N
newone
Guest
As Shakespeare said.
First of all, excuse me if this text is a little long. It is a subject that I never tackled previously : the relationship between religion and politics, as concerns Islam. In many aspects, this religion makes me think of an Ideology. That is because it is not only a religion, a fact that is never mentioned. Islam is both a religion and an ideology for social organization, and thus concerns the policies sought on Earth. Islam has these two characteristics, which are equaly important. The best proof that it is an ideology. When it has the possibility, and for reasons that, I repeat, are ideological and not religious in my opinion, because it makes no sense, Islam dynamites treasures of humanity, just as Pol-pot did in Cambodia. Thus 6 months before destroying the pretty Twin Towers in New York, Big ladens friends blew up the giant Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan.
We do not know today what the 21st century will be. I mean that only our great grandchildren at the beginning of the next century will be able to look back and say this about the 21st century we are now entering. At the beginning of the 20th century, (which only recently finished), in the years around 1900, nobody would have been able to predict what was going to happen even ten years hence, or to say what would be the general tendency of the century, to make an assessment up to the end ot the century. Only now that it is finished can we identify what characterized the 20th century. And we know this, as many of you will agree with me, I think. The 20th century was, we can now say, the century of ideologies. And we know the damage they did. Buddhism, which is a religion, or merely a practice according to some, in any case that I like very much, says that thoughts, which are the basis of ideas and opinions, and thus of ideologies, are immaterial obviously. Thus one should not believe in them. The wise man observes thoughts passing before his spirit, when they are presented to him, with detachment and almost with contempt, and does not follow them. He remains detached.
On most of the face of the Earth, where heads of state are not Muslim, and in particular in the world where Christianity predominates, we other Westerners know better, and where religious freedom (or simply freedom) exists, none of our politicians would think to pick up the telephone and ask a clergyman for his opinion before making a decision concerning his responsibilities as a locally or nationally elected official. All the more so if this clergyman lives in another country. As we well know, this is because the politician would be afraid that others would learn about this and make fun of him. Indeed, the majority of our elected officials do not practice Christianity, and often are not believers. They are not ashamed to say so, and are not penalized for this. It is hard to imagine a clergyman in a Western country being naive enough to believe that elected officials, mayors, congressional representatives or senators would take his opinion into account. And to risk being ridiculous, believing that if he gives his opinion it would be listened to. Elected officials listen only to themselves. Voters only ask for two things : competency and honesty. And of course an atheist can handle files as honestly as a believer. This is the main thing.
Islamists cannot contradict me on this point. Even between themselves they do not make people believe that our heads of state obey our parishes and churches, and call distant countries to know what they should do. No head of state asks for advice from a Christian leader living in Italy or in the Vatican as everyone knows. If the Italians received daily phone calls from our politicians and of from those around the world, in the USA or elsewhere, asking what they should do, we would have heard about it. There would have been leaks, we would have learned about what was going on. Rest assured, the extreme left would have warned you.
This is not what happens with Islam either. But, via Moslem religious representative in our countries, heads of state in remote Moslem countries who dominate the religious hierarchy make themselves heard and obeyed often. Islam reminds me of Communism in many ways. There are great similarities in their operations, with a clergy that acts as a power transmission belt, and in their obedience to reigning families, generally living in the same countries but whose clan or tribal members, the Nomenklatura, are sometimes a bit scattered around the earth. This is a characteristic of political parties and sects run remotely by individuals.
