05 September 2006
Yes. Let’s rob Muslims of much of their case against us
3:10 PM
Peter Hitchens has recently posted to his blog a sentiment regarding Great Britain with which I agree, at least as it concerns the U. S.:
I am amazed by the…rejection of my proposal for a return to Christianity and Patriotism, as our best defence against Islam. I would like to know why these things are seen as either difficult or impossible. Both these forces remain strong in our society, despite a 50-year campaign of denigration by the elite. I should say the country is just about ripe for a major swing towards morality, as the ghastly baby boomer generation fades away and its children view the hedonistic wasteland left behind.
As for patriotism, what is all this football-worship if not a sort of displacement of proper love of country, which so many have been taught for so long is wicked and bigoted?
All it would take to revive them would be a little willpower on the part of the defeatists who now complain so much - yet will not do anything and claim that such a revival is ‘cloud cuckoo land’.
I don’t believe, as some claim, that the re-Christianisation of Britain will make Muslims convert to Christianity. I’d certainly like to see lots of Muslims sign up for 1662 Anglicanism, but I’m not optimistic at present.
I just think that it will rob Muslim militants of much of their case, if we can demonstrate that we can be both ordered and free.
That is how we were within living memory. It is how we could be again. What feeble gutlessness is it to dismiss this possibility. Look at Poland, wiped from the map twice in two centuries by military force and unexampled savagery, yet now alive again as a thriving nation and culture - in which Christianity and patriotism support each other (emphasis mine).
Now, the part of the Muslim case that Mr. Hitchens has in mind is, no doubt, the moral case. I mean the argument that we have to be brought into submission because we are decadent beyond our own ability to correct and can only be ‘saved’ by the moral redemption that submission to Islam brings.
I am amazed by the…rejection of my proposal for a return to Christianity and Patriotism, as our best defence against Islam. I would like to know why these things are seen as either difficult or impossible. Both these forces remain strong in our society, despite a 50-year campaign of denigration by the elite. I should say the country is just about ripe for a major swing towards morality, as the ghastly baby boomer generation fades away and its children view the hedonistic wasteland left behind.
As for patriotism, what is all this football-worship if not a sort of displacement of proper love of country, which so many have been taught for so long is wicked and bigoted?
All it would take to revive them would be a little willpower on the part of the defeatists who now complain so much - yet will not do anything and claim that such a revival is ‘cloud cuckoo land’.
I don’t believe, as some claim, that the re-Christianisation of Britain will make Muslims convert to Christianity. I’d certainly like to see lots of Muslims sign up for 1662 Anglicanism, but I’m not optimistic at present.
I just think that it will rob Muslim militants of much of their case, if we can demonstrate that we can be both ordered and free.
That is how we were within living memory. It is how we could be again. What feeble gutlessness is it to dismiss this possibility. Look at Poland, wiped from the map twice in two centuries by military force and unexampled savagery, yet now alive again as a thriving nation and culture - in which Christianity and patriotism support each other (emphasis mine).
Now, the part of the Muslim case that Mr. Hitchens has in mind is, no doubt, the moral case. I mean the argument that we have to be brought into submission because we are decadent beyond our own ability to correct and can only be ‘saved’ by the moral redemption that submission to Islam brings.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- James Frank Solís
- Former soldier (USA). Graduate-level educated. Married 26 years. Texas ex-patriate. Ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church in America.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(300)
-
▼
September
(33)
- Proclaim liberty throughout the land
- Partying with Lileks? Could be fun.
- Inconsistency, thy name is ‘Liberal’
- Yoda and Han Solo: a deep thought
- Are executive compensation packages too high? (1)
- The Wallace-Clinton interview; a post script
- A paradoxical necessity of the Iraqi theater
- Clinton on Fox. Or was it the other way around?
- Joseph Ratzinger: a serious opponent in a continen...
- What Chavez and Ahmadinejad both understand about ...
- Which Narnia character am I?
- Maybe it’s more like ‘jobs Americans can’t get to ...
- What’s wrong with Common Article 3
- Attention angry (and ignorant!) Muslims: The Pope ...
- Oh, I get it: The Geneva Conventions are a suicide...
- Yes. Let’s rob Muslims of their case against us. (2)
- The Path from 911
- Five years after
- Really, just why do nations rise and fall?
- The ‘conservative’ stereotype and climate change: ...
- Ignoring the Constitution? What Constitution?
- Victor David Hanson on The Good Life
- This is what happens when fools play at wisdom
- More about those ‘jobs Americans won’t do’
- Here’s how Katie should close her evening broadcast
- A “war” by another name
- Yes. Let’s rob Muslims of much of their case agai...
- Forget the cup. Enjoy the coffee
- Can we please stop the 'final throes' nonsense?
- The next change here at Deviant Scholar
- As 11 September approaches, let's recall another d...
- Apparently, the problem with our education system ...
- The First Amendment's 'religion clause' limits rel...
-
▼
September
(33)
0 comments: