Tuesday, November 08, 2005

What should we expect from Muslims?

(Welcome to visitors from Mudville Gazette open post. )

Betsy Newmark is one of my favorite bloggers. Why? Well, just read this post which she begins:

Jeff Jacoby has some thoughts for Prince Charles and his concern that we're being too intolerant of the Muslim culture. Jacoby thinks that we're being too tolerant and are not doing enough to hold Muslims to account for those in their midst who espouse violence of any type.
Then from Jacoby's column, Betsy provides this:
Of course, it goes without saying that most Muslims are not terrorists. Of course many people professing Islam are compassionate and generous. Of course Islam should not be gratuitously insulted. But neither should it be sugar-coated or kowtowed to. Yet too many Western elites are unwilling to speak plainly about the problems within Islam itself, or to hold Muslim culture to what should be universal standards of decency and justice. Far from being "too confrontational" in their attitude toward Islam, they have been too indulgent and deferential, careful never to say anything that might be deemed insensitive. One result has been an increase in extremist behavior: Witness the violent "Eurofada" raging in the streets of Paris.

We do Muslims no favors by excusing attitudes or practices that ought always to be deemed inexcusable. In Australia's Victoria state, the Herald Sun reported recently, police have been issued a "religious diversity handbook" that advises them "to treat Muslim domestic violence cases differently out of respect for Islamic traditions and habits." The Australian Police Multicultural Advisory Bureau printed 50,000 copies of the handbook, which provides guidelines for modifying police procedures to accommodate minority sensibilities.

And Muslim wife-beaters should be treated with kid gloves, in deference to Islamic norms. "In incidents such as domestic violence," the handbook instructs, "police need to have an understanding of the traditions, ways of life, and habits of Muslims."

Could anything more perfectly capture the moral bankruptcy of multicultural relativism? The Koran may tolerate wife-beating (Sura 4:34: "As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to bed apart and beat them"), but why on earth should Australia tolerate it?

"All Muslim husbands are not wife-beaters," remarks Robert Spencer, a scholar of Islam, "and it is condescending and irresponsible . . . to give those who are a free pass, instead of denouncing the practice unequivocally and calling upon Muslim men to heed the better angels of their nature." In much the same way, he says, the West's unwillingness to "confront the elements of Islam that jihad terrorists use to justify violence, for fear of offending moderate Muslims," ends up undercutting the ability of those very moderates to demand reform from within.
Now Betsy's comment:
Exactly.
Are Betsy and Jacoby right about Prince Charles and lots of others who excuse unacceptable actions? Was Jacoby worth quoting at length? Did Betsy need to say anything more?

I hope you make her blog, Betsy's Page, one of your regular stops. She has posts like the Jacoby one everyday.

1 comments:

Rebekah said...

Tolerance of wife-beating?? Now try to imagine if something similar was done for Christians(Oh! I forgot, CHRISTIANS don't beat their wives for "disobedience".) I don't hate Muslims, but frankly, I do hate Islam.