The morality of allowing Syrian refugees into the USA

[Rau]

I accept that some Islamic leaders have condemned the actions of terrorists. However, I do not think they have “come out in droves.” They need to do that. They need to say explicitly that what the terrorists do is not Islam, and the terrorists are in no way martyrs, but cowards and killers.

Can you point to droves of Catholic Leaders who came out in decades past and opposed the “inaction” of the Church in dealing with the incidences of child abuse by wayward priests, and the quiet papering over of that activity by Bishops?

Good men can always do more.

 

[Rau]

Wouldn’t the next logical step be to work out why this is the case, to what extent Islam itself fosters this being “out of step” and work out some effective measures in terms of what needs, legitimately, to be done to prepare, if possible, to properly deal with the problem?

It does no one any good to pretend these kinds of “out of step” situations will not happen in the future, when clearly they consistently have happened in the past and are happening now.

Absolutely. It is hard to believe that part of the solution is not for the West to see mistakes in its conduct also.

 

[Peter_Plato]

Absolutely. It is hard to believe that part of the solution is not for the West to see mistakes in its conduct also.

Here is one issue we should expect to arise very soon:

stream.org/disorder-sharia-courts/

Once the population of Muslims reaches a certain level we can expect demands that Shariah law become, minimally, a parallel legal system. I say “minimally,” because the more serious adherents to Islam are demanding that Shariah surplant the law of the land because it is a superior legal system – that is, because it is the law that Allah demands humans live by and humans have no options with regard to objecting to it.

Christians, recall, appealed to natural moral law which could be worked out by sound reasoning and relied heavily upon principles of natural equality, justice, truth and intrinsic human worth – not so Shariah.

Here is a second:

ktnv.com/news/protesters-disturb-mass-at-catholic-churches-across-valley

The issue here would appear to arise from the Islamic backgrounds of these “Koosh Christians,” if, indeed, they have renounced their Islamic beliefs at all. Now, whether or not these individuals are, indeed, “Christian” or merely using the claim to intimidate other Christians into “submission” as a tactic, it seems pretty clear that any mainline or authentically Christian group would not practice this kind of intimidation. I have never heard of this kind of thing happening among Christian denominations.

This, essentially, is the problem with leaving words such as “Muslim” or “Christian” as ill-defined cultural or quasi-religious identities completely separated from any adequate determination or description of such terms.

This would seem to provide a very good refutation of the position that to be “Muslim” means whatever anyone calling themselves “Muslim” determines it to be and, therefore, moderate Muslims are “Muslim” in the same or stronger sense that radicals are, merely because they happen to be moderate.

In this case, holding to this kind of nominalistic logic means “Koosh Christians” have as much right to help themselves to the term “Christian” as traditional Catholics do, or that such a right permits someone outside of Christianity to determine whether anyone is truly “Christian” or not; which, of course, is quite in line with Planned Parenthood supporters determining on behalf of pro-lifers everywhere that Robert Dear is determinably a “pro-lifer.”

If anyone does not see the ridiculousness of buying into this kind of leftist redefinitionism gone amuck, I can no longer be of assistance to them since the rational part of their brains seems to have completely abdicated any claim it may have once upon a time had on their rational thought processes.

 

[CatholicKnight3]

Still wondering if the The Vatican is willing to accept thousands of Syrian refugees with out some serious vetting.

So, why should we?

Just like terrorists have vowed to destroy The Vatican, they have also vowed to destroy America, Israel and anyone who does not convert to Sharia Law.

I have seen at least one person claiming to believe in Christ say muslims worship the God as Christians. If I could put on ignore, I would. I will put it that way.

Now we see the price of this unreal naive policy. France is learning.

Do we know history at all? Have any idea if the muslims were not beaten back that the Renaissance may not have happened?

The Battle of Tours, and especially the Battle of Vienna. If the invading hoards of muslims were not fought back and kicked out of Spain and France, I assure you the Renaissance would have been very very different.

We know the terrorists have flat out SAID they will use the refugee movements to infiltrate the countries. So, what do we do? Let them use our compassion to manipulate us as fools?

Meanwhile this “American president” has rejected the Christians that are being slaughtered.

thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/228670-no-room-in-america-for-christian-refugees

Read that. I have not seen much response for this disgrace from The Vatican. Have you? Christians are being rejected, and muslims are being accepted and anyone that rejects this are being called racist? Of course, the race card. Use what always works.

Again, someone please let me know when the Vatican lets its security lapse and allows nonstop muslim refugees inside.

 

[pnewton]

I have seen at least one person claiming to believe in Christ say muslims worship the God as Christians. If I could put on ignore, I would. I will put it that way.

Muslims (capitalized, by the way) worship the same God, but not as Christians. That doesn’t even make any sense.

