Is the following indicative of what Muslims in America will bring to the table on the way to our diverse nirvana?

The reality behind the touch-feely propaganda about moderate Islam and the idea that whatever problems confronts Muslims in the West it's not their fault keeps emertging. Two articles in recent days in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution make the point.

Yesterday, we read about a Pakistani immigrant who strangled his daughter because she wanted to end her arranged marriage. The father murdered his daughter because she "would disgrace the family," according to an arrest warrant. Chaudhry Rashid, 56, told police he is Muslim and that extra-marital affairs and divorce are against his religion. That's why he killed her, the arrest warrant says.

In court this week Rashid said, "I have done nothing wrong."

Today, we are hit with this headline:

“Teens to return from immersion in radical Islam -Film chronicles Atlanta boys' transformation in a Pakistani religious school linked to al-Qaida.”

It’s about a Muslim father in Atlanta who did not like the influence of American culture on his sons. So four years ago, he packed them off, against their will, to a religious school in his native Pakistan. There, they were to learn one thing and one thing only: how to recite the Quran from memory. Oh, turns out that the teachers at the Binoria madrassah aim to ingrain young minds with radical ideology. So they also learned—and solemnly assert—that no Muslims were involved in 9/11.

And how did we happen to learn about these two young Muslims? Only because a documentary Pakistani-American filmmaker, Imran Raza, discovered the boys in 2005, saw them again in 2007, and sent a camera crew earlier this year to film their story. The result is "Karachi Kids." In the film, Raza states that many Taliban militants graduated from the school and that Osama bin Laden once spoke there.

After the story first broke in the media, the father’s initial attempt to get them back to the U.S. ran into a stonewall when the Pakistan government refused to grant exit visas. It took Congressional intervention with President Musharraf and four years of publicity that focused on the boys' desire to go home and the madrassah's alleged connections to radical Islamic groups to bust them lose. The two boys finally returned to Atlanta late Thursday.

The family has lived in Atlanta since 1992, but remains conservative and deeply religious.

Two stories within one week in one metropolitan area. How many similar ones will go unreported? Let’s hope that whatever moderate Muslims exist will find a way to speed up Muslim assimilation into America. Meanwhile, we have no choice but to limit the number that are here at any one time. Just look at the example of the Netherlands.

Christian:
As a former Christian myself, and now a hell-bound atheist, all I can say to your comment is,
Amen, brother!

As a Christian, I find it very troublesome that the government would become involved in the work of the church. Christianity is not about meeting only the physical needs of people; this life is short compared to eternity. To have the government tell a church it can only meet the physical needs of people in the community, but not the spiritual is ridiculous.

Let the government meet physical needs under it's public welfare programs and stay out of the churches.

OK. Next time I'm born in an intolerant *Islamic* nation, I'll keep that in mind, Good Speech.

Gods, man, I only got the one body right now, as I type this.

I tire of the argument going, "We could do better here!"

"Oh, yeah! Look over *there!* I bet we could be a *lot* worse and still feel superior!'

I got this random notion that ain't what America's supposed to be about, somehow.

But more applicable to more than 50 intolerant Islamic nations, including the land of the prophet-Saudi Arabia.

"ed Herman:

"Bolder, yes - pandering to faith-based-anything, no."

Personally, I see it turning something meant to pander to and appease the Religious Right, as an excuse to cut twice as much from public services as was given to proselytizers and self-promoters to use the poor for their agendas, and instead to *enlist* the faith based groups to get some actual work done, in a pluralistic setting, instead of waving a cross and assuming it's getting done.

" Tell the world that it's a lose/lose proposition when we try to appease faith-based groups, and that we can aspire to, and achieve the very same public-spirited goals through other means,"

Like finding ways that Christian-identified groups, and others, for once, can serve the public good with help from the state *without* turning the government into a religious mouthpiece?

There was a terrorist attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan. It is assumed that Pakistanis *might* be behind the attack.

Read the posts of a blogger who goes by the name Farnaz on Susan Jacoby's and Claire Hoffman's thread (George Carlin) for some interesting insights. If only she was so open to all religions as you.

Wow, religious panderer's on the right, religious panderer's on the left. What's a person to do? Be bolder? Okay, god was invented by man for the purpose of subjugating the masses and to finance the building of Oral Roberts University. Just kidding, Oral Roberts is a pauper compared to many of the other religious salesmen.

