Obama's actions have confirmed not only his faith, but his being a chosen vessel.


Since it only takes a few nuts from a religion to brand it terrorist. Fred Phelps comes to mind. Why do all you Christians hate the troops and gays?


"I don't recall hearing about any atheist, christianist, jewish, buddhist, shinto, etc... suicide bombers. "

Ever hear of the Japanese Kamikazes in WW2? Shinto suicide bombers.

Ever hear of the Tamil Tigers? Hindu Suicide bombers.

http://www.spur.asn.au/chronology_of_suicide_bomb_attacks_by_Tamil_Tigers_in_sri_Lanka.htm

Enlighten yourself. Ignorance kills.

http://www.military.com/Opinions/0,,Hayden_072905,00.html


If you all weren't so busy posting, you might have time to keep up with the news. Obama DID support Muslims:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/23/obama-battles-muslim-rumor-head-on/
"I think that those who are of the Muslim faith are deserving of respect and dignity, but to try and feed into this fear-mongering and try to question my faith commitments and my belief in Jesus Christ, I think is offensive," Obama also said.

Now go take a deep breath and have a cup of tea or something. :-)


Of course those Islamics are all terrorists. They are the ones who commit the crime so brand them all terrorists. Would you like to also call all vets terrorists? Timothy Mcveigh was an ex military man.

Posted by: bill r. | January 23, 2008 2:21 PM

bill r,

The religious "right" here in America are just like the radical Islamists that they claim to hate.

Hypocrites, all of them!

http://images.dancingmokey.com/humor_SFW/nun-bong.jpg

See what I mean? ;o)


I know that the divisions in Ireland were loosely based around religion. But to say that the IRA killed people in the name of Catholicism or of Jesus Christ would be more than stretching the truth, syj. They committed their terrorism for the cause of Irish nationalism against Irish protestants who were aligned with the British government. And in Israel, the "terrorists" (I'm assuming you're referring to the group that assassinated Rabin) killed in the name of Zionism, which is somewhere between religious zeal and nationalism. For Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, religion had nothing to do with their deeds. You are drawing faulty comparisons. Now I know that the majority of Muslims are not terrorists. But in the modern world, Islam is the only religion whose adherents kill in the name of their God -- not for "freedom" or nationalism. Further Islamic clerics either encourage such killing as being the will of Allah or do virtually nothing to stop it, arguing that the victims "had it coming." Obviously, the relationship between the West and Muslims is a tricky one, fraught with misunderstandings, meddling and horrific deeds on both sides. But it does not negate wienerdog's point: Because of it's current violent tendencies, Islam would be tricky waters for Obama to navigate.


"You've obviously never heard of Northern Ireland or Israel."

Not the same. There are no catholic or protestant suicide bombers. Ordinary bombers, yes. Suiciders, no. Tim McVeigh's act had nothing to do w/religion. He was mad at our gov't. for going after the Branch Davidians.

Next.


Next.

Posted by: weinerdog43 | January 23, 2008 3:59 PM

Fred Phelps!


Sounds like Trib writer Brachear is doing her part joining the Clinton campaign to keep the Obama Muslim tie in the forefront.


" But in the modern world, Islam is the only religion whose adherents kill in the name of their God -- not for "freedom" or nationalism."

Wrong.

http://www.milnet.com/tgp/data/sikh.htm

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/12/28/india17668.htm

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/02/1c74fb22-4639-47a4-b95b-78a8bead266a.html


billr. This is about the third time you called me a bigot, I see you like to throw that word around a lot, it's typical of cowards who hide behind their computer screens in their basements, or closets. I re-read my posting and I didn't see where i indicted a whole religion as being terrorists, but i guess if you didn't get much past the eighth grade i can see how it may have tripped you up...don't feel bad though billr "mush for brains" John E. got all turned around with it too. If the article below is true it will surely give a landslide victory to Mr. Obama, don't you think billr ?


According to Investor’s Business Daily
reports (see here and here), the older half-brother of the upstart Democrat presidential candidate is a militant Muslim activist in Kenya who has urged his younger brother to embrace his African heritage and supports implementation of Sharia law in a country that, until recently, has been regarded as among the most pro-Western and modern African nations.

