What is Islam? Is the barbarity of September 11 rooted in the preaching of Muhammad? Or are the Islamists, the Islamic fascists, bent on the destruction of all who disagree with them, merely an aberration, mixing politics, religion and violence in an appeal to the lowest psychological denominators of suicide bombers? Historians, political scientists and psychologists are all over the place in supplying answers to these questions. …
The historical forces at play are obvious. Bernard Lewis, a leading scholar of Islamist rage, places the fault line at the failure of the Muslim world to keep up with the West in the modern world. Diminishing Muslim power is both a humiliation and in Muslim minds a reversal of divine law, driving the losers to pick through the verses of the Koran to find justification for violence against winners. … Other scholars blame Western colonialism and imperialism, along with Judeo-Christian traditions, as contributing to the violent mentality of the extremists. These aberrations, they say, cannot be found in the teachings of Muhammad. … Islamists distorted this phenomenon for their own malevolent ends, fusing politics and religion into an all-purpose aggression for the “long-suffering victims” of Western imperial expansion. But there’s another view. “The Middle East’s experience is the culmination of long-existing indigenous trends, passions, and patterns of behavior, first and foremost the region’s millenarian imperial tradition,” writes Efraim Karsh, a British scholar, in “Islamic Imperialism,” a provocative and persuasive book. … He looks directly to the words of Muhammad, who in his farewell address to his followers ordered them to fight all men until they submit with the assertion that “There is no god but Allah.” … Muhammad proselytized with violence and used violence to consolidate conquest. Occupying territory was as important as converting or killing unbelievers. When the Jews of Medina resisted Muhammad in the 7th century, he beheaded the men and sold their women and children into slavery. The prophet, who claimed to derive his power and authority from Allah, was not only head of the captured states but was the single religious authority. “This allowed the prophet to cloak political ambitions with a religious aura,” writes Mr. Karsh, a professor at the University of London, “and to channel Islam’s energies into its instrument of aggressive expansion.” The ultimate goal would be for the world either to embrace Islam or live under its domination. This goal was realized in part with the establishment of the Ottoman Empire, which allowed certain other religions to exist but not prosper. Christians who sought domination, on the other hand, never invoked the teachings of Christ to justify violence. … The interpretation of the Islamist mentality as rooted in Muhammad’s appeal to violence, and the Islamist determination for religious domination of the world, may not tell the whole story today, but it explains why, for millions of Muslims, the image of the warrior trumps the image of a prophet of peace – if, indeed, there ever was one.
If there is any among you who still thinks the mass media isn’t in the pocket of the Left, you merely have to compare how the Plame affair went from being the biggest scandal since Capt. Dreyfuss to a non-story once the crime couldn’t be laid at the feet of Karl Rove or Dick Cheney. … Liberals who are aware that I’m not religious sometimes take me to task for not criticizing the religious Right with the same zeal I bring to bear on what I refer to as the religious Left. … The prophets of the faith include Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy and Jimmy Carter. The fact is, I have nothing against Christian fundamentalists. Mainly, I disagree with them on the issue of abortion. … I dislike abortions as a method of birth control, but I think they’re a necessary evil. … I honestly don’t know how any of the high-ranking Democrats can bear to look at themselves in the mirror when they shave in the morning. But if I ever run into Hillary Rodham Clinton, I’ll be sure to ask her.
Biblically literate people understand that before Satan fell, he shared an exalted place in close communion with God. But through his pride and lust for power he foolishly attempted to think himself equal to God. … I argue that these are the exact same tactics used by modern liberals. Where they disagree with the Almighty – they simply dismiss Him.
Global warming is a religion, not science. That’s why acolytes in the media attack global-warming critics not with scientific arguments, but for their apostasy. Then they laud global-warming believers not for reducing greenhouse gases, but simply for believing global warming is a coming catastrophe caused by man. The important thing is to have faith in those who warn: The end is near.
