One man's death changes the world

Franz Ferdinand

While there are those individuals and cultures who may not value a single life, in the course of history one person's contributions can make a real difference, just as the death of an individual man or woman can change the world.


The death of one person can bring about war, move  multitudes and change the course of history. The value of life, some say, must be measured in the course of events and the contributions that are made to those events that impact many other individuals. Some of those people whose death created a legacy of lasting memory were prophets, others were rulers of great nations. They have been young, old and from many nations also.

Nearly one hundred years ago Archduke Franz Ferdinand, who was nephew of Emperor Franz Josef and the heir to the Austro-Hungarian empire was killed with his wife in Sarajevo, Bosnia in June 1914. It is widely observed by history that this significant event initiated the outbreak of World War I. A Serbian nationalist, chafing with other citizens of the region against the domination of Austro-Hungarian empire, killed the Archduke, sparking a conflagration that swept through Europe, brought the Americans into a world conflict and killed millions.



Many people blamed the government of Serbia for the attack, looking to put down those struggling for independence with the incident of the killing of a prominent European leader. Russia supported Serbia, along with its allies Belgium, France, and Great Britain while Kaiser Wilhelm's Germany lined up with Austria-Hungary, and in the process World War I was initiated. While the Archduke had not yet gained the throne, the representation of the empire's power in the region brought the flame of independence to ignite, while the fires fanned throughout the European continent. The death of one man had changed the course of history.



When a zealot becomes a martyr, often the effect is to facilitate the gathering of many people, not just for an immediate event but to foster a belief that is made stronger by the death of a single individual. That is especially true if that individual makes the sacrifice of life for a cause. The sacrifice is the blood of the martyrs that can fuel rage, cement philosophies and make men fight each other to avenge that sacrifice or the beliefs that brought the martyr to die for a cause.



As the Second World War was ending, Palestine was caught up in conflicts between Jews and Arabs. A man by the name of Avraham Stern was an angry man with a hatred for the Arabs. He gathered followers to fight the police in Palestine who were trying to intervene and prevent the Zionists from killing innocent Arabs. Stern was killed by Geoffrey Morton, Assistant Superintendent of Police of the Tel Aviv District, following an episode in which three senior policemen, two Jews and one Briton, were killed. Morton shot Stern, according to his claims, as Stern tried to climb out a window and escape, although many people have considered since that Morton manufactured the story and had actually killed Stern in cold blood. Stern was the martyr, appealing to the desperate refugee factions who had fled the Holocaust only to be faced with Arabs who did not want these strangers to take over their lands. He is said to be the hero of modern Israel's right-wing Likudnik mainstream, with two of his admirers who eventually became prime ministers. These were Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin. 



The Zionist movement had needed a hero, and Stern's legacy has been to continue to foster the notion of refugees continuing to settle in Arab lands, creating an ongoing tension in the region that consistently threatens to engulf the rest of the world. 







The death of Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam, brought the religion that had flourished to splinter into two main sects, the Shiah that believes that Muhammad wanted his nephew, Ali to secede him and Sunni, the sect of Islam that follows the line of succession beginning with the Prophet's uncle and through that lineage. These two sects are often literally at war with one another, and the consistent tension between the two has prevented the unification of the Muslim world in modern times, following the independence of the Middle Eastern countries.







There are others whose lives have made a difference, including Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jesus Christ, Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, John F. Kennedy and a host of others, but often it is that individual who seems to have a minor role in the events of a time that instead becomes a major player upon death in a way that lasts for generations. As Stalin himself once said, “One man's death is a tragedy,” for it focuses on the intimacy all people have with one another, that can change the course of history.

Woman's equality does not extend to religion

Greek Orthodox priest

Throughout the world the mainstream religions have one thing in common. Women aren't in charge. Despite the conversations about equality, women lag behind not just in business but in the churches and temples too.


Visit a Baptist Church in the South on a Sunday morning, before the main event of the preacher's message, and the Sunday school classes are often divided. Men and women usually meet separately, as they do in some other denominations. They have their own classes and conversations. There may be a couples group, but habitually there are special classes for men and for women.


