Sticks and stones may hurt your bones but words can never hurt you.
Today's PC moguls seem to embrace the opposite opinion when you take into account how real life violence in the name of a religion is belittled and glossed over while the ones offering opinions which go against the mainstream PC oratorio are one step away from being crucified on the political skull-hill.
This trend is once again laid bare for everyone to behold in the case of Dutch politician Wilders when he commented that the Koran should be banned like 'Mein Kampf'.
Apparently oblivious to the fact that in Saudi Arabia being in possession of a Bible can lead to imprisonment or public flagellation, Dutch politicians and lawyers (what a combination; I wonder why it conjures up images of pimps and whores?) are only too eager to defend the precious mental well-being of Dutch Muslims, making sure that no word of criticism will land on their heads. This in spite of the fact that where Islam is concerned the Dutch have PLENTY to be worried about.
Yet the right of freedom of speech does not seem to include criticism on the Muslim religion.
Now that Fortuyn is gone all he stood for seems to have been forgotten as well. After eliminating him first, now his legacy and accomplishment are offered up on the altar of Allah.
Even a Catholic bishop like Muskens joins hands with the PC-elite when he urged Christians to use the name of Allah when referring to God.
Yes, why not use Moloch, or Dagon, or Baal as well? Could it be the onset of senility causing him to be oblivious to the origin of the name Allah, that it is not a title, but an actual name of the moon god, the name of an idol which existed before the Muslim concept of Allah, an idol into which Muhammad united all the other idols, even attempting to include YHWH?
Since when does YHWH share his place with the father of lies, since when does YHWH allow his honour and glory to be stolen from Him? Should we insult YHWH to the extent that we call Him after a delusion promoted by a paedophilic mass murderer?
Carrying that same train of thought further, why then shouldn't we call Muskens 'Mengele' to emphasize the common ground with Neo-Nazis instead of focusing on the differences?
After all, what's in a name?
What does YHWH mean when the Bible mentions that He will put His name on our foreheads and write his laws in our hearts? Is He going to implement the essence of Allah into our foreheads, write the being of Baal or the character of Moloch in our hearts and minds?
God does not use a name as a label or a pin-pointer on a genealogical roadmap.
It’s the essence of a person, his character and being. The white stone with our name on it, as mentioned in the book Revelation, is not just the equivalent of a company-card with your name on it, it's the revelation of our essence, the person who God created us to be.
‘Hallowed be thy name’; I wonder if the bishop ever contemplated this part of the Lord’s Prayer. YHWH expresses the essence of God, Allah doesn't. Allah is just a label type of name, ‘I AM’ expresses the all-encompassing being of God.
I’ve written about the name of Allah a long time ago in the post ‘Who is Allah’ which provides a fitting response to the bishop’s statement, even though it was written long before he made the statement.
The bishop’s comment is symptomatic of the very phenomenon I wrote about earlier, spiritual poverty.
I am convinced that calling upon God with a sincere heart is what makes God listen, and as such those brought up in a cultural setting other than Judaism or Christianity may use the name for God that they have been taught. And if their heart is sincere, God will listen.
But this knowledge should NOT be used as a pretext to bow down before a delusion in appeasement and excuse our weakness and our cowardice, because we KNOW God’s name, and to deliberately use the name of an alien invented deity is like an insult to God.
Adding water to wine does not create more wine, it destroys the original.
Unfortunately, I feel this bishop is paving the way for the future, a nice cosy one-world religion where protesters such as yours truly will be seen as upstarts in need of disciplinary measures.
Gradually elements of the Islamic shariah find their way into our societies without being labelled as such, and the comment of the Dutch bishop going down the stairs of dhimmitude must be a very welcome contribution in the eyes of the Imams. Is it any wonder that in the face of this ongoing process of Islamization of our societies and the betrayal of the population by its leaders, be it political or religious, that Wilders comes up with strong statements?
Instead of Muslim integration the opposite principle seems to be at work.
Whereas protests against Islam are smothered and the violence committed in the name of Islam against someone like Jami is glossed over by the leader of the party Jami belongs to, a flood of complaints has been launched against Wilders for expressing his views.
Just as we have had rain all summer, it will continue to rain for a long time to come, falling on the heads of those who dare to put the finger at the sore wound.
All because the Western Emperor is wearing no clothes and continues to parade and take pride in the display of his nakedness.
In the meantime sticks and stones continue to be thrown at messengers whose words do not comply with the Emperor's dictate.
If tolerance and open mindedness are upheld as the Emperor's jewels, where is it visible in the way a man like for instance Wilders is treated?
If honouring human rights is among the aspects we take pride in, why then are the rights of the unborn deemed worthless and why are we so eager to sanctify the religious views of a group which allow for and even promote the use of violence for the sake of spreading the religion, a group which embraces the concept of an uebermensch (the Muslim) and which will not hesitate to translate this concept into legislation? After all, in the eyes of Islam only Muslims are created equal, the rest is infidel.
If unity is to be praised as a virtue, do we try to obtain this unity at the price of selling out our own beliefs and eradicating the adverse elements?
Who was it that said that the more things change, the more they stay the same?
Seeking to be wise and elevated in their own eyes our leaders continue on their downward path even if it is leading them to the level where they have adopted the habits and mannerisms of those previously looked down upon as archetypes of bigotry and intolerance in the face of differentiating views.
When it comes to censorship and deprivation of personal freedom very often religious bigotry is quoted as the epitome, yet some seem all too easily forget that bigotry and totalitarianism are first and foremost the product of human character traits, and securing a separation of a church organization and state does not eliminate those character traits from exerting their influence through other outlets in positions of power as our politicians continuously demonstrate.
Through the blindness and hardness of heart of the West it is transmogrified into the image of the Borg, albeit a very feeble and fragile version of the Borg.
And Allah is indeed the ideal name for the god of Borg.