Bolder, yes - pandering to faith-based-anything, no. Tell the world that it's a lose/lose proposition when we try to appease faith-based groups, and that we can aspire to, and achieve the very same public-spirited goals through other means, and via organizations and public programs that have no connections to churches, synagogues, temples or mosques.

test

Hmmm, Obama needs to be bolder???

I agree and to that end, he should publish and preach about the following flaws and errors of the major contemporary religions:

For "newbies" only:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

Many of the 1.5 million Conservative Jews and many of their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.

simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

Current major issues:

Pedophiliac priests, atonement theology, limbo and original sin!!!!

3. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

Current major issues:

Adulterous preachers, "propheteering/ profiteering" evangelicals and atonement theology.

4. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds this muck and stench of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

Current major issues:

The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering , womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder.

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) -

"Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."
The caste/laborer system and cow worship/reverence are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

Current major issues:

The caste system and cow worship/reverence.

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies, muck, stench and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.

Expanding Bush's faith-based giveaway does three things: 1. establishes that the USA needs a welfare system to redistribute wealth; 2. confirms that the state itself cannot effectively administer the welfare state; 3. bolsters the notion that property declared "religious" should be shielded from taxation and other regulation.

This is a terrible program that should be canceled, not expanded.

We need a president not a preacher. Government cannot run a soup kitchen, or provide meals for someone who has lost a child in the family, or a good food shelf. Governments should never even try doing such things. Good Governments need to be like well oiled machines and like machines they require no religion. They are not there to hold your hand when you fall. Therefore separation of Church and State is a must.

Good states and good faiths have a symbiotic relationship, they keep out of each others way yet serve the same purpose; looking after people.

Glad that you realize that America is a nation with a soul of a Church. It never was and never will be a nation with a soul of a Mosque. In any Muslim country there are numerous mosques but provide no care or shelter for the needy; they are madrassas. Why would we want to fund a Mosque? After all most refugees and immigrants are first generation, fresh from those failed states that have not separated Mosque from State. America is so successful because of separation of Church and State then let’s keep it that way. Definitely keep the Mosque out.

"When will we then see federal funding for Wiccans and Pagans and Polytheist organizations, or followers of Zeus? I mean, under this program, they should be legitimately included. And in no way do I discount their relevance, but who will make these decisions?"

This is a good question, Steven. He has spoken about those people with and without faith as all needing to work together. If he's serious about it, there's no reason for the above groups you mention to not be included as well. I hope that Pagan and other minority groups would be given a fair shot at getting such funding. Proselytizing isn't even an issue since the community doesn't seek conversion.

I would hope that he would put his actions where his words are. and I'd also love to see these expanded to include interfaith efforts as well.

This is the first politician I've seen in my lifetime who seems to be trying to show that his faith means something more than hating other people. That no matter what one calls themselves there is a part to play. If he can pull it off, more power to him.

"Obama’s delicate Church-State dance – the government will support religious groups doing good work, but they have to agree not to use federal money to proselytize the people they are serving or discriminate against the staff they are hiring – makes sense, although this too is going to be stickier in reality than it is in a proposal."

Always is, Mr. Patel. Pre-Bush programs supposedly had the same strictures, but that didn't stop the proselytizing and selective-granting of the resources by certain Christian groups. The Salvation Army got a practical 'monopoly' on the services to the poor in certain parts of New York City, then decided it was more important to not-serve gays than to serve anyone, in fact, just like Catholic Charities in Boston shut down its adoption services rather than (potentially) recognize the equal humanity of gay couples.) (Notice a theme, here?)

What Bush did was to remove any accountability for where the money goes, while cutting twice as much out of public services than was given to (When you look, very proselytizey Christian groups to the exclusion of almost all others) ...without accountability, and often under the notion that 'Well, being Christian is better than food, so converting the hungry is better than feeding them,')

Obama's plan is to restore the accountability, and hopefully make the programs a net gain for the less fortunate, not just forcing more-depserate people whose President abandoned them to go begging to more-strident 'kneel-for-your-supper, sinner' types.

In some ways, I think the boldness here is in the *practicality* of what he's proposing, instead of using the poorest among us to prove an ideological point. There's still a lot of people out there needing helping, those who fall through the cracks of the government system, (That this happens does not mean that the government system is useless: in fact, abolishing it as conservatives would like would quickly either overwhelm the private or faith-based charities, or make them just as 'big government' as what we have now.)