 

[pnewton]

Here is one issue we should expect to arise very soon:

stream.org/disorder-sharia-courts/

Once the population of Muslims reaches a certain level we can expect demands that Shariah law become, minimally, a parallel legal system. I say “minimally,” because the more serious adherents to Islam are demanding that Shariah surplant the law of the land because it is a superior legal system – that is, because it is the law that Allah demands humans live by and humans have no options with regard to objecting to it… I can no longer be of assistance to them since the rational part of their brains seems to have completely abdicated any claim it may have once upon a time had on their rational thought processes.

My rational mind tells me that the slippery slope argument requires at least some precedents or it is a fallacy. The direction of the courts has been consistently toward greater separation of Church and State. Establishment of religious law is not something we are “sloping” toward. Amending the Constitution is harder now than it has been in the past. I do not see any slope that would appeal the First Amendment. A post with a slippery slope fallacy is not the place to berate others lack of rationality.

 

[CatholicKnight3]

muslims (capitalized, by the way) worship the same god, but not as christians. That doesn’t even make any sense.

they deny christ is lord!!!

I am done with this board!!!

They deny christ is lord!!!

I am sick of the utter false teaching!!!

They slaughter christians for not converting to sharia!!!

You are all false teachers!!!

 

[pnewton]

Still wondering if the The Vatican is willing to accept thousands of Syrian refugees with out some serious vetting.

So, why should we?

I do not know what you mean by vetting, but I can address the rest. The Vatican did take one family that fled Damascus. The Vatican has a population of less than five hundred. If we were to take in the same percentage of refugees, that would be three million. So your slam on the Holy See is without merit as the Holy Father does practice what he preaches.

 

[pnewton]

they deny christ is lord!!!

I am done with this board!!!

They deny christ is lord!!!

I am sick of the utter false teaching!!!

They slaughter christians for not converting to sharia!!!

You are all false teachers!!!

Just what are you a “knight” of? The Catholic Church is not a false teacher. The doctrine of the Church is clear on this.

Pope Paul, also quote by St. John Paul the Great:

“The Church also has a high regard for the Muslims, who worship one God, living and subsistent, merciful and omnipotent, the Creator of heaven and earth.”

Instead of ranting against the Truth, we should learn from the Church as teacher.

Oh, and bye.

 

[Rau]

they deny christ is lord!!!

I am done with this board!!!

They deny christ is lord!!!

Do you agree that the God of the Jewish people is “the same God” as our Christian God? Yes, the Jews do not accept Christ as God incarnate. But we share the same God, and the Bible incorporates the Torah.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Do you agree that the God of the Jewish people is “the same God” as our Christian God? Yes, the Jews do not accept Christ as God incarnate. But we share the same God, and the Bible incorporates the Torah.

Jews and Christians accept the same moral law. Muslims and Christians do not. The Bible does incorporate the Torah, but does the Koran incorporate the Bible? No.

 

[Rau]

Jews and Christians accept the same moral law. Muslims and Christians do not. The Bible does incorporate the Torah, but does the Koran incorporate the Bible? No.

True enough, but the other poster sought to conclude the Moslem God was not our God because they do not view Christ as God incarnate. That is not a basis to differentiate, as the Jewish example demonstrates. I should not have cluttered my post by referencing the Bible.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

True enough, but the other poster sought to conclude the Moslem God was not our God because they do not view Christ as God incarnate. That is not a basis to differentiate, as the Jewish example demonstrates. I should not have cluttered my post by referencing the Bible.

I don’t know a lot about Islam, but I know they consider Jesus the greatest prophet after Mohammad. Jews also consider Jesus a great prophet. Neither religion considers him God. Although Christianity, along with Judaism and Islam is a monotheistic religion, to me, and I may be wrong. Jews and Muslims are more closely related because of the Catholic belief in a Trinitarian God. I am aware that some Protestant denominations do not believe in the Holy Trinity, but I do not know of any that do not believe in the divinity of Christ. Culturally, I think Jews and Christians are more alike.

I think it was fine to reference the Bible.

 

[Usagi]

Jews and Christians accept the same moral law. Muslims and Christians do not.

Well…

If we look at the Law of Moses, especially when implemented at a governmental level with prescribed punishments for violation and such, I suspect we modern Westerners (Jews included) would be just as horrified by a nation that lived strictly under those rules as we are by the legal systems of some Muslim nations.

Christianity is distinct from both Judaism and Islam in that the New Testament never lays out a code of law for a Christian state. Over the millennia, though, the Church has ended up intertwining itself with various empires, kingdoms, and nations, and almost always our ancestors ended up persecuting Jews and heretical Christians in their territories and killing people in horrific ways. Even today, we have people on these very boards who would like to see Christian morality enforced by law in our nations, and even a fringe that literally wants to institute the Old Testament law as the way humans should be governed.

Islam is in the situation of being the youngest of the three faiths, amd for much of its history has been in a dominant position within certain nations so that religious law and the law of the land have been heavily intertwined. Some Islamic nations enforce what we see as outdated and barbaric punishments for crimes. But that is not because of some essential difference between Islam and the other two Abrahamic religions. Our ancestors fell into the same patterns in similar situations. By the present time most of us have decided that living alongside Gentiles or heretics or unbelievers is preferable to everyone killing everyone else or one group being on top and oppressing all the rest. There is nothing about Islam that prevents the majority of its followers from also coming to that conclusion, especially those living in places where Islam does not dominate.

