Why I’d be a Muslim

[RogerW 0]

Islam is a religion of Justice, of conviction, and of positive action.

If I were not an Objectivist, I would be a Muslim!

If there was no law of Identity, there would be a God.

One God, An all powerful God, an all knowing God.

Those who would not accept him evade the nature of existence; they are not just wrong but evil.

God cannot accept compromise with evil.

As God’s agent on earth, I would accept no compromise, and would fight to end evil.

Man cannot be reasoned into faith and so I would force evil to submit by rock and bysword.

Islam is a religion that has but one root flaw; its starting premise is wrong, and all the conclusions that follow are defective.

Existence is governed by the law of identity, a fact open to all men through reason.

Identity precludes the existence of God.

Like Islam, I believe evil stems from evading reality, and Like Islam, I accept no compromise, and I will fight against evil.

But unlike Islam, I know man cannot be forced into reason.

I cannot force submission, I can only offer persuasion.

This battle over evil is a war of opposing realities, A battle where I must attack with my pen, but defend with my sword.

[RogerW 0]

In retrospect, I wish I had let this idea stew for a couple more days before posting. It got stuck in my craw and it was keeping me from moving forward with other work. Please consider this a work in progress, and I may rewrite it at some future time.

Any feedback, suggestions, recommendations, or general criticisms?

[alann 0]

You cannot equivocate between reason and faith; they are opposites.

If you're trying to say that you have absolute confidence in reason and your free will and the Western defense of individual rights and, therefore, liberty, and you are unwilling to tolerate attacks on those freedoms and your right to act as you see fit, then say that. Your intolerance is for injustice, or for irrational demands for the repression of your exercise of freedom; theirs is for that freedom itself. They are opposites. To equivocate, even to make some kind of poetic point, is an obfuscation and not helpful in understanding the issues involved.

"If there were no law of identity" is a contradiction. The law of identity is a metaphysical fact. Things are what they are. God does not exist if nothing exists anymore than He/She/It exists in reality, where Existence exists. Again, I think I get what you're trying to do metaphorically, but you can't get there from here. God and mysticism are about denial, not about what isn't, but about denying what is.

[RogerW 0]

You cannot equivocate between reason and faith; they are opposites.

If you're trying to say that you have absolute confidence in reason and your free will and the Western defense of individual rights and, therefore, liberty, and you are unwilling to tolerate attacks on those freedoms and your right to act as you see fit, then say that. Your intolerance is for injustice, or for irrational demands for the repression of your exercise of freedom; theirs is for that freedom itself. They are opposites. To equivocate, even to make some kind of poetic point, is an obfuscation and not helpful in understanding the issues involved.

"If there were no law of identity" is a contradiction. The law of identity is a metaphysical fact. Things are what they are. God does not exist if nothing exists anymore than He/She/It exists in reality, where Existence exists. Again, I think I get what you're trying to do metaphorically, but you can't get there from here. God and mysticism are about denial, not about what isn't, but about denying what is.

I agree with you entirely, and I now see how my posting could be viewed as an equivocation. As I said, it was not well written. I was trying to momentary argue from an Islamists position, with the clarity of an Objectivist, (if that make sense), to highlight Islam’s threat.

My poorly expressed point, posted with a deliberately provocative title, was intended to illustrate that Islam draws a very consistent ethic that follows "logically" from its starting premises, i.e. a failure to recognize the metaphysical fact of identity. Their use of force is the consistent consequence of the starting point, and this is why they pose such a threat. Islam is very simple and consistent, unlike Christianity which has a muddied view that clouds the issues. Because Islam is so much more consistent, it is so much easier to see the threat that comes from failing to recognize the metaphysical fact of identity.

I will have to reevaluate of trying to make such a juxtaposition is capable of achieving the desired effect.

Roger

[bborg 0]

Islam, and religion generally, is a rejection of the axiom of existence, not just identity. Muslims do not simply disagree about the nature of what they observe, they reject what they observe and embrace instead a doctrine of fantasy and appeals to emotion. They condemn infidels, not for "evading" Allah, but for focusing on what exists and not submitting to the whims of the faithful.

[KPO'M 0]

In retrospect, I wish I had let this idea stew for a couple more days before posting. It got stuck in my craw and it was keeping me from moving forward with other work. Please consider this a work in progress, and I may rewrite it at some future time.

