The eagle-eyed among you will have noticed that "under Islamic law" devout Muslim men are only allowed to marry and then bang young girls who have submitted to the religion of peace. No infidel tail for Mohammed's boys. The kidnappers' victim was a Coptic Christian, so you might well wonder what on earth the Islamic cradle-snatchers were playing at, until you hear that the girl's father had received a phone call right after they had snatched his daughter informing him that he would never see her again, and a full month later an Islamic group issued a statement saying that the 14-year old kidnap victim had converted to Islam "freely" and married a Muslim man. So there's no problem there after all. If you're a randy Muslim bloke and you want to bed a young Christian girl, just kidnap her and tell her father he'll never see her again, tell her the same thing, then wait for either the Stockholm Syndrome to kick in or her spirit to break. Once she utters the shahada and submits to the religion of peace, you can race up her like a rat up a drainpipe. Sorted!
The applicant in the aforementioned legal case did not prevail; it was found that Mr. Kahn's actions were contrary to European law. So any Western citizen can legitimately hold the position that the actions of these devout Muslims in Egypt were illegal. Kidnapping is illegal, abducting a minor is illegal, and the object of the exercise, marrying a child, is also illegal. A cultural relativist might try to argue that just because such actions are regarded as criminal in Western Europe, one cannot condemn a Muslim living in Egypt for behaving like that. However those actions are in fact illegal in Egypt as well. So that objection falls flat pretty quickly.
Such actions are not only illegal, they are morally reprehensible. No morally sane person would think that abducting a child and forcing her to marry a stranger is in any way good. Such actions are evil, and that needs to be stated clearly. And this is not an isolated incident; it's being reported that at least 24 girls have been abducted recently, as part of a campaign aiming to intimidate and thereby to subjugate Egypt's Christian population.
When one thinks back to the heady days of the "Arab Spring", a movement supposedly founded on individual freedom and a yearning for democracy, one can hardly believe that such horrors were all the time lying in wait for minority groups in Egypt. Well, if you accepted what you were told in the mainstream media at the time, such a thing would be difficult to believe. On the other hand anyone in possession of a functioning intellect knows that it is quite possible for a democracy to restrict the freedom of some of its citizens, and to become what John Stuart Mill so memorably called a "tyranny of the majority". If you refuse to acknowledge this simple truth, then you have abandoned reality, and you can be excluded from any serious discussion on the subject.
Unfortunately, that applies to practically all of our politicians and mainstream media outlets. It has become clear in recent years that the sources of information which we have traditionally relied upon to become informed in order to make the best moral choices we can in our lives as individuals, have become corrupt and untrustworthy. Simply put, we can no longer rely upon them to tell us the truth, about anything.
One of the key symptoms of the ongoing degeneration of Western civilisation is the absence of moral language in everyday political discourse. Our politicians have adopted a policy of systematic obscurantism. Rational, fact-based discussion of Islamic terrorism has been replaced by euphemisms and doublespeak. So we have an Islamic terrorist spree-killing American troops at Fort Hood while yelling out the takbir labelled as an episode of "workplace violence". And when Islamic terrorists murdered Americans in Benghazi, the victims were described as "folks in the field" and the Islamic terrorists who murdered them were referred to simply as "those folks" so that once again the President of America could avoid discussing reality. And if Islamic terrorism is never called by its true name, then there is no need to consider its moral aspects. If the murders at Fort Hood and Benghazi are not evil acts carried out by individual moral agents exercising their own free will, but rather "man caused disasters", then they can be seen as naturally occurring events involving "folks" just like us, with no more need to examine their moral aspects than there would be after a hot day or a shower of rain.
Politicians throughout the West have knowingly implemented a linguistic strategy where nothing can be declared wrong, and nothing can be right. They have adopted an amoral worldview, where all that matters is their being able to ride the political gravy train as they build tracks towards a global political system that welcomes all parties, and all peoples. And if you are attempting to put together a political group that includes everyone on earth then it follows that morality must be abandoned, and furthermore declared verboten, because considering that aspect of some members' actions is the one thing that would sabotage the entire project. To put this in logical terms: amorality is a necessary condition of a one world government.
When I consider those amoral beings, I can't help remembering the sight that greeted Dante when he passed through the gates of hell. There he came upon those folks who had abandoned morality and "lived without blame, without praise", and who were now forced to march naked, with flies and wasps swarming around their faces.
"Then I looked, and saw a flag
that circled round so rapidly
it seemed granted no repose;
and behind, such a long trooping
of people, I'd never have known
that death had undone so many."
A fitting way for politicians to spend eternity. They want to deny us the freedom to speak the truth, to think for ourselves, to live our own lives. The concept of negative freedom was described by Isaiah Berlin as the range of action open to you, or to use Berlin's well known metaphor, as the number of doors open in front of you. The doctrines of Islam demand that for women, children (especially female children: see above), anyone who does not submit to Islam, and indeed for male Muslims too (consider the penalty for apostasy), many of those doors are slammed shut. At a philosophical level, Islamic doctrines are fundamentally incompatible with human liberty.
So if Western politicians want to work towards a global political system that would include Islamic groups such as Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood and the OIC, then not only must they forsake their own consciences, they must prevent the uneducated riff-raff like you and me from ever discussing the moral aspect of Islamic doctrines and practices, so that no one will question what they're doing. And given the actual demands made by Islamic doctrines, they will strive to satisfy their Islamic comrades by restricting the negative freedom of their own citizens.
As individuals, we can fight back against the linguistic weaponry employed by this politico-religious movement. Whenever a Qassam missile packed with lies is launched towards us, we can, and must, shoot it down. We have to develop our own Iron Dome system, which means understanding the weapons being employed against us, where they are launched from, the nature of their power, and the trajectory they adopt before landing. Once we do that, we can learn to shoot down the fiery darts aimed at us, and each of us, as individuals, can begin to resist the forces of evil that are abroad in our world.
Tags: Jonathan Matusitz, Isaiah Berlin, Dante, Obama, Islamic terrorism, murder, linguistics, Qassam missile, Iron Dome To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!