 |
| Lake Como-Travel+Leisure, Facebook |
 |
| Lake Como, Italy, trekearth |
Co-worker '(Radio) Mr. Russ, please come back'.
Co-worker 'This looks like fog on the screen'.
Me 'It is sunlight, the sun is beginning to go down (from our perspective of course). It is an effect'.
Co-worker 'Oh'.
Me 'And you have the science degrees'.
I am glad that the gate arm did not stay stuck earlier, only briefly...
A Radical Problem In Brief
With the media documented murderous acts of ISIS: Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, notably against Muslims and Christians in Iraq and against at least two noted American journalists with beheadings; I am philosophically pondering on how to deal with a threat of radical Islam in the Western World.
Personally, as far back as the Crusades, I think it was likely a mistake for the Western World and the Christian Church (although politicized) to ever get heavily involved with the Islamic and Arab worlds.
Now there is a history, both good and bad, positive and negative for both sides to remember and rehash.
If there was no such negative history, would radical Islam be a threat to the West today?
Perhaps, but I seriously doubt it would be as great.
Rather friendly relations at a distance while maintaining a strong Western military advantage would have been better.
As a corporate security officer working with Sikhs, Christians, a Latter-day Saint, a Muslim and other, there have been discussions on the issue.
With my Sikh co-workers and my Christian co-worker there is agreement that in general, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Secularists, Feminists, Atheists, Agnostics, Latter-day Saints, Jehovah's Witnesses and a variety of other persons with religious and non-religious philosophical views can co-exist within the Western World without one group wanting to kill or behead the other.
Even with some major religious and philosophical disagreements.
It is mainly it seems, the radical, militant Islamists that are very much opposed to toleration of others and democracy and have the theological concept of convert to Islam or die in regard to all other groups, including other Muslims that they find objectionable.
Other notable exceptions that would be opposed to toleration and democracy, not stating this is an exhaustive list, but these philosophical views are not prevalent in the West presently, would be those supporting Communism, certainly as in anything resembling that of the Marxist-Leninist, Soviet Union and those supporting Fascism as in anything resembling Nazism.
Lewis M. Hopfe admits that one of the most controversial aspects of Islam is 'Jihad' (Holy War). Hopfe (1987: 419).
Pagans he writes may have been forced to convert but Jews and Christians and others were free to worship and they chose. Hopfe (1987: 419).
It is admitted by Hopfe that there is a Muslim doctrine that one must do battle for God. Hopfe (1987: 419).
This is contrasted by Christ as the kingdom of God is not of this world.
New American Standard Bible
Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm." (John 18: 36).
Instead of Kingdom of God is eventually established as in fully culminated in Revelation 21-22 by God, and not by the military acts of the Church, Christians, Jews or people of God.
The Holy Roman Empire would be a politicized version of Christianity which I would not consider primarily Biblically based.
In addition to attempt to force any type of conversion is to miss the point that God converts persons as in God chooses (Ephesians 1-2) and molds one for works by faith through grace through the atoning and resurrection work of Christ. One is born again by an act of God in John 3, not by an act of the sword.
Doubtless there would be many documented cases found today where radical Islamists have attempted to coerce and force Christians, Jews and persons of all types of religions and views to their type of Islamic views. Some at the threat of death.
S.A. Nigosian states the goal of Jihad is not so much conversion but for Islam to gain 'political control over societies'. Nigosian (1994: 448). This is done in order to rule them under Islam. Nigosian (1994: 448).
Therefore
It seems reasonable that anyone holding to such radical views should be barred entrance into a Western nation. I am not stating that all Muslims should be barred from the West, but that radical Islamists that demonstrate in their public or discovered views opposition to toleration and democracy should not be allowed into Western nations. Anyone that prefers Sharia (Islamic law) to Western democracy should be barred entrance.
On a practical level I suppose a burqa ban would be a deterrent for entrance for many Islamists considering entrance into a Western nation.
Yes, this could be considered a decrease in liberty, but would such people if provided entry really desire to uphold Western liberty and democracy if there was a Muslim majority?
Doubtful if they prefer Sharia (Islamic law).
HOPFE, LEWIS M. (1991) Religions of the World, New York, Macmillan Publishing Company.
NIGOSIAN, S.A. (1994) World Faiths, New York, St. Martin’s Press.