Any feedback, suggestions, recommendations, or general criticisms?

One suggestion, perhaps, is to write it from the perspective of a Muslim. Why not write an expository piece titled, "Why I'd be an Objectivist"? It can be a persuasive piece to show how Objectivism provides the good things that Islam can only claim to.

[Lady Brin 0]

In retrospect, I wish I had let this idea stew for a couple more days before posting. It got stuck in my craw and it was keeping me from moving forward with other work. Please consider this a work in progress, and I may rewrite it at some future time.

Any feedback, suggestions, recommendations, or general criticisms?

None, except the only reason I started reading the essay is because I thought the title read: Why I'd be a Muffin.

[B. Royce 0]

In retrospect, I wish I had let this idea stew for a couple more days before posting. It got stuck in my craw and it was keeping me from moving forward with other work. Please consider this a work in progress, and I may rewrite it at some future time.

Any feedback, suggestions, recommendations, or general criticisms?

None, except the only reason I started reading the essay is because I thought the title read: Why I'd be a Muffin.

A muffin's proud,

A Muslim cowed;

A Muslim, him submits,

A muffin has puffin' fits!

[RogerW 0]

A muffin's proud,

A Muslim cowed;

A Muslim, him submits,

A muffin has puffin' fits!

Brian, I'm not sure I got this one, but I laughed out loud just the same! 'The Muffin and the Muslim,' I can see whole series of illustrated children stories.

[B. Royce 0]

A muffin's proud,

A Muslim cowed;

A Muslim, him submits,

A muffin has puffin' fits!

Brian, I'm not sure I got this one, but I laughed out loud just the same! 'The Muffin and the Muslim,' I can see whole series of illustrated children stories.

Then you got it, Roger.

[TerryJ2 0]

As a creative person, I understand what you are trying to say.

I had a short story published 4 yrs ago which I wrote in the first person, from the POV of a Muslim woman in Pakistan. She, however, is an individual, and clearly stands out from the others.

I think the publisher has a few copies left (it's a very small press), and if you want to read it, it's called "On My Honor," published by Live Wire Press, In Good Company, Volume 5, www.livewirepress.net, padler@cstone.net. If I cut and paste it here, from my hard drive, I think it would be way too long.

Terry

[Betsy Speicher 0]

If I cut and paste it here, from my hard drive, I think it would be way too long.

We have entire novels in the "By Members, For Members" forum, so feel free to share it.

[Bob Kolker 0]

Islam is a religion of Justice, of conviction, and of positive action.

If I were not an Objectivist, I would be a Muslim!

If there was no law of Identity, there would be a God.

One God, An all powerful God, an all knowing God.

Those who would not accept him evade the nature of existence; they are not just wrong but evil.

God cannot accept compromise with evil.

As God’s agent on earth, I would accept no compromise, and would fight to end evil.

Man cannot be reasoned into faith and so I would force evil to submit by rock and bysword.

Islam is a religion that has but one root flaw; its starting premise is wrong, and all the conclusions that follow are defective.

Existence is governed by the law of identity, a fact open to all men through reason.

Identity precludes the existence of God.

Like Islam, I believe evil stems from evading reality, and Like Islam, I accept no compromise, and I will fight against evil.

But unlike Islam, I know man cannot be forced into reason.

I cannot force submission, I can only offer persuasion.

This battle over evil is a war of opposing realities, A battle where I must attack with my pen, but defend with my sword.

Islam is the Religion of Submission. If you want to see what Islam is, see what it produces. There is a phrase from by Gospels I agree with: By their fruits, ye shall know them.

Bob Kolker

[masked 0]

Islam is the Religion of Submission. If you want to see what Islam is, see what it produces. There is a phrase from by Gospels I agree with: By their fruits, ye shall know them.

Let's for the moment ignore the irony of using the "reasoning" of the Gospels to make statements about a religion (or anything).

The way a philosophy or a religion manifests is not necessarily representative of the principles of that philosophy or religion.

Atlas Shrugged serves as a perfect example. To us, the main characters were fighting for life, freedom, and reason, but to everyone else they were terrorists. It was not the ideas of Islam that drove Ragnar Danneskjöld to become a pirate. It was Objectivism.