Baptists emphasize local church autonomy. The division of the Southern Baptist Convention maintains that local control offers individual members, as well as the clergy, a way to develop close relationships and the ability to develop functions that correspond with the community needs. The emphasis in the local church is on cooperation that the church maintains builds trust. Cooperation, however, means some adjustment, as the roles are somewhat different in the church as opposed to the community. While women direct and manage men in the workplace in increasing numbers, in church their roles remain as second in relationship to men.


Many Protestant churches, and the Catholic church, offer ministry only to men. In the Southern Baptist churches women do not serve as elders but as helpmates of their husbands who hold offices in the church. They do not offer the principal message on a Sunday nor do they teach the classes dominated by men. Their role in the church is defined by what they believe is the way Christ desires men and women to relate in religious life.


The scriptural foundation for how women are to behave and function in church comes largely from the words of Paul in the New Testament. SBC (Southern Baptist) Voices declares its policy as governed by the words in the Bible. In a discussion on the matter of women pastors, one of the main voices in the forum said this, “If you are going to have a woman pastor in your church, why would you even want to be Southern Baptist? We do not believe that is biblical. We think it is wrong.”

The Biblical passages used to determine woman's role in the church are 1 Corinthians 14:34,35 and 1 Timothy 2:11,12 do seem to teach that women are prohibited from teaching and preaching. The respective passages read as follows:

Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.
Let a woman learn in silence with all submission.
And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.

While the body of the Southern Baptist denomination utilizes these references to justify women being excluded from the role of pastor, a graduate student examined the issues and principles related to this, and after speaking with a Biblical expert, the following observation was made, as a way of clarifying the scripture. It may leave the question open for women, under some conditions, to occupy the role of leadership and potentially the role of pastor.


On a site called Gospel Answers the graduate student quotes  Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, a native of Greece and a Biblical scholar. He explains the quotes like this: “Under no circumstances does the injunction of Paul in 1 Cor. 14:34 indicate that women should not utter a word at any time during the church service. Furthermore, the word gunaikes should not be translated “women” in its generic sense, but as “wives.” It is wives who should submit to their husbands. The whole argument is not the subjection of women to men in general, but of wives to their own husbands in the family unit as ordained by God.



The issue of women becoming pastors is being reviewed regularly, as women increase their leadership outside the church. Moderate Baptist churches have sprung up, out of the body of the Baptist tree that continues to have many branches, that have stepped away from the admonition against women becoming pastors and what is considered to be an outdated and incorrect way of looking at women's church roles. Jimmy Carter said he had regretfully left the Southern Baptist church because it has “adopted policies that violate the basic premises of my Christian faith,” including a denomination statement that prohibits women from being pastors and tells wives to be submissive to their husbands.”


Across the religious divide of Protestantism, other denominations outside of the Baptists have embraced women as pastors. Some of the fundamentalist Christian groups like the Pentecostals have advanced women as pastors. Aimee Semple Mcpherson is a case in point. She was a famous preacher whose brand of speech and dramatic persuasion that departed from fire and brimstone rhetoric and instead used the embrace of love from the pulpit brought her to the forefront of her faith.  She was one of those women who preached to mixed audiences everywhere. The Episcopal Church has women priests. The Presbyterians promote women as ministers. Evangelical Quakers, not to be confused with the traditional groups, who have ministers, unlike the unprogrammed groups who don't, maintain both men and women as ministers. So there is some inclusion of women in the clergy in select religious communities.


Catholics maintain women in secondary roles, as teachers, nuns, layworkers, but not as priests. They indeed have never, and by church doctrine cannot be, the Pope.



Islam, although the progressive groups offer arguments of the faith's promotion of women's equality, nevertheless reserve the leadership role of mullah or imam to men. Women, including the more educated ones, are usually in the background at religious and community functions. Leadership roles are reserved principally for men. Buddhism and Hinduism by practice also preclude women from managing religious groups, as does Judaism.

Across the range of history religions of various kinds, including the Greeks gods, held men as the principal leaders of the communities of faith.  Whether the leadership came from the Papacy of old or Thor of the dark world, men set the rules and gave the orders by which adherents were to conform.



