Rep. Peter King is going through with his threat to weed out all the radical Muslims in the United States so, as I like to point out absurdity through absurd extrapolations, let's see if I can help Rep. King find all the "radical" members of other religious groups in this country.
Let's start with the Mormons, a nice quiet group of people who hang out in the western State of Utah after being run out of town in points a little farther to the east. In our more enlightened times, shouldn't it be considered "radical" for a religion to teach that wives are supposed to submit themselves to their husbands, even to the point of sharing him with other wives? Even though the Bible doesn't teach that polygamy is wrong and the Mormon church no longer advocates polygamy for its male believers, mostly because it is illegal, isn't the very idea "radical" and go against the grain of our modern society?
Then we have the Roman Catholic Church. With all this talk, mostly from government types, about excessive human population and its destructive affects on the Earth, wouldn't it be considered "radical" to teach people that not only should they avoid getting an abortion but to avoid using any birth control whatsoever? The rise in the Hispanic population in this country is partly from immigration but a great deal is because the majority are Roman Catholic. They seem to be trying to out-breed "Los Gringos." That sounds pretty "radical" to me.
And what about the Pentecostals? Instead of depending on the state-sponsored health-care/pharmaceutical monopoly to take care of their medical problems, these folks have a tendency to wait upon their God to cure the sick and heal the lame and if He doesn't, they have the faith to accept their fate, which could include death. Can anyone get any more "radical" than that?
There's the Baptist, particularly those of the Southern Convention, who write and print all those informative tracts and pamphlets that explain why every other adherent to every other religion in the world is going to Hell. Sounds like "Hate" speech to me. And the SBC could never find that part in the Bible where it says owning slaves is sinful, mainly because it does not exist, but to point that out seems pretty "radical."
Last but not least is those people who worship Caesar. Caesar-worship is a very pluralistic religion in that believers in other faiths are allowed to join in as long as Caesar comes before duty to any other god or deity. Caesar-worshipers have absolutely no problem in forcing others to recite the daily prayer they have chosen and to punish those who do not engage in acts of obeisance towards the venerated icons that the Caesar-worshipers hold in high regard. Sounds like what some people, mostly non-Muslims, describe Sharia Law to be.
As any reader can see, each and every religion has its nutcases and its points and tenets that others outside of that religion can find objectionable, but unless behaviors based on any particular belief system qualifies to be described as criminal, no one has a right or the authority to judge, condemn, or punish anyone for holding to a faith or collection of faiths. There is one way to create more radicals willing to use violence, though, and that's by creating the perception that they are being persecuted for their religion. In this way, Rep. King might be working against his stated goals, or he is possibly "serving a higher purpose" by fomenting dissension and religious tension amongst the People.
Of course the most radical folks to look into are those who penned those long-forgotten words in that archaic document of decomposing importance in our ever expanding world of government encroachment on our lives:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."
From the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
Can't get any more "radical" than that...
0 comments:
Post a Comment