Communist countries, including after the end of the Kominterm, retained their strong or very strong allegiance to the ex-Soviet Union and listened carefully to Moscow. Through the Communist Parties around the world, Moscow ran and influenced the organizations the parties had created, and mobilized large numbers of followers. Recall their propaganda against the Star Wars project of the late lamented President Reagan (may he rest in peace), that hindered them considerably and (along with foreign policy and human rights) contributed to the fall of the Communist block. More than twenty years previously they had mobilized large numbers of people against America and its leaders, and the Vietnam war, and they won on that front. Well, I said thus, Christianity is only a religion, not an ideology. It has no resemblance with a politicized organization that has an allegiance with leading families in remote countries. It has nothing to do with like the Communist Party, a Islam, or any sect. The Christian hierarchy does not give orders to politicians
I am not attacking atheists by saying what follows (by the way, war veterans say that there are no atheists in the trenches), nor the former Communists (like myself, I dropped in, alas, in the past). But I remember that in the Seventies, and even more so a few decades before, when well-known Communist politicians in the media in Europe, which had them at all levels in the fields of journalism, literature, the arts and politics, and who were often interviewed and strongly stated while howling, if they had been able to do so, or in writing, that they did not believe in God, and that they were atheist, and proud to be so. They practically beat their chests with their fists in front of the cameras to affirm their atheism, standing straight and looking churches in the eye, most probably. But soon after they converted to Islam. And for a long time after, when they are interviewed now, they confirm their conversion. You see, Islam does not have only faults. Do not make me say what I did not say. Islam turns deeply convinced atheists into enthusiastic, convinced followers of the opposite. Ahhg! No doubt the superiority of Islam over Catholicism.
Now in countries that Islam is trying to enter, their believers ask for a public holiday in honor of their religion, as our societies have public holidays for Christian festivals that they are compared with. My answer to that and my opinion are simple. And I am not saying this as a sermonizer or as an important person, because I am not somebody important here or elsewhere. I say this without hatred.
But as long as EASTER, for example, is a not a holiday in Moslem countries (which is formally prohibited), I do not see why we should create a public holiday devoted to Islam. As long as the countries of Islam are not democratic, and where there is no religious freedom (in other words, any freedom), WE DO NOT TRUST what resembles and has, just like the Communist Party, the characteristic of a major sect, (which kept May 1 as a public holiday). Why not give a public holiday to the Moon sect, and to Scientology as well, while we're at it? We know the damage inflicted by ideologies in the previous century, which witnessed the birth and death of Communism which considered itself to be eternal. Let us be vaccinated and not fall ill with the same disease. Islam is also an ideology, and not only a religion. We should not accept this mixture of traits, not mix religion with politics. Each has a role to play and work to do. Politicians should manage cities as requested by their electorate. And religious leaders should continue to speak about God, and only about God, which is what those who come to hear them want.
You can (I hope), reach my texts here :
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=573&highlight=
First of all, excuse me if this text is a little long. It is a subject that I never tackled previously : the relationship between religion and politics, as concerns Islam. In many aspects, this religion makes me think of an Ideology. That is because it is not only a religion, a fact that is never mentioned. Islam is both a religion and an ideology for social organization, and thus concerns the policies sought on Earth. Islam has these two characteristics, which are equaly important. The best proof that it is an ideology. When it has the possibility, and for reasons that, I repeat, are ideological and not religious in my opinion, because it makes no sense, Islam dynamites treasures of humanity, just as Pol-pot did in Cambodia. Thus 6 months before destroying the pretty Twin Towers in New York, Big ladens friends blew up the giant Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan.
We do not know today what the 21st century will be. I mean that only our great grandchildren at the beginning of the next century will be able to look back and say this about the 21st century we are now entering. At the beginning of the 20th century, (which only recently finished), in the years around 1900, nobody would have been able to predict what was going to happen even ten years hence, or to say what would be the general tendency of the century, to make an assessment up to the end ot the century. Only now that it is finished can we identify what characterized the 20th century. And we know this, as many of you will agree with me, I think. The 20th century was, we can now say, the century of ideologies. And we know the damage they did. Buddhism, which is a religion, or merely a practice according to some, in any case that I like very much, says that thoughts, which are the basis of ideas and opinions, and thus of ideologies, are immaterial obviously. Thus one should not believe in them. The wise man observes thoughts passing before his spirit, when they are presented to him, with detachment and almost with contempt, and does not follow them. He remains detached.
On most of the face of the Earth, where heads of state are not Muslim, and in particular in the world where Christianity predominates, we other Westerners know better, and where religious freedom (or simply freedom) exists, none of our politicians would think to pick up the telephone and ask a clergyman for his opinion before making a decision concerning his responsibilities as a locally or nationally elected official. All the more so if this clergyman lives in another country. As we well know, this is because the politician would be afraid that others would learn about this and make fun of him. Indeed, the majority of our elected officials do not practice Christianity, and often are not believers. They are not ashamed to say so, and are not penalized for this. It is hard to imagine a clergyman in a Western country being naive enough to believe that elected officials, mayors, congressional representatives or senators would take his opinion into account. And to risk being ridiculous, believing that if he gives his opinion it would be listened to. Elected officials listen only to themselves. Voters only ask for two things : competency and honesty. And of course an atheist can handle files as honestly as a believer. This is the main thing.
