Atheism, a frightening phenomenon?
In March 2008 Saudi King Abdullah proposed an inter-faith dialogue between Muslims, Christians and Jews. It is interesting to note that his proposal did not include Hindus, Buddhists and other faiths but that is an issue of another post.
The monarch made the call during the melee of Geert Wilders’ Fitna. He made the call from a position of weakness, at a point where Islam was, and still is, in considerable ‘focus’ but while he clamoured for moral equivalency with Christians and Jews by referring to them as 'our brothers', he had the temerity to demonise ‘atheism’ in the process.
Quote (Raymond Ibrahim - VDH Papers April 2nd 2008) .... the Arabian kingdom, however, is famous for tenaciously upholding and exporting “Wahhabism/Salafism,” that literalist brand of Islam that preaches absolutely no tolerance — murdering apostates and condemning all non-Muslims as infidels — and famous also for having supplied 15 of the 19 hijackers of 9/11, “educating” fellows such as Osama bin Laden, and boasting asword on its national flag. One can’t help but question the old monarch’s motives ... More tellingly, days before the king’s call for dialogue, prominent Saudi Sheikh Abdul Rahman Barack issued a death-fatwa against two Saudi writers. Their crime? They wrote articles in the Saudi paper Al-Riyadh questioning the Muslim position that holds all non-Muslims — whom the Saudi king would otherwise call “brothers” — as infidels. According to the Arab News, Barack said: “Anyone who claims this [that non-Muslims are not infidels] has refuted Islam and should be tried so that he can take it back. If not, he should be killed as an apostate from the religion of Islam.” (emphasis mine)
Given the rise, not of atheism but, of radicalism in the name of Islam, the world is under siege and the King, being the custodian of its holiest site, is obliged to counter the position.
The King must be aware that it is Islam, and not atheism, which is viewed negatively and ‘a frightening phenomenon’ not only because radicals commit terror in its name, but because moderates such as him do not openly express outrage when such terror is committed.
May I digress! Jewish historian Dennis Prager, recently commented on differences between the Palestinian issue and
Tibet is a nation of a 1000 odd years with a definitive culture and language which China is trying to dismantle while no nation called ‘Palestine’ ever existed in history. Palestinians were always part of the larger Arab community who asserted statehood in the aftermath of the failed Arab wars against
He asked then, why do Palestinians who never existed as a nation in history have observer status in the United Nations but Tibet, a nation in existence for over 1000 years, does not.
Prager asked, why does attention on
The answer is ‘terror’. Generations of Palestinian terror has effectively galvanized world attention to their cause.
Hypothetically, if Dalai Lama, the Tibetan leader, Buddhist and atheist cultures within
Thankfully, for the world at large, Buddhist and atheist cultures in
Point is, Islam is in focus because of ‘terror’ committed in its name, but is there any justification for moderates not to express outrage when such terror is committed, let alone pronounce atheism ‘a frightening phenomenon’ instead ?
Dd, Yy here. I am a Catholic. But it is also imprtant for me that different ppl who believe in different religion should live in harmony. I do not wish to see anyone who is condeming another's religion or believes. Ppl should learn to tolerate one another's believes to make the World a better place to live in. I sincerely wish this will come true one day.
ReplyDelete