Paying attention to two critical details reported by IBD, one might surmise that Roy has succeeded in convincing his brother to embrace his African heritage. Those details are as follows:

In 1991, when Obama joined the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, he pledged allegiance to something called the Black Value System, which is a code of non-Biblical ethics written by blacks, for blacks.

and

In short, Obama’s “unashamedly black” church preaches the politics of black nationalism. And its dashiki-wearing preacher — who married Obama and his wife and now acts as his personal spiritual adviser — is militantly Afrocentric. “We are an African people,” the Rev. Jeremiah Wright reminds his flock, “and remain true to our native land, the mother continent.”

While beer drinking and illicit drug use is frowned upon by many, Abongo “Roy” Obama’s vices — the Black Value System, militant Afrocentric views and radical Islamic beliefs — pose far greater dangers to the American way of life. That in mind, I hope all Americans recognize these dangers before they have impact decisions made in the Oval Office.


You have to subscribe to Militant Islam in order to kill or die in the name of God---and in the name of forming a greater STATE of ISLAM. You're forgeting that. Their whole purpose in suicide bombings is to die for god in a fight to unite the Middle East into one State of Islam, under their version of Islam, militant Islam.

Terrorism is a POLITICAL tool. NATIONALISM is always tied in somehow.

Islam as a religion is not nasty or virulent. Unless, as an atheist, you find all religions by their very nature of being a religion, nasty and virulent. The followers of Islam can be nasty or virulent.


You've obviously never heard of Northern Ireland or Israel. They may not be "suicide" bombers, but they have had their terrorists.

Posted by: syj | January 23, 2008 2:58 PM


I do not agree with wienerdog's sweeping (and uninformed) generalization, however yours is a completely false analogy.

Northern Ireland may have terrorists, but there is no direct connection of them to religion. The conflict is about nationalism, and colonial imperialism. Religion is beside the point. If both sides were Protestant or both Catholic they would still be killing each other.

The same is true of Israeli "terrorists" if that is the correct word. They don't kill or displace people because they are not Jewish -- again it's about National determination.

The same is not true about Islamists or Jihadists. Yes, there is the also the Imperialsm/Nationalism factor but, unlike the samples you've cited, they believe they serve God by killing Westerners... even if they be noncombatant office workers thousands of miles away. That is unique to Islamism.

Note that "Islamism" aka "Jihadism" is not the religion "Islam". It is a political movement based upon Islam.


""You've obviously never heard of Northern Ireland or Israel."

Not the same. There are no catholic or protestant suicide bombers. Ordinary bombers, yes. Suiciders, no. Tim McVeigh's act had nothing to do w/religion. He was mad at our gov't. for going after the Branch Davidians.

Next.

Posted by: weinerdog43 | January 23, 2008 3:59 PM"


Branch Davidians were a RELIGIOUS Cult, an offshoot of Seventh-Day Adventists. If McVeigh was retaliating against our government for their attack on the Branch Davidians (which, can be argued, could have been a huge, mishandled mistake), that sounds like it had a WHOLE LOT to do with religion. And if there are no Catholic or Protestant suicide bombers, that's only because Catholics and Protestants are holding the reins of power. They certainly have the dogma in place to produce suicide bombers, and there are certainly enough people spouting their religious fervor. If the world were massively Muslim, and if that Muslim religion hadn't been seriously challenged for some 450 years (as Christianity hasn't), I kind of doubt they'd be producing suicide bombers, either. They'd be suppressing and marginalizing non-Muslim beliefs and WE'D be the suicide bombers. We've certainly shown no compunction against burning people alive, tearing them limb from limb, crushing them under rocks, disemboweling and impaling them, so suicide bombers aren't that much of a stretch.


Reading down the thread. I see that JB said pretty much what I did, and I could have saved wear and tear on my fingers.

If I may clarify JB's point (that Luke tries to refute) -- Islam is the only religion which currently inspires a global, political, violent, quasi military movement that threatens Western civilization.

Luke's samples are specious.


Until Islam cleanses itself of the radicalism that allows and encourages outright hate and murder of those who believe differently than they, Islam deserves American mistrust. As a committed Christian, Obama could never violate his own faith by "defending" a different faith. John 14:6 says, "Jesus *said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.'" However, as a Presidential nominee he can make it clear that in America all religions have a voice WITHIN the democratic process.


billr. This is about the third time you called me a bigot, I see you like to throw that word around a lot, it's typical of cowards who hide behind their computer screens in their basements, or closets.
Posted by: Don B. | January 23, 2008 1:13 PM

A weasel that hints at something and not really come to the point is a coward. You insinuate that because his brother may or may not be a muslim, is an issue that needs to be talked about is a bigoted stance. You have a problem with a religion..Muslims. You are a bigot. Believe me if you would like to tell me to my face as much as I'd like to tell you to your face you're a bigot, just tell me the time and the place.


