"...THE RED-NOSED CHRISTIANIST"
I am overjoyed to see that little bastard Eric Rudolph get his ass hauled off to jail. Even better, though I only read it and did not see it live, I can imagine that never were words more spoken through grinding teeth than:
Ten days before Christian extremist Eric Rudolph was arrested, an interesting piece appeared in the Detroit Free Press on the violent portrayal of Islam in the Middle East. It's central point is critical to the doctored American view on the Islamic world, and I'll get to that in a second. But the opening sentences are also paramount:
Enter Eric Rudolph. He, along with McVeigh, Terry Nichols, Buford Furrow, and David Koresh (and we could include the Weavers in there as well) are examples of Christian extremists. Though Koresh's example slighly varies (the whole cult thing), all of these men are/were miltant, heavily armed men who believed in a virulent form of Christianity that called for the survival of one race (the white race) and the elimination of all other races and faiths (notably judaism). In their case, their sect is often referred to as "Christian Identity", bigoted and violent by design. People like Lou Dobbs refer to fundamentalist Arab terrorists as "Islamists". Surely, that makes Rudolph and co. "Christianists".
"But wait!", you say, "those guys aren't real Christians!" Well duh, of course they're not. They're on the opposite of the spectrum from, say, Bono. Christianity at its best is about peace, tolerance and growth (or at least it should be when it isn't . . . and when i say "growth", i don't necessarily mean "build! build! build!", hehe). The thing is, this is definitely true about Islam. In the same vein, Islam is a peaceful religion, and the Taliban-style fundamentalists, stuck in the 8th Century, aren't real Muslims either. If they, along with Al Qaeda, are considered part of the normal Islamic spectrum, then so must Rudolph and McVeigh be a part of the Christian one. The reason they aren't lies in the myth of moral superiority with which Western culture is generally afflicted. Continuing on...
"But wait!", you say, "If Rudolph-style kooks are to be considered part of the American Christian spectrum, why don't they have as strong a footing in their region and local culture as Islamic extremists have in their own? Can't the only conclusion be that Islam is, thus, more evil than Christianity?" The difference is not about varying nature of faith, but other factors. From the DFP piece:
I may add to this post later, but I must rush off to a section... In the meantime, go to Google News, and do two searches, the first for "Christian extremist" and the other for "Islamic extremist", and compare the number of results.
I am overjoyed to see that little bastard Eric Rudolph get his ass hauled off to jail. Even better, though I only read it and did not see it live, I can imagine that never were words more spoken through grinding teeth than:
"This sends a clear message that we will never cease in our efforts to hunt down all terrorists, foreign or domestic, and stop them from harming the innocent," Attorney General John Ashcroft said in a statement.Awwww, that must've broke poor Ashy's heart to say. (side note: um, where's osama? anyway...)
Ten days before Christian extremist Eric Rudolph was arrested, an interesting piece appeared in the Detroit Free Press on the violent portrayal of Islam in the Middle East. It's central point is critical to the doctored American view on the Islamic world, and I'll get to that in a second. But the opening sentences are also paramount:
Close your eyes and picture a "Christian extremist." If you're like most people, the term doesn't conjure immediate pictures.The author of the piece, Desiree Cooper, goes on to talk about the corruption of the definition of Islam as peace, but she could have just as easily broken into an equally interesting discussion about the lack of a concept of "Christian extremism" in America and elsewhere.
Now, try it again with this term: "Muslim extremist." The image probably comes much quicker, especially in this age of Al Qaeda and nonstop terror perpetrated by avowed Muslims.
Enter Eric Rudolph. He, along with McVeigh, Terry Nichols, Buford Furrow, and David Koresh (and we could include the Weavers in there as well) are examples of Christian extremists. Though Koresh's example slighly varies (the whole cult thing), all of these men are/were miltant, heavily armed men who believed in a virulent form of Christianity that called for the survival of one race (the white race) and the elimination of all other races and faiths (notably judaism). In their case, their sect is often referred to as "Christian Identity", bigoted and violent by design. People like Lou Dobbs refer to fundamentalist Arab terrorists as "Islamists". Surely, that makes Rudolph and co. "Christianists".
"But wait!", you say, "those guys aren't real Christians!" Well duh, of course they're not. They're on the opposite of the spectrum from, say, Bono. Christianity at its best is about peace, tolerance and growth (or at least it should be when it isn't . . . and when i say "growth", i don't necessarily mean "build! build! build!", hehe). The thing is, this is definitely true about Islam. In the same vein, Islam is a peaceful religion, and the Taliban-style fundamentalists, stuck in the 8th Century, aren't real Muslims either. If they, along with Al Qaeda, are considered part of the normal Islamic spectrum, then so must Rudolph and McVeigh be a part of the Christian one. The reason they aren't lies in the myth of moral superiority with which Western culture is generally afflicted. Continuing on...
"But wait!", you say, "If Rudolph-style kooks are to be considered part of the American Christian spectrum, why don't they have as strong a footing in their region and local culture as Islamic extremists have in their own? Can't the only conclusion be that Islam is, thus, more evil than Christianity?" The difference is not about varying nature of faith, but other factors. From the DFP piece:
"There is nothing inherent in Islam that makes people violent," said Hassan, speaking last Friday to the Detroit Women's Forum at the First Congregational Church on East Forest. "In the Middle East, it's the sociopolitical situation that gives rise to the violence. Religious leaders are exploiting it."Very good, Ms Hassan, I'm buying you a pie! Everything from the legacy of European colonialism to American military presence to the vicious political opportunism of some who aspire to rule, and not a friggin thing in the Qu'ran.
I may add to this post later, but I must rush off to a section... In the meantime, go to Google News, and do two searches, the first for "Christian extremist" and the other for "Islamic extremist", and compare the number of results.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home