Are Secularists Responsible for Islamic Terror?

I nominate the following quote for the Stupidest Argument of the Year award:

[The] extreme form of Western secularism is exactly what is alienating traditional Muslims and pushing them toward militant radicalism. Islamists such as Osama bin Laden actually make their case against the United States and the West on the grounds that our cultures have abandoned Christianity!

From bin Laden’s perspective and that of his allies, the conflict is between Muslim-led forces of monotheism and morality against Western forces of atheism and immorality. Though he refers to the U.S. as a Crusader state, his arguments clearly show that he believes the West is intent on imposing atheistic and pagan values on Muslims, not Christianity.

Kurshid Ahmad, the influential Pakistani leader of Jamaat-i-Islami, says, “Had Western culture been based on Christianity, on morality, and on faith, the language and modus operandi of the contact and conflict would have been different. But that is not the case.” The assertion that the international campaign of political leaders against Muslim terror is a battle between two opposing forms of religious fundamentalism is patently false.

This argument is similar to one that Dinesh D’Souza makes. The writer, Steve Hagerman, is correct that the fundamental clash is not between Islam and Christianity. It is between theocracy and liberty. Sure, if the United States lived under a Christian theocracy, it might not be targeted by Islamic terrorists, because the United States would become just another third-world slum.

But what, exactly, is Hagerman’s point? That we should act as crazy as the Islamists so that they no longer attack us?

One thought on “Are Secularists Responsible for Islamic Terror?”

  1. Doesn’t the historical exampe of the Crusades kind of go against the whole “Christianity and Islam would be best buddies” argument?

Comments are closed.