dan ho

Is anyone following the BC Human Rights Tribunal case? It has to do with an article by Mark Steyn entitled The Future Belongs to Islam. I think the case in itself is evidence for why the future could belong to Islam.

The Muslim world has youth, numbers and global ambitions.

The West is growing old and enfeebled, and lacks the will to rebuff those who would supplant it.

It’s the end of the world as we’ve known it.

An excerpt from ‘America Alone’.

I do not agree with the use of the words “rebuffing those who would supplant it”. I would say it is kinda harsh.

However, the fact is, in the western world, we could take this to court and non-muslim and muslim alike have an equal chance of representation and debate this. While in the Islamic world, which is mostly ruled by fundamentalists, non-mulsims do not get that voice.

In that sense, the article’s message is amplified.

Granted, Islam is a peaceful religion and the argument is right that you have to distinguish between fundamentalists and peaceful muslims. There is no doubt about that. Also, the Christian world is not without its crusades, inquisitions and other attrocities of past. The question is, do we want another crusade/jihad/inquisition? Two (or more) wrongs don’t make a right.

Yet, if on one hand, you have to give the opposing faction a “fighting chance”, but on the other side of the coin, all opposition is crushed, then that’s a much higher chance for one faction. Can there ever be equality if we kept the western world “free”, but let the rest of the world be dominated by any one faction (be it muslim, christianity .. or maybe even a non-religious ideology .. communism, facisim, etc)?

Really, it’s a debate of free world vs. fundamentalists. Not really western vs. muslims. It just happens that the current fundamentalists are muslims.

What are your thought on this?