Across the world, women may assert their equality in business, in social life, and in government. But in matters of faith they continue to be second to men and seldom attain the principal leadership positions in religious communities, even though in the secular world women's abilities are being lauded as worthy and equal to men.

Religious eclecticism is the new religion

Pope Francis I of the Catholic church

While each of the major religions claims to be the one growing the fastest in the world, what is distinct about faith in most places has to do with how people actually practice their religion. It turns out that religious eclecticism is the new religion that is likely growing the fastest.



While Pope Francis makes pronouncements about marriage between a man and a woman, and the Church frowns upon birth control, forbids abortion and divorce, what do most Catholics believe and practice? It turns out that most Catholic women practice birth control and use contraceptive methods that have been banned by the Catholic Church. Research in 2011 found that 98% of women do not follow the Church's dictates on family planning. The same is true of most Protestant women.



What about divorce? Divorce is frowned upon or forbidden by the tenets of most followers of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. How divorce occurs is somewhat different in all these religions; however, divorce and strong religious belief are compatible in the sense that the most faithful when it comes to general religious practices and church attendance still divorce. They also have extra-marital and premarital sex, despite church admonitions against these practices. It turns out that the rate of divorce is increasing among conservative Protestant groups, according to a recent study. “Generally, religion, religious belief and religious activities are thought to strengthen marriages,” said co-author Jennifer Glass, a sociology professor at the University of Texas at Austin. “It appears that the cessation of education, early marriage and early parenthood, you’re set up for relationship conflict, financial stress and dissolution.”



Most people of faith make compromises with their religion. They sift through the beliefs, sorting one from another, following one and not another. The examples are numerous with relationships, particularly marriage. While faith groups teach the value of knowing someone well but not sexually, most people enter marriage having had sex not just once but several times. While religion emphasized particularly the virginity of women, the modern world sees women as sexually free as men and having the same rights and sexual needs. Furthermore people of faith who are single also live together without being married, a practice that is also growing just as the rate of divorce is ending marriages.



In addition to personal practices, there are specific beliefs or tenets that are part of each religion that people disregard when they are discussing their own particular take on almost anything. For example, mainstream Christianity does not believe in reincarnation. On the other hand, it is not uncommon for people of all faiths to talk about past lives, have their palms read, and talk about auras, mediums and gurus of all kinds. The religion of an individual may form the core of belief but out of that core are many deviations of practice and even manipulation of the tenets in order to accommodate practice.



Mixing tenets is a common practice, according to the Pew Forum. Many Americans, for example, blend Christianity with New Age beliefs. Furthermore it is not uncommon for people to belong to one denomination and attend the services of another. And a sizable number of Christians believe in ghosts or supernatural experiences. In addition it is common practice to have a religiously mixed marriage. In most of these marriages the partners attend various churches or groups as opposed to only one. 



More than 20% of Christians believe in reincarnation. Nearly three in ten people believe they have been in contact with someone who has died. These types of supernatural experiences are part of the eclecticism that is found among religions of all kinds across the world. While members of different faiths will profess the value of their beliefs, many people are willing to go along to get along when it comes to personal practice. Yet despite of these factors, religious hostilities are said to have reached a six-year high. This impacts nearly one-third of the world. It turns out that people are willing to make compromises for themselves but are less willing to understand and accept the beliefs of others.



Much of the eclecticism that occurs has its roots in antiquity. The ancient Greeks adopted eclecticism in philosophy and thought. The major religions each went through periods of borrowing from each other or modifying beliefs and thoughts in order to make accommodations. Islam also, with its many branches, indulges in eclecticism, with varying practices, borrowing from one another while at the same time maintaining one's own beliefs as the essential ones. And for many people essential is sometimes argued as being the only valid beliefs.



Is being eclectic a form of hypocrisy? Likely so, but does it work toward bringing people together in a harmonious and spiritual way that allows people to embrace and accept differences given the divergent tenets of the world's religions? The issue remains that by not admitting to ones' hypocrisy and holding to rigid ideals when dealing with others, while practicing far less than those ideals, does not allow the understanding and acceptance necessary for true religious tolerance. Eclecticism is growing in practice, but it has yet to yield the greater understanding for religious unity, which is paramount to peace.

