We definitely allow Muslims of all stripes to get away with demonizing anyone critical of Islam. We do this in the name of tolerance, multiculturalism, and political correctness. Western apologists defend Islam and are doing so out of ignorance or, like any Muslim engaged in Taqiyya, are lying to paint Islam in a positive light.
Since the reformation Islam needs is unlikely to come from within the Muslim community - Irshad and M. Nawaz are a tiny fraction of the world's Muslims - we must do what we can to halt the perpetuation of the 'Religion of Peace' lie as well as the false accusations of bigotry, racism, and Islamophobia.
I was born to Muslim parents and raised in a Muslim country. It is only thanks to non Muslim critics of Islam (Robert Spencer, Sam Harris) that I began to question. Like the vast majority of Muslims, I was largely ignorant of the actual doctrine and merely memorized verses and rituals.
There are two paths a Muslim can take upon beginning to understand the true nature of Islam. The first is to become horrified and slowly but surely abandon the ideology. The second is to embrace it and become a mujahid or at the very least a sympathizer to jihad and Islamic totalitarianism. Of my Muslim friends and family, most follow the latter path, while those who choose the former are forced to live a lie for fear of persecution and death. Open apostasy is a rare thing indeed.
Irshad and her ilk may have good intentions, but calling oneself a Muslim does not a Muslim make. Islam, as an ideology, exists independently of what anyone wishes it to be. Anyone who has actually studied the doctrine understands that it does not allow self criticism, and that its central message is that of supremacy, submission, hatred of non Muslims, and the spread of Islam by any means necessary.
As an ex Muslim, I have to say that waiting around for Irshad-like reformers to have any real impact is a waste of time and blood. Their message falls on deaf ears and rings hollow. Incessant criticism of Islam and continually pointing out the shameful and abhorrent behavior of Muslims is the only way I'm aware of to actually jolt Muslims and non-Muslims alike into accepting reality.
We can no longer permit this hyper offense-taking on the part of Muslims. We can no longer make the claim that Islam is compatible with democracy and human rights. We can no longer watch the Irshads of the world try to reconcile the medieval, totalitarian ideology that is Islam with modernity. Irshad is not a Muslim, she does not speak for Islam, and she'd be much better off going the way of Ayaan Hirsi Ali and publicly declaring herself not a Muslim and explaining why this is so.
"There is no lack of evidence concerning the Muslim practice of jihad. The classical and modern works on the subject are voluminous, and they are documented by an examination of Muslim actions as recorded by historians. There can be no reasonable doubt that jihad is a major theme running through the entirety of Muslim civilization and is at least one of the major factors in the astounding success of the faith of Islam.
ReplyDeleteIn reading Muslim literature -- both contemporary and classical -- one can see that the evidence for the primacy of spiritual jihad is negligible. Today it is certain that no Muslim, writing in a non-Western language (such as Arabic, Persian, Urdu), would ever make claims that jihad is primarily nonviolent or has been superseded by the spiritual jihad. Such claims are made solely by Western scholars, primarily those who study Sufism and/or work in interfaith dialogue, and by Muslim apologists who are trying to present Islam in the most innocuous manner possible.
...after surveying the evidence from classical until contemporary times, one must conclude that today's jihad movements are as legitimate as any that have ever existed in classical Islam... In short, although the actions of many of these groups may disgust many Muslims, as far as their conduct of jihad, they fall within the limits set by classical and contemporary Muslim law."
~David Cook