Reading down the thread. I see that JB said pretty much what I did, and I could have saved wear and tear on my fingers.

If I may clarify JB's point (that Luke tries to refute) -- Islam is the only religion which currently inspires a global, political, violent, quasi military movement that threatens Western civilization.

Luke's samples are specious.

Posted by: MJ | January 23, 2008 6:21 PM


Spoken like the true racist coward that you really are.

Are you going to re-invent yourself with a new post name after you get run off of here again (Leo T, Juanito, Anonymous, MJ)?

You're even more pathetic than Paulo and that's saying alot, you coward.


"Islam is the only religion which currently inspires a global, political, violent, quasi military movement that threatens Western civilization."

NO- it is the only one the gets the most play in the meida because of 9/11 and Iraq.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism


In an ideal world there would be no suicide bombers, but since we have political occupations in Israel and Iraq, it is not an ideal world. Since America continues to impose her standards on other cultures, there will be people who will see that as an attack on their culture, their religion and their way of life. The proverb of "live and let live" doesn't seem to find a place in Western civilization which seems hell bent on dominating the minds and lands of "third world" people. Suicide bombers are the response to western imperialism and technology that can drop a smart bomb and destroy a whole neighborhood. When weapons are unavailable, the poor use their bodies to defend their lands, their religions and their way of life. Prior to the attacks on the World Trade Center in 1993 and 2001, it would appear that it was America doing all the attacking on foreign soil. As Ron Paul mentioned The U.S. has bases all over the world whereas no other country has military bases here. Some of those military bases were forced upon host nation - the most blatant attack against Islam were the bases in Saudi Arabia. The 1993 and 2001 attacks were radical responses to the trespassing on hallowed ground to Muslims.

So, for Obama, it would be best to keep religion out of the picture, but also to understand the underlying grievances of those who wish to do us harm.


you people really know little about islam, muslims are allowed to marry members of other faiths particularly, jews and christians as they are considered by them to be people of the book.


NO- it is the only one the gets the most play in the meida because of 9/11 and Iraq.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

Posted by: Dee | January 23, 2008 7:35 PM Dee,


Dee,

You're citing Wikipedia and that in itself doesn't embarrass you?

Interesting as this entry is, it doesn't say much that I don't already know and it doesn't prove I'm wrong. The organizations and movements listed are not global in their appeal and operation, as is al Quada; they don't have a global military/political agenda as does al Quada.

When is the last time the National Liberation Front of Tripura or the KKK committed terrorist acts (killing thousands) on three seperate continents accross two hemispheres?

Al quada doesn't get the press "because of 9/11" but beecause they're the most dangerous; because the scope of their operation and influence is more broad than any other terrorist group; because in fact, they're a only "group" in the loosest sense. Al Quada is more of an "ism".


you people really know little about islam...

Posted by: azh | January 23, 2008 8:08 PM


azh,

I'll be the first to admit that i know very little about Islam. But Islam and Islamism (or Jihadism) are two different things.


Fred Phelps!

Yipes. Forgot about him. Ya got me!


MJ

Wow there buddy I was being lazy (as I am now) and no it doesn't bother me in the least.

MY POINT WAS that ISLAM is not the only RELIGION that CURRENTLY inspires..bla bla bla.

All religious terrorism has higher aims. The target is not WESTERNERS. The target is "other." Infidels.

There has been an increase in terrorisms carried out by isamic goups, jewish groups, american christain white supremacists, and many little various religouse cults.

All of the groups have high global aims, as AQ did, and an act like 9/11, isolated AQ from the group. On the one hand it helped identify them, on the other it allowed them to gain exposure.

AQ is a threat becauseeee, like all religouse terrorism, it deals with religious terrorism, they are more violent, more daring, and their targets more numbered.


MJ

Wow there buddy I was being lazy (as I am now) and no it doesn't bother me in the least.

MY POINT WAS that ISLAM is not the only RELIGION that CURRENTLY inspires..bla bla bla.

All religious terrorism has higher aims. The target is not WESTERNERS. The target is "other." Infidels.

There has been an increase in terrorisms carried out by isamic goups, jewish groups, american christain white supremacists, and many little various religouse cults.

