by Jerome du Bois
In an earlier post I quoted the following sentence written by local self-declared "moderate Muslim" activist and physician M. Zuhdi Jasser:
For those of us who enjoy and cherish the freedoms of America as Muslims, we know that there is nothing more Islamic than American democracy.
And I commented:
American democracy is not only compatible with Islam, they are nearly identical, according to this man.
Riiight. So when we hold up the USA next to Islamic societies, we see similar pictures? Where? Turkey? Doctor . . . your eyes need work.
In fact, Muslims worldwide believe in One Man, One Vote, Once. As soon as they assume the positions of power, here comes dhimmitude and sharia.
I will not allow words, places, and concepts I cherish --The United States of America, democracy, freedom, and reason itself, which is absent from his statement-- I will not allow them to be twisted or muddled or inverted or stained in the service of a Muslim agenda --especially a disingenuous one. Dr. Jasser practices Nuclear Cardiology; he's no idiot; he knows exactly what he's saying, and he knows it makes no sense. It doesn't matter; what matters is that he can print it.
Now I find a new example of Dr. Jasser's Newspeak, from his pluggedin column on Benedict XVI.
He had the strength to both deny the superiority of Christianity over Islam striving to recognize a common base, while also justifiably criticizing Muslims for dangerously mixing politics and religion.
There are two hot links in this quotation. I'm only interested in the first: "Christianity over Islam" links to an article in Catholic News dated March 6, 2002. I quote the article in full, beginning with the headline:
Ratzinger denies Christianity īsuperiorī to Islam
The Vatican's Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger has reacted to "conventional wisdom" that "the Christian faith must give up its claim to truth" in the wake of 11 September.
The Prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith made his observations on Friday when addressing a conference in memory of Bishop Eugenio Corecco of Lugano, Switzerland, on the topic Faith, Truth and Tolerance.
Ratzinger praised Islam for upholding the values of monogamous marriage and the dignity of women, which "undoubtedly demonstrate a cultural superiority".
"It is true that the Muslim world is not totally mistaken when it reproaches the West of Christian tradition of moral decadence and the manipulation of human life," he said. "This imposes on us a serious examination of conscience."
"The truth of the Christian faith appears to us in all its depth, but we mustn't forget that, sadly, it has been darkened many times by the concrete behaviour of those who called themselves Christians," he said. "Islam has also had moments of great splendor and decadence in the course of its history. "
Cardinal Ratzinger stressed that it is "important is to go to the roots of the values proclaimed by the different religions". This, he said, is where "a real interreligious dialogue can begin."
First: The new Pope is supposed to be a very smart man, but the passages in bold are stupid and wrong. Since when is Islam monogamous? And since when is it dignified for a woman to become a victim of the most horrible crime, which I will not call by its common disgusting designation but will name it what it is: sororicide --murdering female relatives. Some dignity. (And don't hand me the old saw about cultural, not Islamic. That's bullshit. These murders are Islamic through and through.) And from the first day someone begins praying five times a day in a single direction, or reciting words they don't understand, Muslims begin to manipulate human life; they would nitpick your moments down to the subatomic if they could.
Second: I don't read a clear statement by the then-Cardinal which supports the claim of the headline. (By the way, I have no Catholic axe to grind, which will become obvious below.) But Jasser amps it up as if it means something. He, too, knows damn well that millions of Muslim women suffer under polygamy and worse, even in the West, even in the USA. He, too, knows damn well that the absolute rulers all across the Middle Eastern Muslim world revel in a depth of moral decadence that would have the Borgias green with envy. (Camel jockeys, mutigenerational pedophilia, extortion, dhimmitude, slavery, and I'm leaving a lot out.)
As far as I'm concerned, both Dr. Jasser and the new Pope sign off on the continued universal inferiority of all human females except those safely dead and gone. How many women of authority did you see in that whole red, white and gold television spectacle? Zeeerro. As for Dr. Jasser, why doesn't he write about Ayaan Hirsi Ali or Bat Ye'or or Irshad Manji? I wonder.
In the meantime, I remind Dr. Jasser that words have commonly accepted meanings. Don't try to jam disparate concepts like Islam and democracy together. You have written about the dangers of mixing politics and religion, but again you know damn well that in Islam they are inextricably intermixed, and the policy is to make the world Islam. Muslims need to make clear statements about giving up notions of conquest and about the need for an Islamic Enlightenment, in which Muslims question everything. The rest is either hand-waving or, worse, taqiyya.
CODA: Finally, for those who believe the new Pope will continue along the lines of his predecessor, Hugh Hewitt gives us this tantalizing peek into a future that will make Mel Gibson's heart go all aflutter, and the hearts of those who would champion women sink:
Pope Benedict XVI is a scholar, and a teacher. Scholar/teachers have students, and they stay close with many of them. Father Joseph Fessio, Provost of Ave Maria University in Naples, Florida, studied under the new pope in the early '70s, and has stayed a friend and student for thirty years. He was my guest today. Here is a short and important --in fact crucial-- excerpt from that conversation. A complete transcript will be posted later at Radioblogger:
"His deepest love is the Mass. And so he wrote a book called The Spirit of the Liturgy, and it is clear that he believes that what happened after Vatican II, that Council, was that the way the Mass was celebrated really represented a break from tradition. It was no longer in continuity. So, he has said publicly that the previous rite should never have been abolished because it was a rite that had nourished saints for centuries. At the same time, he was the one who had to negotiate with Lefebrve and others, and who had to tell the pope, 'We can't take anymore, they have broken the rules here, they have ordained bishops.' So he deeply wants to have the Mass celebrated as he says in his homily [today] with solemnity and rectitude. So I think he will reach out to those who have a love for the pre-[Vatican II] Mass."
That's right, folks. You'll be looking at the priest's back as he drones on in the ancient tongue. That's progress, back to the future that was the past. That's when the women were required to attend Mass veiled as well, remember? And why wouldn't that practice be ressurrected as well? Thus the priest can smile with his Muslim brother, contentedly looking down upon the muffled women.
Posted by Jerome at April 23, 2005 12:30 PM | TrackBack