I obviously can’t quote more than one thing at a time… The second and third blocks in quotes are my own words, not quotes…

Sheesh.

This is a given. But understand that from within the Muslim world, they haven’t gotten to the point where their everyday existance is so threatened by the zealouts that they feel the need to put them out to pasture. Right now, the criticism (most of which is COLLECTIVE) intinctively makes them rally around the bandwagon, even though they personally do not want them there.

I think both sides in some extent need to get out of each others collective faces, Muslims from demanding that us infidels live up to taboos of Islam, and us Westerners from sneering elitism and in some cases ignorance.

Agreed.

… because at least currently the values of most non-reformist Muslims are incompatible with Western values.

I disagree. I’m not “reform” and I don’t take any issue with those who aren’t Muslim and who don’t share my “values” or belief system. Although the United States is not a predominantly Muslim country, it allows me to live *more* Islamically by granting me autonomy to live as I see fit (the whole seperation of Church and State- although we still have a ways to go, for sure.) No one tells me to wear the scarf (Saudis) or take it off (Turkey) and whatever I do, is of my own accord.

Yes, I am a practicing Muslim. Born in Yemen and raised in NYC. I used the extreme purposely because it was easier than trying to find “half-way” points on either side. I got lazy … Or was it that I was sleepy again? Mmm..maybe goofing off at work? I digress, but yeah-I’m Muslim.

yes, I understand where you are coming from, except:

I may very well rebel by either sleeping with the army or becoming asexual, etc.”)

Both alternatives seem a bit drastic, don’t you think? :)

Btw, are you a Muslim? The way you are putting things kind of suggests it.

There’s a difference between when one says, “This is what we do. This is what we advise. This is what we can do to help.” As opposed to the current trend of “Why don’t you savages just listen to us because you’re obviously too inept to find your own way.”

*This is not indicitive of all people, but there is a very pronounced overtone of “holier than thou” attitudes when it comes to the collective “West” in trying to help us reform.

I, for one, think that the responsibility on reform is on Muslims. I think both sides in some extent need to get out of each others collective faces, Muslims from demanding that us infidels live up to taboos of Islam, and us Westerners from sneering elitism and in some cases ignorance.

The Neoconservative dogma of “we’re forcibly bringing you democracy, why don’t you love us?!” Is a bit odd, I think.

There may very well be arguments for war in Iraq etc. coming from the National Interests of the US etc. (altough I doon’t find them terribly compelling), and in theory I’m hawkish and see value in pre-emptive strikes and all that.

Still, I’d rather see that reformation happen before the West opens itself up to influx of Muslims, because at least currently the values of most non-reformist Muslims are incompatible with Western values.

My main contention I guess you could say is that yes, we can’t do it for them, but what I find most irksome is the undertone of “Well, we’re far superior to you (culturally, religiously, etc) and you should be like us so let us help you find your voices by telling you exactly what to do.”

There’s a difference between when one says, “This is what we do. This is what we advise. This is what we can do to help.” As opposed to the current trend of “Why don’t you savages just listen to us because you’re obviously too inept to find your own way.”

*This is not indicitive of all people, but there is a very pronounced overtone of “holier than thou” attitudes when it comes to the collective “West” in trying to help us reform.

As for the criticism of religion, constructive criticism is not a problem. In fact, it is most beneficial- one to either reinforce what you originallly believe or two, to catapult reformations/change/etc. But insults have the opposite effect for those who really want to help bring about a positive change. In fact, it only reinforces a vicious cycle when ISLAMOPHOBES continue in the same rant over and over again because it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. (That doesn’t include the big things like, murder, etc, but more along issues relating to sex, etc. In other words, you can say all you want regarding Muslims killing everybody and their momma but that doesn’t mean I’m going to go on a rampage. Whereas if you talk about sexual issues, I may very well rebel by either sleeping with the army or becoming asexual, etc.”)

I digress a lot, but I hope you understand where I’m coming from.

The quote

My main complaint is that Islam currently makes it too hard for Moderates to stand up to the zealots.

is from myself, but you seem to address Tuomas.

Good point about the rule of law in Islamic countries, but we have rule of law in Europe and here, too, far too few moderates are speaking up. Maybe because it seems futile to them, but what other way to improve on things is there?

We can’t do it for them.

MartinG, one of the main reasons Moderates have not been able to stand up to the extremists and bring about Reformation is the West’s constant meddling in the area.

Good point, but self-ineterest alone should make them try harder. Besides, it’s not just in the Islamic world where the moderates have to do more, it’s right here in Europe, too.

My main complaint is that Islam currently makes it too hard for Moderates to stand up to the zealots.

You’re degenerating the religion and its adherants in one lump sum. Islam the religion and its principles do not make it hard. Extremists, zealots, non-moderates etc is what’s making it hard. You’re also lumping politics and Islam, and although they overlap at times (just like any other religion), they are not one and the same. And while no one would argue with you in that the change has to come from within the Muslim world, what it sounds like you’re advocating is that Islam THE RELIGION ITSELF is beyond redemption, and the only way to salvage it, is not that people actually start ADHERING to its tenants- but if only they would VEER away from it (thereby implicating “if only they became more like us”). In other words, moderates have to reform a violent religion. If that’s not what you’re saying, then thats fine. But that’s how you’re coming off to the many who read what you write. Yeah, maybe you’re “misunderstood”, but if everyone’s telling you you’ve gained weight, maybe you should get on a scale…

As I know in the past from our “dialogues” you don’t take too kindly to comparisons, but I’m going to throw one in just for fun anyway. In the 60′s you had the Black Panthers and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. If we focused strictly on the Panthers you could easily dismiss the cause of Civil Rights because they were *ahem* aggressive. But on the flip side, you had Martin Luther Jr whom fought for the same causes, in a different manner. Whereas most people choose to focus on Dr. King and condemn the Panthers, you would ignore King altogether and point to the Panthers as being indicitive of the majority.

Yes, there are lots of changes to be made. Yes, moderates have to step it up a more IN THE NEWS and public sphere so we can get on CNN too, but face it: in this day and age, rioters make for better coverage. Moderates having an interfaith dialogue sitting at a table, just talking: eh.. not so much.

Also, your ahem…”criticisms” as you quaintly call them are not constructive. You say “moderates” should be more vocal. Vocal to whom? And for what purpose? What would be your plan of attack? Do you think that if all of a sudden, I get on TV, that somehow my espousing moderate views will somehow convince the extremists? Perhaps sway some who are sitting on the fence? Don’t you realize how these people work? Those of a feather flock together.

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps the reason the extremists get away with the burnings, murder, etc (who by the way would just as easily kill a Muslim for not ascribing to their views) is because there is no RULE OF LAW to hold them back? That the govt’s saw fit for reasons beyond int’l politics to let them run amok? And just as there is no rule of law to stop the zealouts, likewise, the moderates are also left to fend for themselves? I guarantee you a hundred percent, that if you were part of a moderate majority even in a city of a million people, that you would not sacrifice your life and that of your family for the “greater good” of your society. You’re saying this from the comfort of your own home/apt/etc. It takes one zealout to fuck up your family for life.

It has to start with a mass of people agreed, but when all is said and done, there are very few PUBLIC volunteers. There’s a saying in arabic: Orphans make for powerful revolutionaries… It came about for a reason.

MartinG, one of the main reasons Moderates have not been able to stand up to the extremists and bring about Reformation is the West’s constant meddling in the area.