All of the groups have high global aims, as AQ did, and an act like 9/11, isolated AQ from the group. On the one hand it helped identify them, on the other it allowed them to gain exposure.

AQ is a threat becauseeee, like all religouse terrorism, it deals with religious terrorism, they are more violent, more daring, and their targets more numbered.


Oh yes thank you for waiting. (Maybe this will speed up the posting of my post.)


Dee,

Ignore "MJ", he's a self-important nutjob with no friends who fancys himself a "smartguy".


Believe me if you would like to tell me to my face as much as I'd like to tell you to your face you're a bigot, just tell me the time and the place.

Posted by: bill r. | January 23, 2008 7:11 PM

Only a coward such as yourself billr would make a threat over the print, sorry if i hit a nerve billr. you can safely go to your cross dressing parties again, your safe by distance. Oh by the way Roy IS a radical Muslim that's not in dispute, a 10 year old child could of understood that merely by reading the article. It sounds to me that the truth is hurting little billr a little bit. Sweet dreams princess!


May be you all need to read "Holy War" written by Karen Armstrong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Armstrong)
You will now that religions never make war. People who make war!


He openly criticize Bible so he cant be a true chrisitian either


Note that "Islamism" aka "Jihadism" is not the religion "Islam". It is a political movement based upon Islam.

Posted by: MJ | January 23, 2008 5:59 PM

O.K., And "crusaders" are the same as "jihadists". It's just the "Christian" version of the same thing.


Should Obama stand up for his brother Muslims? Should he say that being a Muslim is not a bad thing? Is Islam just another religion that is part of America? Is this a religious test for office?
All of these are red herrings. The question is one of values, and it is perfectly clear to anyone who takes the time to read the Koran that Islam's values are not compatible with the values and freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. It is a fact that not a single Muslim-majority country has signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Instead, all Muslim countries have signed on to the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI). The CDHRI explicitly stipulates that the ONLY source of human rights is Islamic sacred law -- Sharia. The CDHRI makes it official that Islam is superior to other religions as a matter, not only of belief, but of law. And, of course, Islamic sacred law makes men legally superior to women. The CDHRI plainly rejects the fundamental values of western civilization -- freedom of religion, freedom from religion, separation of religious and civic life, gender equality. Islamic sacred law also clearly calls for Islam eventually to be the dominant religion in the world. This is why Islam is NOT A RELIGION LIKE CHRISTIANITY OR JUDAISM. ISLAM IS AN IDEOLOGY with its own set of values, and its values are not compatible with western values as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and our American Constitution. All Americans need to understand this and not fall for the lie that Islam is just like other religions. It is not. It is an imperialist ideology with a ritual religious component with its own value system and its own totalitarian program for organizing society. In this, it is fundamentally different from Christianity and Judaism -- and all Islamic scholars and religioius authorities agree on this.


O.K., And "crusaders" are the same as "jihadists". It's just the "Christian" version of the same thing.

Posted by: syj | January 24, 2008 8:21 AM


Yes, and the Crusades were about a thousand years ago. The West has progressed from the savage idea of mass murder for the Lord.

The only entity we have like that today are the Jihadists.


The people of the world, be they Jew or Gentile,from the US,Israel,or any other country have the right to self defense by embracing Biblical Christianity when attacked or threatened by Islam.


It is an imperialist ideology with a ritual religious component with its own value system and its own totalitarian program for organizing society. In this, it is fundamentally different from Christianity and Judaism -- and all Islamic scholars and religioius authorities agree on this.

Posted by: Monte Doro | January 24, 2008 11:33 AM

First of all, imperialism is a WESTERN political strategy to dominate the "lesser" peoples of Africa and Asia. You didn't and won't see Muslims trying to convert Christians, but vice versa.
The current crop of Islamic extremists are not trying to "imperialize" anyone, but defending the lands that have fallen under Zionism and the United States. To try to spin it that Islam is trying to take over the world is far from the truth; it would seem that the actual truth lies in what is occurring in Iraq and Palestine. If you want to speak of human rights violations, just look at the Iraq War and Gaza.

You really need to educate yourself about Islam, the real Islam, not the fictionalized version in bigoted movies or from Zionist and evangelical propaganda. During the Middle Ages, while Christian women in Europe were being bartered as property, Muslim women owned property. The flagrant abuses of human rights, especially toward women has nothing to do with the religion of Islam, it has to do with the cultures. Most "Muslim" nations still hold to the
Biblical or pagan view, not Koranic view of women.

