Haiku [from N.O.], points to the Robert Lindsay piece on Islam producing psychopaths. [This post appears only at OoL.]
Though it’s difficult to disagree with Lindsay, I’d like to digress and look at two other aspects – his quote below and then religion in general.
When it comes to anger, Western societies widely agree that it is a sign of weakness. Uncontrolled explosions of this unpleasant feeling are maybe the fastest way of losing face, especially in Northern countries, and though angry people may be feared, they are never respected.
In Muslim culture, anger is much more accepted, and being able to intimidate people is seen as strength and source of social status. We even see ethnic Muslim groups or countries proudly declare whole days of anger, and use expressions such as “holy anger” — a term that seems contradictory in peaceful cultures.
In Western societies, the ability to handle criticism constructively if it is justified, and with a shrug if it is misguided, is seen as an expression of self-confidence and authenticity.
Many fellow bloggers plus myself do the anger bit in print because things are so frustrating with LibLabCon, the EU, Obama and all the rest of it. Julia gets stuck in, most of us do. Seems to me that the reader prefers to believe a calm article, supported by facts, though perhaps sympathizing with the ranter.
However, a lot of shill-ing and trolling is done by those coming over as erudite, calm and collected, using simple fonts and well laid out pages. Compare that to the lurid colour on black, heavily capitalized and shrill, going left field to the point most would click out – pity because there are often morsels in there worth pursuing elsewhere.
This might sound strange coming from me, the OoL author who fights for the Judaeo-Christian antecedents of our society but no society should be a theocracy, least of all the Christian – that’s just open to abuse and has been throughout history. And if that is so for a benign religion – look at the NT text, not the zealous followers – then it is how many thousand times more so for Islam?
This so-called religion has to be one of the greatest blights on the world, particularly for women but also for men – hands chopped off, weekly beheadings in Riyadh and so on. Call me extreme but methinks that any non-indigenous addition to these islands must be asked if he/she embraces UK law as overriding other law. If not, then out.
Turning that back on Christians who cannot accept gay “marriage” ever – and look at the recent Louisiana ruling against it – are they to leave if they can’t accept that law?
Answer is no if they are from here and of British stock. If this is their original home, then they are entitled to not accept it, just as pagans are within their rights not to accept the state telling people they must go to church on Sundays.
Because there’s another tradition in these islands, is there not? The tradition of being free to pursue one’s own path.
But to impose that freedom on the society – is that not coercive? Can a Muslim argue that for us to impose values of freedom and tolerance is just as extreme as they are?
Somewhere along the way, someone has to say stop – that sort of thing is just sophistry. Those are the values of our islands and you’re wishing to impose the opposite. No thanks, goodbye – there’s the aeroplane.