Ernie:
As mystified as you may be ( I was  primarily referring to  your e-mail of 
yesterday,
or two days ago now ) sometimes you say things that mystify me . Such as  :
 
I understand your preference for a full solution,  but the reason I balk at 
that is the 
cost involved. The  only way I can see to eliminate Islam entirely is 
forced conversion, 
and I refuse to countenance that level of  coercion
 
Hmmm. No idea how many times I must say it, but again, the idea is the  
opposite of
forced conversion. " Opposite of."
 
The plan, to call it that, might be characterized as a Billy Graham Crusade 
 on steroids ,
but without Rev Graham and with a cast of  the country's  best scholars, 
all of the 
well informed people in the media ( there are some even if not nearly  
enough )
and even some elected officials such as  Allen West, newly elected GOP 
Representative from Fla, African-American, military, colonel, and smart as  
hell.
And it wouldn't hurt to have a major movie studio in one's corner.
 
Think revival tent and the preacher telling everyone to get on board the  
Jesus train
and if they don't they are headed straight for the Inferno. No-one in the  
crowd,
not even the deacons, have machine guns at the ready, all set to open  fire
on the congregation if no-one answers the call. 
 
Well, THAT would be interesting, for sure, but  not quite  the idea.   :-/
Maybe that's how you do things in your church, but somehow I doubt it. 
 
I'm sometimes very much a populist. The idea is persuasion, even rabble  
rousing,
but nothing at all to do with violence. 
 
Not the first time you have pegged me for something very different.
 
The ideal is simple :  I have $ 50 billion to  spend.  I buy a huge media 
empire and
create a new university based on the kinds of ideals we have discussed  
before.
Maybe I sign up a decent sized contingent in the Congress and ,  of  course,
set up a major lobbying effort.
 
Sure, not remotely possible as things are.  But at least imagine what  I'd 
do.
Next order of business, is it possible to persuade others who do have  parts
of this media, etc system to get with the program ?  One here, one  there,
a few someplace else, until something vaguely like this media system 
starts to take shape.
 
Then, let 'er rip. Not a broadside from the battleship Missouri, but  from
100 newspapers, 2 or 3 TV networks, etc, plus all of it backed up
with the smartest researchers in the nation. THIS is the idea.
 
I'll take 1% of that if I can get it. Even that would be enough to get  
going
with enough clout to make a difference.
 
As for the decimation of Christians in the Mid East, its actually fairly  
simple.
Critical mass. Until the 20th century Christians still could be 10 %  or 20 
% of
the population of some countries, even more, as in Lebanon. But 10 %  is the
danger zone, easy to pressure,  and the minority can no longer defend  
itself.
The numbers aren't there.
 
But, yeah, externals always play a role. especially foreign occupation  and
a rising tide of nationalism. Plus, when applicable, economic crisis.
 
However, think of most of sub-Saharan Africa. No Islam, or very  little,
and now it is Pentecostal everywhere, if not majorities, really large  
minorities.
Heck, even under Communism there are  --what ?--  about 100  million
Christians in China  This seems pretty clear, no Islam,  and  Christianity
( Buddhism in some cases, like China also ) can take off like a  rocket.
With Islam, relentless persecution as soon as numbers are small  enough
to crush. Even , in cases, when numbers still are high, like  Bethlehem,
once 80 % Christian, now under 20 %.
 
Seems pretty clear to me.
 
Billy
 
========================================================
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
message dated 1/30/2011 10:46:21 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
[email protected] writes:
 
Hi  Billy,

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 30, 2011, at 21:30,  [email protected] wrote:

> Ernie :
> What strikes me is a  tendency to gravitate to deductive logic when
> discussing the prospects  for reform in Islam. 

Huh?

Not sure how you wrung that out of my  comment.

Still, let me ask a question that has bothered me: Islam may  always have 
been evil, but the Christian communities being purged from Iraq  and Egypt 
had survived for 1000 years. And the Ottoman Empire may have been  thuggish, 
but I don't recall it being vastly worse than it's contemporaries.  

In short, things seem worse now than a century ago. Which implied  modern 
Islamism seems to owe at least part of its virulence and intolerance to  
political and economic factors, in -addition- to theological ones. 

I'm  not denying that Islamic theology is deeply incompatible with 
modernity. And I  would love to see all Muslims worship a God with the 
character of 
Christ  rather than that of Mohammad. And yes, creeping Shariah is a genuine 
and  under-appreciated problem in the west. 

But just as it is foolish to  ignore theology and view Islamic terrorism as 
the fruit of purely economic and  political determinism, so it seems narrow 
to blame -all- of Islam's current  ills and misbehavior -solely- on Islam 
itself. 

Yes, that may well be  the root cause, but there should be ways to reduce 
the worst symptoms in the  absence of a full cure. I agree that thoroughgoing 
reform is a long shot, but  a detente of sorts with modernity seems at 
least conceivable, and necessary,  if we are to coexist. 

I understand your preference for a full  solution, but the reason I balk at 
that is the cost involved. The only way I  can see to eliminate Islam 
entirely is forced conversion, and I refuse to  countenance that level of 
coercion. So yes, I hold out the hope of moderating  or containing Islam on 
deductive grounds, because the alternative is  unthinkable.

Previously, you made it sound like we could hope to get  rid of Islam 
purely through strong moral argument. With your endorsement of  deportation in 
your proposed amendment it sure sounds like you are prepared to  cross that 
line and use the threat of physical force.

So how far are  you willing to go to rid the world of Islam? Is there 
anything you  categorically won't do? And what happens if that level of force 
isn't  enough?

E

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to