I was once told that the only religion to have never committed jihad was Christianity. This supposed fact was news to me seeing as how my family tree had a little stay in Spain... abruptly ended by jihad.
The attacking force was not conscripted of Moors or Berbers. The assailants weren't angry burka wearing, Quran hugging, foaming at the mouth Muslims. Actually, the Moors were the only people willing to fight for my ancestors' freedoms. The advancing army was comprised of the first crusaders embarking upon the reconquest of Spain.
And it was in the Spanish Inquisition that these Latin rambling loons decided to expel my Jewish roots from southern Spain. Their goal was like that of Christian England who expelled it's Jews a couple centuries earlier. However Spain used the Muslim Moors as their excuse to get at the wealth of the Moors and Jews.
To me it seemed that England and Spain had committed jihad. The prevailing religion of the two were used to justify the slaughter of other religions. Yet I was told Christianity had never killed anybody due to religion.
In the United States we used the Holy Bible to justify the wholesale slaughter of "witches" in Salem. In the dirty south slaves were made to convert or die. And thus their native religions were destroyed so as to fit the demands of their masters. Yet neither compared to the convert or die philosophy used to implement genocide upon the Native Americans.
So how is it that the myth of Christian purity still exist in the far right today? And even in the moderate right wing, how is it that many still believe that Christianity is the only religion to have never committed jihad?
One can find even in main steam America a paranoia when it comes to Muslims. I myself have been asked if I was Muslim while wearing my kippa... as if it would be a bad thing to say yes.
Yet in the far right you get more of the radicalized fear of Islam. This is the sort of view that believes that every chador wearing Muslim is part of a "sleeper cell". The sort if paranoia that we would call Islamaphobia.
With people like Ron Paul it is transferred to the belief that Muslims are not as "sophisticated" as us. That they are somehow just a couple steps behind us when it comes to society and civilization.
Yet even this philosophy is neutering in a manner when it comes to the humanity of the Muslim. It never helps a society to belittle a portion of its population. Instead it cripples the society as a whole.
By treating a person as a child you create a child within that individual. If you treat them as an enemy you create an enemy within that individual. So where is the brotherly love preached in the Gospel when it comes to the radical right?
There is none. Just as Osama Bin Laden preached hatred and death from his interpretation of the Quran; the radical right preaches hatred and vile contempt for the love Yeshua preached in the Christian Bible.
Worse yet, the potential for pogroms and ultimately genocide arise as this sort of paranoia spreads.
And that is why Alder's Ledge continues to discuss this seemingly political topic. We find it contemptible that this form of hate filled vitriol remains a part of our national discourse.
For those in Indiana who listen to WIBC 93.1 you might be familiar with Greg Garrison and his usual show. Today I was treated to his usual pompous attitude when it comes to Islam vs Christianity.
Today however I found it odd how the term "snakes" was used to describe all Muslims in the United States. This was again news to me seeing as how many of my closest friends are Muslims. And till having listened to his show was I unaware they were "snakes".
This term falls in line with how the Hutu in Rwanda called all Tutsi "cockroaches". It is the same degenerate method the the Nazi's used (Hitler claimed to be a good Catholic) when calling all Jews "rats". Yet a supposed news commentator here in Indiana found it acceptable to use a dehumanizing term to describe all Muslims here in the United States.
And yet time and time again I'm told that the right wing doesn't hate anybody.
Note that I do understand the actual meaning of the word "jihad" and know that it does not mean "holy war". The use of the word is for illustrative purposes since the word is used in this manner by the people this article is meant to address. If you want to comment on that please note that you have read this portion of post and know that I will not reply kindly to any pious responses.