Atheism becomes haven and the faith of discontents

[caption id="attachment_22228" align="alignleft" width="200"] symbol of atheism[/caption]

Leanne Jenkins---Is atheism a religion?  Is the lack of belief in God a reasonable foundation for building a religious framework, complete with membership guidelines and a place to meet for ceremonies?  Some folks think so, and the notion is growing.

In Portland, Oregon there are billboards that advertise the atheist organization, complete with meeting announcements and a campaign to promote membership.  Oregon is one of those states with a low involvement in religious organizations, and this may be a mechanism for those outside the mainstream, or even the alternative, spiritual organizations to align themselves with atheism.   In fact there are atheist meetup groups in the greater Portland area that advertise themselves as simply "neighbors getting together to learn something, do something, share something?  But what is there to share in an atheist group?

It turns out the discussion centers around everything from vegetarianism to information about Christianity, entitled "Christianity Explored."  And the vegetarian meet-up group narrows its definition to accommodate the membership generalities of non-theistic approaches to interaction by referring to its membership discussions as "agnostic vegetarians."

Many of these people maintain they have either not found religion to be coherent, supportive or necessary, and that they have been discontented with the fractionalism that occurs among sectarian groups.  Others see belief in God as mere superstition, reflecting instead on science as the solution to man's ills.  A number of discussions advertised by the national group are centered upon the sciences.

The American Atheists organization centers on civil rights interests and issues, making sure that other religions don't overstep certain boundaries in ways that would identify a state religion or a religion that indicates that all people belong to a particular religion designated unofficially, or subtly, as one defining the principles by which most people should live.

Experts tell us that it's hard to identify the demographics of atheism, as much of the world's populations identify themselves with a particular religion.  One estimate is 90% of the people of India and the United States.  But there is evidence that the fastest growing religion in the United States is "no religion."

Still while there is a claim by atheists and agnostics that their segment of non-belief is growing faster than faith groups, there are those who differ with this claim.  For example Foreign Policy Magazine observes Islam to be the fastest growing religion in Europe,  and its growth rate the highest in the world.  The rate of growth of Islam worldwide was 1.84% in 2010, the Baha'is at 1.7% puts it at Number 2 in the world in growth rate,  and Sikhism at a growth rate of 1.62% comes in at Number 3.  Christianity's growth rate of 1.3% places it at Number 6.

 

 

America's appreciation of diversity and spirit of Christmas sullied by religious biases

 

[caption id="attachment_7745" align="alignleft" width="300"] Jew, Catholic nun and Muslim on World Religion Day, an example of religious tolerance[/caption]

Carol Forsloff---In spite of America's diversity of creed and color, there remains a tendency to think of those who are on the edge of the mainstream groups as the “Other.” This is particularly true since 9/11, as Muslims remain concerned they are targets of suspicion, harassment and prejudice. This is also true of other groups, as even folks without religion are suspicious of those who belong to some of the minority groups. 

Harvard University has a project called the Pluralism Project. Every year the group publishes research on the topic of religion in America. The most recent research examined the impact of the Boston bombing at the marathon on perception of Muslims.

“People, they’re not used to seeing an American Muslim…there’s no such thing, it doesn’t exist,” says Alisha Fields, an African-American convert to Islam who wears hijab or the traditional clothing and who has experience with being labeled. Fields told researchers that she feels her fellow Americans, when they find out you are Muslim, “label you as Other, because if you’re Muslim, people don’t think you’re American.” She told researchers that this sets her up in an either-or choice as Muslim or American.

The Jehovah's Witnesses have a long history of suffering persecution in the United States. There have been numerous cases that have been brought to the courts, where Jehovah's Witnesses, who often refer to themselves as JV's, have been discriminated against, often because of their stance on not entering military service or saluting the flag. In fact some of the veteran's groups have particularly targeted some of the JV's, with the result that the religious group went to the courts to present evidence of discriminatory practices. A book entitled Judging Jehovah's Witnesses provides an overview of the problem.

