Knowing Our Enemy Part 2

Yesterday I posted the first of a series of four articles from the Washington Examiner which they have posted to help all of us understand who we are fighting in the war on terror.  The second article can be found at the Washington Examiner and is written by Tawfik Hamid. 

Mr. Hamid points out that honoring the traditional dances or mores of a culture is a positive thing, but honoring the stoning of women in a culture should not be viewed as a positive thing. 

Mr. Hamid points out that after the Danish newspaper published cartoons of Mohammed there were no demonstrations by Muslims for four months.  It was only after the magazine apologized for publishing the cartoons that the violence began. 

The article points out:

“The violent response to the cartoons occurred in early February of 2006; only 72 hours after the magazine apologized for publishing the cartoons. This apology was likely perceived by radical Muslims as weakness, and thus initiated a wave of Islamic violence that spread to many parts of the world.

“Similarly, making concessions to Islamic Shariah law can serve as a provocation to radical Islam, as it gives the radicals the impression that the West should bow to their Islamic laws.”

The article points out that in respecting the religious freedom of Muslims we need to aware of which religious practices affect only the person who practices them and which practices have a negative effect on others.  Muslims must be required to practice their religion within the bounds of the American legal system, otherwise we run the risk of importing some of the more barbaric aspects of Muslim law–honor killings, stonings, etc.  In America we do have religious freedom, but that is the freedom to practice your religion within the boundaries of the law.  Murder is against the law.

This is a time to show our faith as a country in the validity of our laws, it is not a time to try to bend those laws to an immigrant group that has refused to assimilate.