Goodbye, Germany.

Female German judge rules that the most holy sacred book the Qu’ran permits spousal abuse.

If we used the Qu’ran as our law, we would all be sexually paranoid men or compulsively forgiving battered wives.

Public School gone insane in Ridgefield, CT

Once again, school administrators get the idea to stick their noses in areas they don’t belong.
hat tip: LGF

Sure, there is nothing really wrong with seeing what information about a particular person is on the Internet — however, just as you must be careful what you say on the Internet, you must also be careful not to read too much into material that doesn’t really have anything to do with your own relationship to the person.

Knowing stuff about a person is fine. Trying to wage a personal jihad against every unpleasant aspect of every person you have a professional relationship with is stupid.
High school students are old enough to start forming some of their own opinions about the world. Education isn’t about managing people’s opinions. It’s about giving people information in order to allow them to build their own opinions.

Dean Esmay fails at line drawing.

You must accept these things to remain in Dean’s good graces.
Dean, who fancies himself to be a new William F. Buckley, demands that we pretend Islam has nothing to do with the terrorism problem.

1) Islam does not represent the forces of Satan or the Anti-Christ bent on destruction of the Christian world.

This is reasonable for the most part. Islam, generally speaking, is bent on destruction of the Christian world. And by that, they mean the mostly secularized West. 75% of Muslims may rather not do so, but Muhammad, the Qu’ran, and many imams say this must be done. And because this is based in the most orthodox forms of Islam, it is fair to say that Islam is bent on destruction of the non-Muslim world. However, that is not reason to assume the worst and go all eschatological, branding Islam as the force of Satan, or the Antichrist. That suggestion is to me an evidence of nihilistic theology. Some people would like nothing more than to think Islam is the Beast of Revelation, and use that as an excuse to give up, because after all Jesus is going to come and nuke ‘em all in the lake of fire. Well, what if that isn’t the case? What if this is just a human problem that we’re going to have to deal with ourselves?

2) There is no 1,400 year old “war with the West/Christianity” being waged by Muslims or anyone else.

This is entirely false. Muhammad himself started this war, and his spiritual descendants have continued it. It is a historical fact in which denial is pure lunacy. Read the history of Islam, Dean.

3) Islam as a religion is no more inherently incompatible with modernity, minority rights, women’s rights, or democratic pluralism than most religions.

Also entirely false. Esmay thinks he is being reasonable with the word inherently, as if the jihadists can simply be excommunicated and then Islam will be just as decent as any other religion. To make Islam a decent religion would require denouncing Muhammad and at least half the Quran, especially the latter half. In other words there wouldn’t be very much left to hold the religion together, and what they’d have left would be essentially a form of Judaism. A religion’s integrity depends very much on its scripture and prophets. You can’t simply take a holy book, and throw bits out because this part or that is unscientific, uncool, or just plain evil–and expect the religion to remain otherwise intact.

4) Medieval, anachronistic, obscure terms like “dhimmitude” or “taqiyya” are suitable for polite intellectual discussion. They are not and never will be appropriate to slap in the face of everyday Muslims or their friends.

Oh please. So it’s all right to use the words politely in intellectual discussion, but not to slap people in the face. Who decides which is which? What if I intend to use it politely and the other party interprets it as a slap in the face? I imagine that if I am arguing with a CAIR person, that sort of thing will always be interpreted as a slap in the face no matter how I mean it. So who decides when it’s appropriate? The Archbishop Dean Esmay, I guess.

5) Muslims have no more need to prove that they can be good Americans, loyal citizens, decent people, or enemies of terrorism than anyone else does.

This is true to an extent, as long as they behave like decent people and enemies of terrorism they should not be subject to suspicion. A free society ought to treat its people as innocent until proven guilty.
However, covering for those who act suspiciously, such as CAIR on behalf of the ‘flying imams’ who seemed to be attempting a dry run of a hijacking, is itself suspicious behavior. Those who defend suspicious organizations like CAIR must get a clue or be considered also suspicious. People have a right to be suspicious if the facts indicate there might be a basis for suspicion.

Face it, Dean. Islam has a problem, which has a certain direct correlation to terrorism. There might be parts of Islamic culture worth salvaging. But you won’t succeed in saving Islam by pretending the religion itself doesn’t have a problem.