Rather, these countries are all oligarchies where a small, unelected group of rulers exercises all the power and continually thwarts the will of a predominantly Muslim population wishing to impose theocratic law.

In the case of Turkey I'd be interested in what evidence you have that the populace wants to impose theocratic law as opposed to simply being dissatisfied with a government that is not just secular but anti-religious.

From Time Magazine May 2007
Despite secularists' warnings, a poll conducted last year by a leading Istanbul think tank found that only 8.9% of the population would like to see Turkey's legal system based on Shari'a law, down from 21% in 1999. But many chafe at restrictions imposed on conservative Muslims by the secular state: according to the same poll, only 14% of those surveyed believed that Turks were able to practice Islam freely, down from 31% in 1999.

This is a line of argument I'm see a lot both from internet atheists (or others criticizing Islam) and from various politicians of the "close the borders NOW" variety. I don't find it terribly persuasive. A lot of countries with predomininantly Muslim populations are quite secularly governed.

Konrad, I think your examples prove my point, rather than yours. You list Egypt, Saddam's Iraq, post-colonialism Algeria, and Turkey. But these countries are not peaceful, secular nations where Muslims support separation of church and state. Rather, these countries are all oligarchies where a small, unelected group of rulers exercises all the power and continually thwarts the will of a predominantly Muslim population wishing to impose theocratic law. (Turkey is a democracy, but even so, its military has repeatedly thrown out governments that weren't sufficiently secular. All the rest of the nations you list are out-and-out dictatorships.)

This is exactly what I had been thinking. I've spent over a year in Iraq and watched the downward spiral take place as parents were forced to pull their daughters out of school for fear of religious reprisals, how bookstores and liquor stores were bombed by religious fanatics. Not all of the violence in that country is directed against American forces. It's ironic how bookstores that survived years of Saddam's brutal regime and struggled to bring about free speech and news to the Iraqi people lasted but just a matter of months after the Muslim nutcases were let loose. Regular Iraqi people live in a very real and present danger from religious fanatics. They're not just a few bad apples, they are an utter nightmare.

There are certainly moderate Muslims. They love to read, drink alcohol, watch pornos (believe it or not, just check out what they play on Arab satelite TV networks), go to school, and vote in democratic elections. The problem is, with all of the ones I've ever met, none of them are particularly religious. They're a lot like the salad bar Christians and other non-practicing types. They don't bow down towards Mecca 5 times a day and they get pissed off when their neighbors pressure them not to let their wives walk outside without a burka. Inside their homes, their wives walk around in daisy dukes whatever the hell they feel like wearing. It's just that when these moderate Muslims walk outside into public, if they so much as show an ounce of secularism, they're liable to get killed by their religious neighbors.

This whole idea of apologizing for Muslims is like apologizing for American Christians by pointing out that there are atheists in America, too. Sorry, but religious Muslims just don't deserve to get the credit for the moderate nature of their own neighbors who they oppress.

This whole shit about doctors making us their bitches leaked in from the Middle-eastern monotheistic faiths, and so those faiths must perish as the degenerate rape-fostering piles of filth they are. If I had the Gyges' Ring that would allow me to eliminate these religions, I would use it without hesitation.

The poit of the Gyges' Ring story is that we all praise justice and the values of our community out of weakness, and that if any of us were to gain some outstanding power over others such that we could act accordong to our wills with impunity, we would use it to reshape the world according to our ends. The Gyges of legend seduced the queen, usurped the throne, and conqured Lydia's enemies. Gyges had an empire, but thought small

What woud you do if you were Superman?

konrad_arflane, first, there is no reason to loose patience or drop netiquette just because someone doesn't conform to your views or ideology.

Well, I don't think I actually did drop netiquette. At least not in what I ended up posting ;-)

But really, when you make statements like the one about Islam being monolithic, it goes beyond not conforming to my views, and into the realm of conflicting with reality. That sort of thing is terribly difficult to argue with, especially if you're trying to keep a cool head at the same time. I honestly don't mind if you think Islam is awful, as long as you'll acknowledge that it's not a single kind of awful.

Second, you make impossible demands like looking at indivduals when critizizing an ideology or religion. That way, you could never critize any political or religious movement without looking at each member individually which is practically impossible.

I wouldn't ask you to to look at all Muslims individually. I would ask you to refrain from looking at the worst percent of them and assuming they're representative of the rest.

And you'll forgive me if I don't consider the Archbishop of Canterbury's views on how best to accommodate Muslim immigrants authoritative (though I agree that it's troubling that such an influential (well, in Britain anyway) figure feels that way). I agree with prase that the way to go is insisting on secular laws and secular basic education. Several European countries, my own included, still need to get last remnants of Christianity out of those areas before we can reasonably expect Muslims to take us seriously when we preach secularism to them. If and when we get that sorted out, I'm confident that we'll see our immigrant communities come round to our point of view in a generation or two.

Second, concerning Europe's future, as an European I do not feel overly optimistic, but still see Smurfy's viewpoint as utterly absurd. Fear apparently doesn't help anybody to think clearly. Can you really think about Islamic theocracy in Europe in 20 years? I agree that the attitude of western-European governments to Islam should change, but this will inevitably follow if the Muslim atrocities graduate. I don't underestimate democracy's ability to solve problems. Does anybody think segregation of any form is a realistic option (also in the sense you can democratically agree on such solution)? If not, we should insist on secular laws, maintain a reasonable level of universal secular education and wait until muslim communities diminish, assimilate or become moderate. I still think that today's revival of political Islam is only a short-term phenomenon and we will be solving completely different problems in 2050.

But as things are and what makes Islam worse than xianity, is the fact that Islam is still the Monolith it has been for centuries, opposed to xianity which had an enlightenment (at least in the old world, not so much in the US) , i am afraid i am right.

I'm sorry, but it's becoming increasingly difficult for me to maintain proper netiquette with you. Have you perhaps heard of the *ahem* "sectarian violence" in Iraq? Is that your idea of a "monolithic" religion? Not to mention the fact that the organization of Islam compares best to the most loosely organized Christian denominations, such as American evangelicals. Islam doesn't have a Pope, it doesn't have cardinals or archbishops. I'm not even sure it has bishops. Now it's possible that this state of affairs is a contributing factor to the extremism we're witnesses to in the Islamic world right now - when there is no formal structure, the most shrill voices tend to attract the most attention (and possibly the most followers), much like American evangelicism, in fact. But be that as it may, if we're to actually *do* anything about the situation, we need to understand what is actually going on, and not rely on the scare-mongering distortions peddled by the worst of our politicians.

Also, please read Ebon's post above this one, "A Riotous Diversity", and tell me why the situation he describes shouldn't also apply to Muslims.