Although Senator Harry Reid of Nevada and former Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts are both Mormon, questions arose during Romney's run for the Presidency about the Republican politician's religious beliefs. Yet none of the other candidates on either the Democratic or Republican ticket were asked similar questions. And many people, according to the Christian Science Monitor, will private ask their Mormon friends and acquaintances, “You don't really believe all that stuff, do you,” which is a reflection of the negative attitudes that are often expressed about Mormonism.

America has diverse religious groups that include a variety of Christian groups. As Christmas draws closer the different styles of worship during the Christmas holidays become apparent. Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate the holiday. The Mormons do. And the Muslims believe in and honor Christ, but Christmas is not a religious holiday celebrated by most of them in America, although the idea of gift-giving can occur within the greater community with children involvement on some occasions.

Christmas is a time, it is said, for people to come together in the spirit of love and forgiveness. But the suspicion and distrust among religious groups remain a barrier.

 

 

 

 

 

The risks of faith-based politics to religious ideals

[caption id="attachment_14291" align="alignleft" width="242"] Thomas Jefferson, 1786[/caption]

Carol Forsloff - Recently Franklin Graham was interviewed on the topic of religion and politics.  He underlined the importance of faith, specifically Christianity, and when asked if Obama is Christian, answered he believed the President is but that Obama has given Muslims “a pass.”  How does that compare with the American view historically and how has it impacted social and political relationships?

In an MSNBC interview Graham spelled out his concerns that President Obama has been ignoring the persecution of Christians in Muslim countries.   Newsmax reports detailed the contents of the interview.

“Under Islamic law, under Shariah law, Islam sees him as a son of Islam, because his father was a Muslim, his grandfather was a Muslim, his great-grandfather was a Muslim,” Graham said.  He went on to explain, “So under Islamic law, the Muslim world sees President Obama as a Muslim, as a son of Islam. That's just the way it works. That's the way they see him.”

When asked if Graham believes Obama is “categorically not a Muslim,” Graham said,

I can't say categorically because Islam has gotten a free a pass under Obama.

Since the inception of American independence, religion and politics have been uncomfortable sleeping companions, especially during thorny times.    For Thomas Jefferson,  one of the founders of American democracy and a scholar on many subjects, religion was a serious matter, intimately related to individual freedom and belief.  He often spoke of religion and its importance in human experience; and although he didn’t claim to be regimentally involved in any one religious group, he did recognize the concept of God, creation, and man’s need to reach for the infinite.  But he too found the insertion of religion into political debate something that created consternation, controversy and division.  He also believed strongly in the right to question religious belief.

The scholar and statesman, Jefferson, was a man of the Enlightenment, recommending by letter to his nephew Peter Carr in 1787: Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.

Yet it is the fear expressed by politicians and their supporters that is aroused in many political debates about religion.

Religion has been part of the discussion referencing freedom as much as almost any other topic throughout U.S. history.  It remains part of the political debate in the 21^st century.  It has, however, changed to a sectarian argument, and the issue of who is best, has the right set of beliefs and attitudes, is a major part of the dissension.

Jefferson recognized the fact that Christianity was not alone in its place in man’s array of religious beliefs.  His notion was to protect that individual freedom of belief, especially important given the fact so much persecution had occurred in the countries from which many people had fled.  It was also a part of the religious persecution that occurred in the colonies, to include the burning of “witches,” or those who seemed to hold what were considered heretical views by the majority.  For that reason, the protection of religion became critical in the creation of the Constitution.   Still the debate about that protection continues to be part of the political arguments raised throughout history.  Jefferson’s own views have also been argued, with one side taking the stance that Jefferson was specifically protecting Christianity as the principal religion of America while others believe he had a broader view.  In fact scholars tell us that Jefferson’s philosophy was not specifically Christian and that there is nothing in the Declaration specific to Christianity.

