The Third One

I have been called out for an unwillingness to criticize Islam. Atheists often get accused of this in the United States. The fact of the matter is that there's two things that keep people from criticizing Islam. 1) Since most of its adherents are Arabic, Asian, recent African descent, or otherwise nonwhite, they perceive any criticism as being racist. 2) They are simply afraid for their lives and property, since Islam is prepared to violently suppress criticism and apostasy to the point of mass homicide. Anyone so concerned about myself, however, is simply mistaken. Like all religion, Islam is simply philosophy with untenable beliefs that must be taken as immutable truth on the basis of insufficient evidence. Islam is not composed wholecloth of bad philosophy, as it would be difficult to design a religion that met this test, but it certainly contains tenets to which no modern person who believes in free speech, feminism, human rights, pluralism, or any number of any modern liberal ideas should be willing to adhere. However a moderate Muslim might need to reach the conclusion that he need not adhere to these tenets of Islam makes no difference to me.  Any Muslim, as with any person, willing to obey secular law and not interfere with the rights of others has no quarrel with me.

So let's get the central question out of the way here. The terrorism, the death warrants on the heads of people like Salmon Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the murder of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, and various violent responses to the infamous cartoons  published in Dutch newspaper Jyllands-Posten all carry with them a central question of whether the response was due to Islam itself or due to insanity, political motives, socioeconomic motives, and whatever other traits on the part of the perpetrators. I firmly believe that Islam itself is the motivation behind these things, and, perhaps tellingly, so do the perpetuators of these various problems. Now, that doesn't mean I have any prejudice against Muslims whatsoever. Although I should be brief so as to not repeat the many criticisms I've made of other Abrahamic faiths, I will say that The Old Testament condones slavery, rape, and extreme sectarianism, while The New Testament condones human sacrifice and torture as a means of atonement for sin. These criticisms, and, admittedly, more, do not mean I've any ill will towards believers in Judaism of Christianity and the same goes for Islam.

I forget if I've ever posted it here, but I once wrote an article about how secular people and religious people could coexist. This is important because, in the western world anyway, neither side is going anywhere anytime soon. Islam can certainly be a part of this, but the rules of this coexistence I have written will likely be unacceptable to much of the Muslim world. There are two rules we must all follow if the religious and the secular are going to coexist. First, we must all be equal before the law. Second, we must all agree on a uniform standard by which to raise children. Perhaps you can already see the issues that much of the Muslim world would have with my rules. The central problem with the first rule would be Sharia Law as a very concept. Having a separate set of laws to which some citizens are beholden because of their religion is the opposite of being equal before the law. Education for girls is the central issue they would have with my second rule, as much of the Muslim world violently opposes education for girls, particularly if it is equal, as it must be in a society that values women, to education for boys. Let it never again be said I don't have the guts to criticize Islam, because, in the preceding paragraphs, I have done just that.

-Frank