Definitely, he's been my favorite candidate *because* he has the leadership skills to actually energize a culture-war-numbed nation. The media and the religious conservatives have been trying to turn this to yet more fear and negativity, of course, casting vision and leadership skills as 'elitism' if not 'Dangerous fanaticism that might be Black Christian or Muslim.' And of course, claiming there's no 'substance' as if you can't have both.

So, here's some substance. That's what I figure.

I haven't ruled out he can and will be *bolder,* but in all the swiftboating and smearing, people haven't really gotten the chance to see 'about what.'

He's stronger on the facts and issues, though, I see no problem with cooling it down a bit.

The problem is which churches do we give money to for "faith-based" programs? If my new "Church of the Heebee Geebees" (where we jump around and make fun of Irish Catholic bigotry on Fox News) wants to start a soup kitchen, who decides whether or not it is a bona fide church? (believe me, there are arguments why it is just as bona fide as other participating "churches")

Therein lies the problem in this theocratic approach to government assistance. It's a slippery slope whether the beneficiary church is a white racist neocon front group or a black liberation racist front group.

Obama has continuously critized Christian ministers saying they have hijacked Christianity..Personally I think his faith based idea is going to hijack Christianity...
Obama speaks of crime and shootings, and teen pregnancies, poverty, etc. and is offering a bandaide for this cut artery in American society. But the root of the problem needs tackled and destroyed..Go back in America's history before prayer was removed from the schools and read the statistics on teen pregnancies, juvenile crime, school shootings, etc..It was almost non existent.. I know I lived it... Each godless generation has produced more evil...Cause and effect...
America's problems can be traced to a few things.. , namely the aclu, and/or the u.s. supreme court and/or the godlessness forced on children..
Much of the ruling and especially the judical branch of America has become like adam and satan in evaluating good and evil ..They call evil good and good evil and force their evil opinions on the masses and give offenders legality to practice evil....They also take the meager 10 laws god gave man and not only added billions, they have also defaced these mere 10 laws which are for the good of all men..For instance...THOU SHALL NOT MURDER....consider abortion...
As promised, God has allowed our enemies to come on our land because we have forgotten God..We are so intent on believing good is evil and evil is good that God has allowed a man in the political arena that the masses are calling godlike but in reality is no part of God..and will destroy America... Just maybe then we will repent and learn what evil is and what good is.

A government sponsored faith program would allow the government to put its nose into the church. At first it would dictate to the churches who they may hire or fire, etc..That is the beginning.. As I see it it is like the camel who wanted to put his nose into the Arabians tent to get it warm.. then his front feet, and then his belly till the camel was in the tent and the Arabian was out in the cold. To qualify for this gov. assistance the churfor the lure viamust abide by certain hiring and firing rules..If the churches must hire people that are not Christian and /or have diverse teachings.. Slowly this would infiltrate the church and the truth would disappear.
Mad Murray is an example of how one persons opinions can destroy an entire nation.
The churches have always given to the poor and charity work.. It most definately does not need government help, dictation,or money..Government funded faith based programs is just another one of satans tricks to get control over the churches.The Government has far too much control over the righteous people and too little control over the unrighteous and criminals..Dont give them any more power with the promise of money.....

I'm an Obama supporter, after having read his books, visited his website, heard his (admittedly) generalized "change" rhetoric, and looking at the thrust of his message that says "I can't do it alone, we can do it together."

However, I must admit that I think this elevation in importance of "faith based initiatives" is a mistake, in the short and long run. It may be a pipe-dream to think Americans are better served by the "neighborhood" faith communities who have an audience, but I'd need to see some good data that tax money given to churches serves the greater public good, versus policy changes that change the general rules of how this nation functions in terms of justice for the poor.

Not to mention what it does to the concept of separation of church and state. This idea is the antithesis of that concept, if there ever was such a legitimate concept to begin with.

And it is by no coincidence that we have a Supreme Court decision that relays that this program is immune to litigation.

I've been a church member for most of my life. I agree with the many people who are concerned that this federal money will certainly help those programs that serve a part of the greater community service, but in a way that frees up tax-free money to go to that faith community's evangelism and outreach programs designed to proselitize. It will be an indirect way for particular faith programs to benefit from federal money.

Why do we need federal funding of churches, more than their already tax-exempt status? Why can't the efforts of faith-based communities be through the donations of faith-based members, as a true gift-of-love funneled through the organization?

When will we then see federal funding for Wiccans and Pagans and Polytheist organizations, or followers of Zeus? I mean, under this program, they should be legitimately included. And in no way do I discount their relevance, but who will make these decisions?