Pursuing Holiness

JT at Wizbang framed the argument perfectly back in 2006 - do we have the right to not obey Islamic law? He expounds on that concept here, detailing the worldwide movement to criminalize criticism of Islam and asks another key question.

I am not a Muslim.

I do not live in a Muslim country.

So why should I be bound by Muslim law?

Why should my non-Muslim government enforce Muslim laws on non-Muslims?

The future of western civilization hinges on our response to this movement. Not only do we have the right to not obey Islamic law, we have the obligation to not obey it - because going along to get along will only result in further oppression. I’ve used the “secondary crime scene” analogy before. You’re in a parking lot, and a criminal sticks a gun in your ribs and tells you to get in the car and drive him somewhere. The parking lot is the primary crime scene, where your kidnapping takes place. The ’somewhere’ is the secondary crime scene, where he can torture, rape, and murder you at his leisure. It’s obviously better to fight back at the primary crime scene - even if you are shot, at least it’s in public where help is more likely to be available. But fighting back at the primary crime scene often scares off an attacker - if you’re not an easy mark, he’ll probably move on to another victim. It also may get the attention of others who will help fight him off. Compliance only empowers your kidnapper.

Right now, Islamists are trying to kidnap us. If we allow ourselves to be subject to Islamic law, that is the secondary crime scene where we’ll pay the jizya and to live the life of a dhimmi. It’s where we’ll begin to cover ourselves to avoid being raped. It’s where we will not be equal under the law. Consider life in Saudi Arabia, or life in Afghanistan under the Taliban. No matter where you board it, that’s where the sharia train stops. The change is happening gradually, with increasing calls for sharia in the west. Outlawing criticism of Islam will hasten our enslavement.

By the very nature of his post, JT is confronting those who seek to kidnap our free speech and by extension, western civilization. Ezra Levant fought back at the primary crime scene and scared off his attacker. Part of the reason he was able to do so is that a lot of bystanders stepped forward and confronted Levant’s attacker until the size of the crowd intimidated the criminal. Mark Steyn is fighting now, and will probably win. The more bystanders who step up and confront the criminals in the act, the more likely it is that the criminals will leave their victims alone - and where attacks on free speech are concerned, we’re ultimately all the victims. Here, at the primary crime scene, is where we need to fight.

written by Laura