Jefferson’s writings to John Adams, his nemesis at times and later his friend,  reflect his specific view of how distorted the ideas can be of those who describe themselves as followers of Christ and most confidently maintain their specific beliefs referencing Jesus, especially with reference to politics.

“The truth is that the greatest enemies to the doctrines of Jesus are those calling themselves the expositors of them, who have perverted them for the structure of a system of fancy absolutely incomprehensible, and without any foundation in his genuine words. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away all this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this the most venerated reformer of human errors."

In the 1960’s, change came not just in technology and the development of advancements in science, medicine, and every domain of human life.  Religion, rather than dying as some predicted and others maintain created aberrations, was vibrant and important in America.  A bigger tent unfolded, however, allowing people to question traditional beliefs and to begin to explore new ways of worshipping that one God so many people believe central to faith itself.   That questioning in some ways reflected Jefferson’s admonition to his nephew, and in that sense became an echo of the value of religious freedom expressed by one of the great founders of the United States.  The 1960’s, according to historians,  represented the birth of new seekers.  But along with it came the renewal of Evangelism and the beginnings of the Religious Right.  Those divisions between those new seekers and the more traditional Christian groups remain today as part of the fabric of politics and faith.

World religious experts, educators condemn Iran's attack on Baha'is

[caption id="attachment_9844" align="alignleft" width="252" caption="Baha'i principles"][/caption]

NEW YORK, Carol Forsloff – Iran’s persecution of Baha’is continues in a country where those of minority religious views not only have their spiritual life restricted but their education as well.

Recently more than 40 distinguished philosophers and theologians from 16 countries condemned Iran for restricting young Baha’is and others from seeking higher education.

Baha’is constitute the largest minority religion in Iran. The religion began in the mid-19^th century with the announcement first of the Bab and later Baha’u’llah that God had sent a “manifestation” to bring a new message of peace for the world.  The Bab is a title meaning “the Gate” and refers to a man claimed to be the forerunner to Baha’u’llah, the prophet for the present age according to his followers, in the same manner as John the Baptist was to Jesus Christ.

Islam teaches that Muhammad was God’s final messenger. Therefore, any religion that adds to or promotes another religion as superior is considered heresy.

43 distinguished academics from Christian, Hindu, Jewish, and Muslim backgrounds have signed an open letter, published in The Daily Telegraph (UK), and reported in the Folha de São Paulo (Brazil), as presented in a press release from the National Baha’I Center over the weekend.

The academics address the persecution and inequities of the Baha’is by emphasizing in a letter to the Iranian government, “Attacks such as these, against the rights of citizens to organize and be educated in freedom, can no longer be tolerated. We call upon the Iranian government not only to cease its persecution of Baha’is, but to provide, and promote, education for all.”

On Sunday, the Baha’is of Beaverton, one of the small-town areas that stretch the Portland, Oregon tentacles, met at a local center to reaffirm their belief in basic Baha’I principles which include the independent investigation of truth and the equality of women and men. Baha’is maintain men and women should be educated equally, using the analogy of a bird with two wings, male and female, both of which must be strong for the bird to fly. Independent investigation of truth encourages people to find religious and scientific truths, which must be in balance as well according to Baha’is.

Janet Imaki, a local Portland-area Baha’i, says this, “Baha’i principles are essential not just for us but for all mankind, when it comes to things like education. We are a growing community in the Portland area, but in other parts of the world, like Iran, our religion has been persecuted. Many Iranians of the Baha’i Faith are in this country and tell us how wonderful it is to worship freely in America and to seek education.”

Janet Imaki

Baha’is strongly encourage education and believe work done in the spirit of service to be an expression of worship.

Religious freedom restricted in 1/3 of the world

[caption id="attachment_7745" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="Jew, Catholic nun and Muslim on World Religion Day"][/caption]

Carol Forsloff - While most Americans continue to reinforce the concept of religious freedom and the First Amendment rights of the Constitution, across the rest of the world religious tolerance and freedom have actually declined.

The Pew Forum conducted a three-year study on religious restrictions around the world.   The organization’s research found that 6.9 billion people or nearly a third of the world’s population live in countries where government policies on religion or social hostilities involving religion have increased substantially during the period 2006 -2009.

