re: #587 medaura18586

Well, I’m no expert on Orthodox Judaism, but the key difference I think is that Judaism is not evangelical — i.e. it makes no (or none that I know of) attempt to spread itself through conversion of non-Jews. Both Christianity and Islam are evangelical — i.e. it is permitted/encouraged to try to convert non-believers.

Another key difference is that Judaism has never promoted itself as the one true faith which has a destiny to become dominant over all other faiths. Historically, both Christianity and Islam have done so. And some current practitioners of those religions continue to believe that the entire world one day will/should accept the faith of Christianity or Islam.

As a result, Judaism, no matter how orthodox or all-encompassing for its own adherents, is not now and has never been aggressive in its attempt to influence or gain control of secular society. Outside of the singular exception of Israel, where it is to be expected that very-observant and less-observant Jews compete for social influence, in no country on earth are there Jews trying to convert everyone to Judaism, nor alter the nation’s laws to be in accordance with orthodox Jewish laws.

Orthodox Jewish laws and customs are for orthodox Jews to observe — and no one else. Groups like Chabad may try to encourage less-observant Jews to become more observant, but to my knowledge neither they nor any other Jewish group is running around trying to impose Jewish laws on non-Jews.

This is the key difference, at least to me. I don’t mind if any religion has an all-encompassing life system, such as fundamentalist Islam or orthodox Judaism, just so long as they don’t try to impose that system on me. Since orthodox Judaism is non-aggressive and non-invasive and non-threatening to the secular world, I have absolutely no negative feelings about it. But since fundamentalist Muslims do state themselves that they would like to impose their moral code and religious customs on me, that’s when I start getting my guard up. And the same goes for extremist Christians who want to impose their belief system (creationism, Ten Commandments in classrooms, etc.) on me: I resist it.

That’s why I left Judaism out of the equation. Yes, it is the original member of the three great monotheistic religions, but it is also the only one that does not not and has never posed a threat to anyone else.

If fundamentalist Muslims in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia or wherever practiced their religion how they see fit in total isolation and self-contentment — fine by me. I wouldn’t give them a second thought. The only thing that bothers me is when they bring their laws/customs to our secular system and try to undermine our secularism.

I don’t agree with Wilders that we should ban Islam or any religion in America, nor do I agree with Spencer that Islam is inherently evil at its core. And I fully acknowledge that the majority of Muslims in the US are law-abiding and non-extremist — “moderate,” if you will. But I also know that Wahhabist doctrine, funded by petro-dollars, is trying to make inroads into the U.S., so I feel we as a society ought to keep tabs on that influence, as well as other forms of creeping Islamic extremism. Because these forms of Islam, as practiced, are (or at least would be if we gave them half a chance) a threat to our Constitutional society.

I greatly appreciate that what Charles is trying to do — to not go overboard in siding with bigots, nor to lay back awaiting our own self-deserved doom along with the moonbats, but to take the middle road of reasoned moderation — is the hardest route of all. It is so easy to slip into extremist thinking at either end of the spectrum, and Charles is to be commended for holding the line in the center.