Should we call them 'Radical' Muslims?

[ck4829]

'Radical' is ususally a leftist term. I think calling Muslims who want to take over our government 'Radical' was an invention of the Conservatives and the Christian Right. I am going to call those people 'Reactionary' Muslims because a minority of Muslims want to turn our government BACK. They want to turn our rights BACK. This sounds what Reactionaries like to do. I know only a super-small minority of Muslims are malevolent, so really names don't matter, but this matters to us because not only is the right smearing the Democrats, they also like to smear Muslims. Do you guys think instead of calling them Radical, we should call them Reactionary?

[bigtree]

1. I don't care what their religion is.

I only want to know of their peace.

[KG]

2. muslims want to take over our government?

they want to turn our right back?

heck, those are the avowed ambititions of the radical fundy christian movement in this country...

[Solon]

3. Found a nice summary of their goals on the Beliefnet Message Board.

Vistronic
9/23/03 1:35 AM 1 out of 160

I thought it would be interesting to extrapolate on the idea of a Christian "Fundy" Taliban in the USA.

Is this the valid conclusion to my arguments for a Christian nation that I have put forth on the Christian Country thread? I wonder?

Also I think as a somewhat "Fundy" I can bring some fuel for the "fire".


The Fundamental Orders.

1. Amendment to establish Christianity as state Religion.

2. Religious Freedom is allowed "official" but all sects must register so the "others" can be accounted for.

3. 10 commandments and selective Old testament laws are adapted as moral code in state and school.

4. Laws are passed to help reinforce these moral codes.

5. The state religion Christianity is now taught at all school levels. Prayer and Pledge are mandatory.

6. All Science that disregards the Bible must be reinterpreted to align to Bible.

7. All "disrupter's of order" must be corrected. Since prison is to harsh for this rehabilitation centers are established.

8. Free speech is allowed except in regards to taking the Lords name in vain and trashing the Bible.



I think that would about cover the basics.
Vis.

Link: http://www.beliefnet.com/boards/message_list.asp?boardID=430&discussionID=290919

[KG]

4. well, i'd just like to know where the poster got the notion

that radical muslims want to take over the US gov't.

[Solon]

6. I was referring to the RR in our country.

I don't see "Radical" Muslims trying to take over this country, in other nations yes, but they do not have that goal here. They want to be left alone, to put it at its most basic level, no more, no less. However, the violent ones have used methods that are inexcusable and should be caught and prosecuted.

[ck4829]

13. I should have probably explained my thoughts

I don't have the notion, but I think Conservatives want to push the concept that 'radical' Muslims are trying to take over.

[LARED]

8. The Fundamental Orders??????

Do you have evidence that any mainstream Fundamental Christian denomination or group beleives these "Fundamental Orders?"

[Solon]

11. Actually if you read it carefully, that is a quote from one of these

self identifying Christian Reconstructionists. It does fit with the ideologies of both the Reconstructionists and of the Religious Right. I think it is a nice summary of the basic beliefs and goals of those who form the base of * support.

[TexasProgresive]

5. No one owns "Radical"

This word like many has lost its moorings. Radical means root or base. It's what you get when you reduce something to the point where any additional reduction would yield something different. The radical of water is one molecule of H2O, to reduce further you would have hydrogen and oxygen. Radical is what all fundamentalist strive for but mostly fail. Jesus is radical, Buddha is radical,Mohammad (sp)is radical, Hitler was radical and Dubyuk is approaching radical. Radicalness is not definitive of someones core beliefs - it is the core. So it can be applied to anyone. It doesn't denote liberal, conservative or any particular leaning.

Reactionary is also a general term that can be ascribed to people of various political and religious stripes. It refers to "knee jerk" reactions to stimuli. This term was wedded to conservatives years ago but like PC it is a big enough tent to cover us all. There are liberal and conservative knee jerkers who react but do not think. Dogs and other animals have a bite reflex. My elderly dog Nicolas sometimes needs a shot to help him with arthritis. When I stick him he reacts by turning his head to my arm but doesn't bite because he thinks it through. If Nickle were a true reactionary he would bite me. But he is more capable of thought then many people

[NuttyFluffers]

7. reactionary, it's the correct usage.

words and their meanings have been mangled in american english. anything to bring them back from the nonsense of 'fascist communist liberal hitler pinkos' would be a relief.

keep calling them what they are, reactionary. eventually people will pick it up. not like stupid 'homicide bomber' or 'suicider' crap that we get in our media...

[markomalley]

9. Call 'em republican-sympathizers instead n/t

[bearfartinthewoods]

10. how about 'fundie'? works for me on many levels <grin>

[Forkboy]

12. I agree completely

fundies are the same worldwide....crazy.

[Aidoneus]

14. I'm not sure there is a "we" to this

You seem to have some really bizarre misconceptions, the sort usually found in people I don't consider a "we" that includes myself.

[ck4829]

15. "We" is just a figure of speech

I have been having to correct this post the most. I was just wondering what your opinion was if it is correct to call them 'radical' or something else.