In the Old Testament, few women had the distinction of realizing human rights. In the New Testament even the Virgin Mary knew her place.

It is true that a regressive element has arisen in Muslim countries, and women have been vitimized by this element, but the fact is that this is not the religion, but the cultural atmosphere of repression.


"The people of the world, be they Jew or Gentile,from the US,Israel,or any other country have the right to self defense by embracing Biblical Christianity when attacked or threatened by Islam."

What?


Posted by: Monte Doro | January 24, 2008 11:33 AM

They are compatible with human rights. They have their own. When they say that Islam is above the law in that case it is because human rights can not be given by any authoritative body. Human rights are God given. Assigning a body to make or amend human rights would also mean that body can take them away. Look up Human rights and Islam. They have a whole list of human rights.

Don't confuse Islam a RELIGION, and POLITICAL OR TRIBAL ISLAM, how that religion is interpreted. And just because political Islam is what currently dominates the religion in many theocratic or semi theocratic countries doesn't make it any less comparative to the values it shares as a religion with Christianity and Judaism.

BTW Islam does not condone converting others against their will. There is no imperialism involved. It actually maintains having a different God doesn't give you the right to insult others. If you are wondering "well then why don't the sheiks speak out" the minority - Militant or Political - Islam, - their - interpretations of Islam, dominate the larger moderate portion of society.


Why no defense of Islam?

Simple - because Islam is BARBARIC.

Get a grip. What's to defend? Have you actually taken a look at the world? Islam is destroying Europe. Islamic nations are HELLHOLES.

Is that what you want him to defend?

The Truth About Islam


Get a grip, Kali Politeis,

Islam is one of the largest religions, if they wanted to destroy the world they would have done so by now. While you are blogging away. Learn to differentiate between the religion and the jihadists. Understand the religion is compatible to co-exist with other religions (as long as other religions don't mean to enforce a status quo as Christianity has, until PJP the Second came along to reverse, and Pope Benedict fumbled.) Instead people want to interpret Islam through Christianity or Jeudism, or those who practice Islam for political advantages, or those who interpret it for violence. Unless you are looking for a second coming, because violence never leads to peace. Be my guest, become what you hate. "Spread the good word."


Yes, and the Crusades were about a thousand years ago. The West has progressed from the savage idea of mass murder for the Lord.

The only entity we have like that today are the Jihadists.

Posted by: MJ | January 24, 2008 12:22 PM

Right, so I guess presdient Bush didn't call it a "crusade" about a week after 9/11. Oh, that's righ, HE DID!! But then again, Bush and his kind probably do think it still is the dark ages.


The people of the world, be they Jew or Gentile,from the US,Israel,or any other country have the right to self defense by embracing Biblical Christianity when attacked or threatened by Islam.

Posted by: Brian | January 24, 2008 2:00 PM

First of all, your wrong. No devine providence (and certainly not the Bible) allows for "self defense" by violent means for any reason.

Secondly, are you saying if "Christians or Jews" attacked an Islamic nation, without "threats or attacks", as you say. They would still not have a right to defned themselves.

If you believe one group has a right to defend themselves against religious oppression, then you have to believe they all do. Or you are not being Christian at all.


The real problem is the continuing denigration of the Muslim vote in this election. Sen. Obama was raised a Christian in the midst of Muslims as a young child and yet he refrains from praising them or their religion. As I've said many times, it's "politicial suicide" seeking ascension to a higher office by campaigning for the Muslim vote. But Sen. Obama is no more guilty of the tactics of attempting to depress the Muslim than is Hillary. Hillary won't accept contribution from Muslims nor will she allow Muslims to volunteer for her campaign. As for the Republicans, all of them are too far wrapped up in the labels of "Radical Fundamental Terroist Jihadist Suicide Bombing Islamofascists". This strict adhenrence to the Conservative Clerical Elitist in this country has led to a growing intolerance of the Muslim bretheren which dot our great landscape. I think Sen. Obama is capable of saying great thing and saying great things about Muslims, Islam, American Muslims, and Muslim Americans. He chose not to and you have to ask yourself why? Is this not a nation built on the diversity not only of race, but also gender and religion. There's a reason why our forefathers put a religious exclusionary clause in our
constitution. The challange is twofold: What can the Muslim voter do to attract the candidates to get their vote while at the same time make Islam and Muslims a worthwhile commodity to capaign for at the ballot box. Right now, there's no doubt that the marginalzation, denigration, and depression of Muslim voters is already out there in full force in this political campaign. This sublimination process is now resulting in both suppression and oppression of the Muslim vote in this upcoming election. I often talk about the silly few and what they want. If I pay attention to some of these right-wing fanatics: they want to ban Muslims from voting in any election in this country. So far, the 2008 political campaign is off to a rousing start for those who don't want Muslims to vote in any elelction ever again in this country.