One of the more potent (and predictable) side effects of forcibly removing religion from public life, public conversation, and yes, public schools, is that society gradually loses touch with the religious dimensions of life. … And the things which unsettle us … often begin to make us angry. Perhaps that explains the increasingly open and unrelenting fury of the Left toward Christians, as rant after rant erupts in a variety of avenues … The savage soundbites on NBC’s new ‘Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip,’ in which Aaron Sorkin’s characters like Christians to the KU Klux Klan and deride them as both wild-eyed doomsday-ers and ignorant bigots from inconsequential corners of the American landscape. The recent virulent Rosie O’Donnell outburst, as she explained to the audience of ‘The View’ why Christians are even more dangerous than Muslim terrorists. The increasingly aggressive efforts of university administrations to drive Christian students from campus, usually on the premise that Christians are “intolerant” of homosexual behavior and that religious activities are inherently divisive. The escalating effort to remove crosses erected on government property to memorialize the sacrifices of fallen servicemen and police officers – lest some atheist passer-by take offense. The inscrutable decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, which ruled that Christians can’t meet in a private room at a public library because they might start studying the Bible or singing hymns … and religion isn’t considered free speech, on public property. But if it’s one thing for the Left to demand that Christians check their faith at the door, it’s another to ask us to check our minds. … Madonna, who justified the climatic moment of her current “Confessions” tour, in which she hangs from a gigantic cross with a “crown of thorns” on her head. Sorkin’s comparison of Christians to Klu Klux Klan members. … The endless accusations of “intolerance” lodged against Christians. Mocked, censored, and persecuted, we pray, change the channel, write letters, stage boycotts, complain on Conservative radio, file lawsuits, vote. In other words, we utilize the full resources of a democratic society … while our opponents force-feed their political agenda with aggressive censorship and fiats invoked by judges more obsessed with their own leftist liturgy than the letter of the law. O’Donnell’s outburst. How long does she think an outspoken woman who publicly embraces lesbian behavior would last under the tolerance of Al Qaeda, whose idea of religious conversion is “I’ll make him an offer he can’t refuse?” The American secularist media. They dutifully shake their heads over the rising number of sex crimes and teen pregnancies – while promoting increasingly pornographic images on everything from daytime television to cable news programs. They warn of increasingly violent crime rates all over the country, between commercials for ever-more sadistic “entertainment” programs. [and the hypocrisy when it comes to being anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment, when it clearly shows in the statistics that those states who allow their law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons under special permit have less violent crimes] …
In their blind determination to eradicate God from our community, from our culture, even from our government, the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State and all their Leftist kindred aren’t really accomplishing the demotion of the Divine – Who is, by definition, un-demote-able. They are bent, rather, on destroying themselves. The only question that remains as they head for their mad fall is whether they take our nation, and our children, with them.
…During the 1990s, liberals stated that legislation designed to cut food stamps was “immoral.” But most liberals also adhere to the belief that you “can’t legislate morality.” How can a bill be “immoral” if it can’t be “moral”? … The First Amendment clearly prevents the federal government from establishing a national religion. Does it also forbid the federal government from establishing a national morality? Was the 13th Amendment ban of slavery an example of Congress trying to “legislate morality”? If your answer is “yes,” is that sufficient grounds to reinstate slavery? … Have you ever read the 1802 letter from which the phrase “wall of separation of church and state” was taken? Is there any truth to the assertion that the letter was written to a group of Baptists in Connecticut ensuring that their church would be protected from the government by a one way wall of protection? How did that letter produce the justification for keeping a high school girl from mentioning Jesus at her high school graduation? Is it true that Thomas Jefferson set up the University of Virginia – using state funds – with rules including a ban on swearing and an expectation that students would “attend religious services”? Given that Thomas Jefferson did not attend the constitutional convention, why is it that people often quote him when insisting that the “separation of church and state” is a “constitutional requirement”? Is it possible that many of these self-described liberals are unable to differentiate between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence? How many states that ratified the First Amendment had official state churches? Is there any relationship between the ACLU’s love of communism and its hatred of religion? For the answers to all of these questions, you can simply read Legislating Morality, by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek. Or you can come back to class on Friday to hear me lecture on the topic of “legislating majority.”
Christophobia is marching through movie theaters and onto the pages of books. … The fear-mongers are not just at the publishing fringes. Kevin Phillips’ rant – “American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century” – hit the bestseller lists earlier this year. Nor is it surprising that the creators of these projects imagine crosses turning into swastikas, because they’re drawing on writers a generation ago who thought that Nazism grew out of Christianity – so why shouldn’t it happen again? That’s why it’s good, in this year of popular culture of paranoia, to have a scholarly book that shows how those who developed the Nazi religion “were decidedly anti-Christian because they saw Christianity as a Jewish phenomenon in the 1920s to the 1940s to be anti-Semitic meant being anti-Christian and vice versa.” … Nazi theologies praised “Aryan religion” with its ethic of power and complained that “The Pauline-Augustinian-Reformed teachings about original sin are insulting to the ethical and moral feeling of the Germanic race.” Nazi Poewe notes, “learned their Antisemitism outside of the church, then hated the church because it would not affirm their Antisemitism, and finally developed their outright rejection of Christianity.” … Hitler, like many of today’s Islamo-fascists, was out to kill all Jews, Christians, and leftists. And that’s why it’s particularly strange to see, in “American Theocracy” and other productions, the sense that George W. Bush and U.S. evangelicals are a fascist threat, rather than the defenders of liberty against those who would impose a new “final solution.”