Illustrations of this growing trend are reflected in government and social policies that have developed in Denmark and France.  France has restricted Muslim women from wearing the burka and school children from wearing clothing that displays religious symbols.  French conservatives view the increasing multiculturalism of France to be a threat to the French way of life.  They point to a major difference in assimilation of Muslims in France and African Americans in the United States and that a lack of shared culture, language and religious belief is largely responsible for the problems France is experiencing with respect to dealing with immigrant groups.

White separatists and right-wing groups have found fertile ground in the stresses of assimilation. Dr. Orly Taitz is specifically directing Europe’s struggles with Muslim groups and tying this to America’s policies with the Middle East while targeting President Barack Obama as being sympathetic to the Muslim causes due to his father’s religious affiliation with Islam.  She uses Denmark’s growing restrictions on Muslims as an example of the risks America faces if it continues to court Middle Eastern favor.

Recently England has faced riots in many sections of its major cities that the media has observed comes primarily from the youth in impoverished areas.  Like Denmark and France, new immigrant youth find it difficult to find jobs in a recession, and many of these same youth do not wish to comply with new traditions in order to assimilate.  US News and World Report pointed out in 2006 the growing problem Europe faces with respect to its immigrant population and the children of those immigrants and wrote:     "Europeans are uncomfortable with Islam, and they see it as an alien body in their midst. ... Europe's got a huge problem, and they're just getting their minds around it now."

These cultural pressures in the middle of economic strife and competition are, according to experts, at the heart of the tensions among population groups, a tension that will likely grow and produce the right wing political growth, religious restrictions and community violence in response.

A plea for peace, understanding: Islam not of the Devil

Guest writer - Khurshid Khan, Muslim chaplain, teacher, and retired U.S. military  - Pastor Terry Jones of Gainesville, Florida has put a sign in front of his Church saying: Islam is of the Devil, indicating total disrespect for a religion that has its basis in the Judaeo-Christian culture, the anti-thesis of the Devil.                                           

Those of good will ask this man to understand the religion of Islam did not commit the act on 9/11 of the burning of the World Trade Towers.  It was an act of lunacy, and Jones response is one of lunacy, the prospect of burning the Holy Quran as a warning to radical Islamists.  

What would so-called  “International  Burning  Quran Day”  accomplish?  The best example I can give is that long time ago when the Catholic Christians burnt TALMUD, the Jewish Holy Book in large numbers …. What did they accomplish?  Nothing.   Did it stop Judaism from Growing?  It did not.    

Such irresponsible  and ignorance acts do not mend fences or burn the bridges  of Intolerance but instead they intensely promote hatred, intolerance and fan the fire. Islam is a very peaceful religion and Quran promotes love, understanding, justice, mercy, tolerance and  brotherhood among all mankind.

 As the representative of a major Islamic community in Shreveport, Louisiana,  I ask Pastor Terry Jones to read the Holy Quran intelligently and with open mind and I guarantee he will see Islam and its books has similar beliefs to those of Christianity and is a religion with a belief in Jesus and in God, with reverence for good acts, kindness and tolerance as well.   

If Pastor Jones is a man of God then he should hesitate in showing such a blatant  disrespect  for God’s great Religion Islam.  Islam teaches respect for other religion just as Christianity teaches respect for other religions.   Moreover, it the United States of America, the land of peace, tolerance, equality, love, freedom and justice for all.  There  is no place for intolerance, discrimination and hate-mongering Behavior by anybody let alone by a church pastor. 

I would like to ask Pastor Jones if the terroristic act of Timothy McVeigh made Christianity the religion that incites terrorism?   Did anyone call Timothy McVeigh a Terrorist?    Did  anybody call David Koresh a Terrorist?    Any reasonable and educated person would answer  they did evil things but did not represent either the religions they professed or the former military men McVeigh represented.

Bad people exist in all religions and countries, but the actions of a few do not represent the majority.  Islamic terrorists do not make Islam the Religion of the Devil any more than the acts of David Koresh or Timothy McVeigh make all men evil and their culture evil as well.