In the West we have built a culture that, while it has “Judeo-Christian” roots, has largely chosen not to enforce any single religion or moral code by force of law. Jews and Catholics can live by their own special laws when it comes to worship or food or whatever, and can even exact penalties on those who break the rules (just as any social club or sports organization can), but we don’t get to enforce our rules on those outside the community and we can’t ultimately stop anybody from just leaving if they choose. There is no reason that Muslim communities cannot also coexist within such a framework. And as awesome as I think Christianity is, there is nothing that necessarily stops us flawed Christians from rejecting peaceful coexistence should the temptation present itself.

Usagi

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Yes, you are right.

Thank you for taking the time to write such a detailed post.

 

[Peter_Plato]

But that is not because of some essential difference between Islam and the other two Abrahamic religions.

Actually, there does exist an essential difference between Islam and the other two Abrahamic religions and that difference has to do with the the “otherness” of Allah. In Islam, Allah is viewed as being so far above human capacity and goodness that he cannot be known even by analogy. There is nothing that compares with the goodness of Allah and nothing humans can do which would even be considered remotely “good,” except to do precisely what was revealed by the prophet Muhammad.

In Judaism and Christianity, the idea of man being created in the image of God – the Imago Dei – provides the grounds for a relationship with God. Natural moral law as grounded in the inherent goodness of each individual human person created in the image of God provides the link between man and God. God is merciful because of the essential God-created goodness present in each person made in his image. This connection between man and God is essential in Christianity – so essential that God could become fully human.

In Islam, that connection is non-existent because the goodness of Allah is infinitely beyond anything found in human persons. No thought, behaviour or act on the part of human beings besides submission to the will of Allah revealed through Muhammad can bring human beings any closer to God – not showing mercy, not obeying moral laws, not showing love or charity, only following the prescriptions of Muhammad.

Doing so will not get humans closer to Allah in any sense, merely that humans will be rewarded for doing so. There is no idea of coming to know and love God or being drawn to him as the Summum Bonum or beatific vision implies. There is only the reward of human pleasures for doing so.

There is, likewise, no objective means for determining right from wrong except what has been revealed to Muhammad by Allah. Reasoning, truth, morality or justice have no independent meaning which can be used as counterpoints by way of assessing whether Islam is correct or not on certain tenets or doctrines. These can’t be weighed or assessed in any objective sense. This is ruled out a priori by the contention that what has been revealed absolutely overrules every possible human objection or resistance by the simple fact that Allah is incomprehensibly above human thought or goodness such that any objections or interpretations on the part of human beings count for nothing.

These two talks by Robert Reilly provide an important perspective.

instituteofcatholicculture.org/islam-yesterday-today-tomorrow/

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Actually, there does exist an essential difference between Islam and the other two Abrahamic religions and that difference has to do with the the “otherness” of Allah. In Islam, Allah is viewed as being so far above human capacity and goodness that he cannot be known even by analogy. There is nothing that compares with the goodness of Allah and nothing humans can do which would even be considered remotely “good,” except to do precisely what was revealed by the prophet Muhammad.

In Judaism and Christianity, the idea of man being created in the image of God – the Imago Dei – provides the grounds for a relationship with God. Natural moral law as grounded in the inherent goodness of each individual human person created in the image of God provides the link between man and God. God is merciful because of the essential God-created goodness present in each person made in his image. This connection between man and God is essential in Christianity – so essential that God could become fully human.

In Islam, that connection is non-existent because the goodness of Allah is infinitely beyond anything found in human persons. No thought, behaviour or act on the part of human beings besides submission to the will of Allah revealed through Muhammad can bring human beings any closer to God – not showing mercy, not obeying moral laws, not showing love or charity, only following the prescriptions of Muhammad.

Doing so will not get humans closer to Allah in any sense, merely that humans will be rewarded for doing so. There is no idea of coming to know and love God or being drawn to him as the Summum Bonum or beatific vision implies. There is only the reward of human pleasures for doing so.

There is, likewise, no objective means for determining right from wrong except what has been revealed to Muhammad by Allah. Reasoning, truth, morality or justice have no independent meaning which can be used as counterpoints by way of assessing whether Islam is correct or not on certain tenets or doctrines. These can’t be weighed or assessed in any objective sense. This is ruled out a priori by the contention that what has been revealed absolutely overrules every possible human objection or resistance by the simple fact that Allah is incomprehensibly above human thought or goodness such that any objections or interpretations on the part of human beings count for nothing.

These two talks by Robert Reilly provide an important perspective.

instituteofcatholicculture.org/islam-yesterday-today-tomorrow/

That you for the informative post. I took Comparative Religion I and II, however, neither went into detail, and I’ve forgotten much of what I learned. Sad to admit that, but it’s true. I found your post very interesting.