this is nothing new, obamamuslim.com detailed tis issue


It isn't just the Bill of Rights that protects religious freedom. The Constitution itself says there is to be no religious test for public office. I mean the main body of it, pre-Bill of Rights. But the media and private citizens get away with talking about the faith of our candidates because they're not the government. But although it may not be a de jure religious test, it's certainly a de facto one. If you guys want to keep this country great and all that, maybe you should start by following the Constitution.

And by the way, Obama's brother is not running for office. There's no reason for Obama to talk about him, any more than we accused Bill Clinton of a cocaine habit on account of his brother's behavior. Get serious, people.

Anyway, I'd rather have a Muslim in office than what we've got now. And at least he wouldn't expect women to run around half-naked just to be considered half-human.


The problem with Obama denoucing Muslims is one yes he has family that are but more then that I would like to know how this man will talk with muslim leaders. I’d like to know why Obama thinks he can make them change his mind on America. And don’t give me his the anti Bush.

I really think Obama is caught in the corner on this. A year ago it comes out that he may have been muslim his campiagn makes a statement that he never was a muslim. Then changes that statment a few months later to not a practicing muslim.

Why not tell the country himself that at one time he was at a very young age a muslim kid that read the koran and some of his family members are. Explain to America thats how he understands the problem and can change the world. Explain to America how he find Christ by converting to Christianity. Oops thats the problem he can’t stand by the Christian angle either because if you look at his church that opens up a whole other problem. Not a Christian church I ever saw. So Obama is trying to deflect and limit the amount of attention his back ground has on this.

He is stuck either way. So I guess his campaign decided that deflecting attenion now until the nomination is locked up. Then all bets are off because the right wingers will come out and focus more attention on his past affiliations.


In answer to the question, "Obama's no Muslim but why no defense of Islam?" allow me to suggest that Obama has read the Qur'an and concluded that Islam is unworthy as a form of government for thinking and peace loving human beings.

Verses such as these may have clinched it for him: "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war." Qur'an:9:5; "Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission." Qur'an:9:29 There are MANY more verses like this in the Qur'an, all of which demand harsh treatment toward "infidels" and "blasphemers," defined as anyone who rejects Mohammad's message, especially Jews and Christians.

I should note that Muslims regard the Qur'an as the immutable word of Allah, binding until judgment day and beyond, meaning that Muslims TODAY should strive to imitate Mohammad's "perfect" example (yes, Muslims regard Mohammad as the perfect model of virtue, so forget about Jesus filling that role, you misguided Christians) and wage violent jihad against their unbelieving neighbors until they are killed, or they convert, or they are subjugated (turned into dhimmis)and made to pay the jizya (protective tax).

Yes, THIS is Islam as Mohammad taught it, lived it, and ordered that it should be obeyed. There may be moderate Muslims, (a.k.a., apostates) but there is no moderate Islam, which is a fiction invented by multiculturalists and Islamic apologists. TRUE Islam is a bloody nightmare that would kill the entire world if need be for Allah, the pagan moon god reinvented, and Mohammad, a thief, liar, murderer, and rapist disguised as a prophet.

Yes, you SHOULD be angry by now. EDUCATE YOURSELF at http:jihadwatch.org, and http://dhimmiwatch.org


let him be whatever his faith the most important thing is the reformation and the responsibility he wanted to change the style of othordox conservative system to a latest modern way to attract young voters who are a future generation thinking to bring USA to success to clear and clean bad image of your country to the world.


Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)

Please enter the letter "k" in the field below:

Galleries

Palin

Sarah Palin

conventions

RNC | DNC

campaign

Campaign trail

Latest polls

Electoral vote map

map

Test your scenarios

Unauthorized tour

Obama

Obama's Chicago

News, but funnier

Cartoon

Walt Handelsman

Cartoon

The Lowe- Down

Cartoon

Editorial cartoons

Quizzes

McCain

Know the presidents?

McCain

Your McCain IQ

Obama

Your Obama IQ

Bush

Bush twins

Candidate match


Test assumptions