Islamists cannot contradict me on this point. Even between themselves they do not make people believe that our heads of state obey our parishes and churches, and call distant countries to know what they should do. No head of state asks for advice from a Christian leader living in Italy or in the Vatican as everyone knows. If the Italians received daily phone calls from our politicians and of from those around the world, in the USA or elsewhere, asking what they should do, we would have heard about it. There would have been leaks, we would have learned about what was going on. Rest assured, the extreme left would have warned you.
This is not what happens with Islam either. But, via Moslem religious representative in our countries, heads of state in remote Moslem countries who dominate the religious hierarchy make themselves heard and obeyed often. Islam reminds me of Communism in many ways. There are great similarities in their operations, with a clergy that acts as a power transmission belt, and in their obedience to reigning families, generally living in the same countries but whose clan or tribal members, the Nomenklatura, are sometimes a bit scattered around the earth. This is a characteristic of political parties and sects run remotely by individuals.
Communist countries, including after the end of the Kominterm, retained their strong or very strong allegiance to the ex-Soviet Union and listened carefully to Moscow. Through the Communist Parties around the world, Moscow ran and influenced the organizations the parties had created, and mobilized large numbers of followers. Recall their propaganda against the Star Wars project of the late lamented President Reagan (may he rest in peace), that hindered them considerably and (along with foreign policy and human rights) contributed to the fall of the Communist block. More than twenty years previously they had mobilized large numbers of people against America and its leaders, and the Vietnam war, and they won on that front. Well, I said thus, Christianity is only a religion, not an ideology. It has no resemblance with a politicized organization that has an allegiance with leading families in remote countries. It has nothing to do with like the Communist Party, a Islam, or any sect. The Christian hierarchy does not give orders to politicians
I am not attacking atheists by saying what follows (by the way, war veterans say that there are no atheists in the trenches), nor the former Communists (like myself, I dropped in, alas, in the past). But I remember that in the Seventies, and even more so a few decades before, when well-known Communist politicians in the media in Europe, which had them at all levels in the fields of journalism, literature, the arts and politics, and who were often interviewed and strongly stated while howling, if they had been able to do so, or in writing, that they did not believe in God, and that they were atheist, and proud to be so. They practically beat their chests with their fists in front of the cameras to affirm their atheism, standing straight and looking churches in the eye, most probably. But soon after they converted to Islam. And for a long time after, when they are interviewed now, they confirm their conversion. You see, Islam does not have only faults. Do not make me say what I did not say. Islam turns deeply convinced atheists into enthusiastic, convinced followers of the opposite. Ahhg! No doubt the superiority of Islam over Catholicism.
Now in countries that Islam is trying to enter, their believers ask for a public holiday in honor of their religion, as our societies have public holidays for Christian festivals that they are compared with. My answer to that and my opinion are simple. And I am not saying this as a sermonizer or as an important person, because I am not somebody important here or elsewhere. I say this without hatred.
But as long as EASTER, for example, is a not a holiday in Moslem countries (which is formally prohibited), I do not see why we should create a public holiday devoted to Islam. As long as the countries of Islam are not democratic, and where there is no religious freedom (in other words, any freedom), WE DO NOT TRUST what resembles and has, just like the Communist Party, the characteristic of a major sect, (which kept May 1 as a public holiday). Why not give a public holiday to the Moon sect, and to Scientology as well, while we're at it? We know the damage inflicted by ideologies in the previous century, which witnessed the birth and death of Communism which considered itself to be eternal. Let us be vaccinated and not fall ill with the same disease. Islam is also an ideology, and not only a religion. We should not accept this mixture of traits, not mix religion with politics. Each has a role to play and work to do. Politicians should manage cities as requested by their electorate. And religious leaders should continue to speak about God, and only about God, which is what those who come to hear them want.
You can (I hope), reach my texts here :
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=573&highlight=
