Vincent J. Curtis
8 May 2015
The poking of fun at Muslims, and simultaneously at restrictions
on free speech concerning Islam, may be said to have begun with the drawing of
cartoons that mocked Mohammed in the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten. There
followed a similar campaign of poking fun at Muslims, and simultaneously at restrictions
on free speech, by means of mocking cartoons in the French newspaper, Charlie Hebdo. Most recently, in Garland, Texas, an exhibit
of Mohammed cartoons was organized by Pamela Geller. Devout Muslims regard the depictions of
Mohammed as a kind of blaspheming of Islam.
The point of the exercise in all these cases was to draw
attention to the fact that some Muslims can be stupid and violent, and, further,
that some people were not intimidated by threats for making speech concerning
Islam. These exhibitions proved beyond
their wildest dreams how right they were.
At Charlie Hebdo a
dozen staffers were brutally murdered in broad daylight. At the Geller exhibit in Garland, Texas, two
Muslims were killed by a policeman before they could perpetrate a Charlie Hebdo -like massacre. The cartoonists who drew for Jyllands-Posten are in hiding, and those
who work there continue to live in fear.
Molly Norris, who drew an unpublished cartoon of Mohammed, remains in
hiding, five years after a fatwa was issued against her.
These provocative exhibitions have lost their efficacy. It is now common knowledge that some Muslims
are going to get violent when certain things are said or done. The point of Jyllands-Posten has been established. And the threat of violence over speech that
mocks Muslims shows indirectly who the moral cowards are among us.
Free speech is restricted when violence is threatened for
the saying and doing of things that Muslims find offensive. But if one is going to demonstrate free
speech by laying a blow on Islam, why not land a telling blow? If one is going to risk life and limb to make
a point, then why not make the risk worthwhile?
Drawing cartoons and having a few Muslim lads gun one down has
become old hat, and no longer proves anything to anyone, except that it is
dangerous to cross Islam. Far more
effective than showing provocative pictures would be to attack Islam on its merits rather than on the foibles
of its followers. Never mind the
trivial, insubstantive stuff: go right
after the central tenets of Islam. The
central tenets of Islam can be attacked with speech upon the findings of Natural
Theology.
Natural Theology is the rational science which treats of God
and His attributes, as far as they can be known by the light of reason. It differs from Sacred Theology, in that this
latter studies God and His attributes by the light of divine revelation. Natural Theology is divided into three
principal parts: the first treats of the existence and unity of God; the second
treats of the attributes of God in Himself; the third treats of the attributes
of God in relation to the world or to creatures.
The findings of Natural Theology demonstrate that the Being
that created the universe is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-wise. He has all possible perfections, and without
limit. God has a perfect will; He loves
Himself necessarily, all else He loves freely.
He loves all other beings insofar as they are good, and because they
come from Him. He needs nothing external
to himself.
The Islamic conception of Allah fails to live up to this
standard. Allah, as conceived by
Muslims, cannot be the Being that created the universe. Allah, according to the sacred texts of
Islam, cannot be all-knowing, all-powerful, all-wise, possessing all possible
perfections, and needing nothing outside of Himself. A few examples are enough to demonstrate the
shortfalls of Allah, as that Being is understood by Muslims.
The belief by Muslims that cartoons that depict Mohammed and
ridicule Islam call for the chastisement of the perpetrators is founded upon
the Koran and the Hadiths. Muslims
believe they are commanded by Allah in these sacred texts to chastise and kill. If Allah were all-powerful, he would not need
Muslims to do his killing for him.
Those beings marked for killing are also loved by the
Creator of the universe because they also come from Him. If Allah were all-wise and possessed a
perfect will, he would not have allowed the creation of those who would mock
him and Islam in the first place, if such mockery be a problem for Allah. And the fact that Allah seems to be so touchy
about the mockery of Him and of Islam indicates, not just an ego, but a delicate
ego; and to have a delicate ego means that Allah needs something external to
himself, namely regard by human beings, things he created. Allah, by the beliefs of Muslims, cannot be
all-powerful, all-wise, having all possible perfections, and needing nothing
external to himself. Therefore, Allah
cannot be God, the Being that created the universe.
The belief in the seventy-two virgins is also highly
problematic for Islam. Both common sense
and Natural Theology find that between death and resurrection that part of the
human being that survives, i.e. the soul, has no physical body. Virginity and sexual pleasure are meaningless
and impossible when one`s being is entirely spiritual. Between death and resurrection, the deserving
enjoy the beatific vision of God, which is far more fulfilling and desirable
than an orgasm, particularly for a spirit.
Where the seventy-two virgins are going to actually come from is also
highly problematic rationally and theologically for Islam.
Natural Theology is a fruitful source for attacks on Islam
that are based on reason, not ridicule.
The problem for western civilization in using rational arguments from
Natural Theology is that Natural Theology also contains the proofs of the existence of God, and lapsed Christians don’t want to
confront the fact of God’s existence and the facts of their own failings in
respect of God.
Hence, the most effective means of attacking Islam – on its
merits- most westerners would be uncomfortable with, because of how it would redound against them and against many people they are friends with. Those who wish to demonstrate a fearless free
speech are deterred from striking the most effective blows against Islam, not by
fear of death, but fear of confronting their own failings. So, instead, they limit themselves to the
feckless and insubstantive means of speaking: the drawing of cartoons.
Striking the most telling blows against Islam and its
foibles of Muslims would, practically, call for a revival of the Christian
spirit and a regaining of moral self-confidence in the West. In the current temper of the times, that is
unlikely to happen.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment