It is hard to see how Islam could be defined as anything other than a religion of death.
The evidence is mounting like bodies in unmarked graves. Muhammad himself killed many. History is full of murders at the hands of Islamic hordes. Today, ISIS in the Mideast and Boko Haram in Africa kill innocent people by the thousands. At least Nazis tried to hide their slaughter until it was discovered.
Islamic terrorists brag about their killing. Those who “want peace,” and those who want to hasten a solution to the inevitable holy war, should press the United Nations to immediately demand that Islam define itself and to whom various Muslims are accountable.
American statists feel an odd kinship rooted in mutual hatred of the Great Satan. When the victims of radical Islamofascists turn out to be atheist beatniks, suddenly the American socialists begin to get the picture.
People the world over know that the next radicalized killer could be learning his hate and even his tactics in the mosque down the street. How long before people refuse to live in fear and decide to strike first? Are we heading for an all-out religious war?
Many are suggesting general solutions that would require entire paradigm shifts, such as everyone agreeing that Islam needs to be vanquished or that marches must take place, though they will accomplish very little in real terms. Meanwhile, people are dying at the hands of Islam.
Why should it be incumbent upon those being attacked to define it so that no sweeping action is taken against their enemy?
Thus far, when Westerners request definitions of Islam, it falls on deaf ears. Muslims avoid definitions for a myriad of reasons. They need to know, as Western sentiment is rapidly advancing toward sweeping answers for the terror in their lives at the hands of Islam, there is no choice but to self-define in very clear ways.
The Islamic world needs to do what Christians, Jews and even Buddhists have done throughout history and the Catholic Christians do on an almost daily basis. It needs to hold an international council and settle the matter.
In any denomination, you can know the congregation by its council. If you want to know what a Catholic believes, there is specific doctrine. If you want to know what the Southern Baptist Convention believes, you can read it. The upper echelon of the Southern Baptist Convention determines the very definition of the tenets of their beliefs. If a crime is committed by a Southern Baptist, you can easily know if that crime is permissible or even encouraged by the religion. The same goes for virtually every other world religion, from Buddhism, to Mormonism, to Christian Science, to Scientology and beyond.
Unlike every other major denomination, there is a total lack of centralization in Islam. Islamic cells are therefore permitted to move around, widen and narrow, avow and disavow at will, with zero accountability to the world about the impact of the “faith.”
In a centuries-old rift between two denominations of Islam, Sunnis believe one thing, and Shiites believe another thing. No one really knows which aspect of the Quran any given group of Muslims believes at any time, and no one is held accountable for acts based upon the Quran. As a result, all Muslims hold potential culpability, leading some to want to eradicate the entire religion. Simultaneously, all Muslims have plausible deniability, allowing crimes committed in the name of Allah to proliferate.
The doctrines of Islam are really quite simply defined by the local imam and, to a larger degree, the individual. So while one apologist might decry violence as being against Islam, there are likely millions who take plain words of the Quran to justify it. Thus, when asking whether Islam is a religion of peace or a religion of mass murder of innocents, the answer is clearly that it is both. Anyone who claims to know the truth is merely giving an opinion.
No one can claim to know what Islam stands for because if the Quran is the ultimate source, it is open to interpretation by sects of Muslims. No one knows who controls the octopus of Islam, so there is no line of authority. There are a lot of questions most non-Muslims would like to have answered about what Islam really stands for and what it means to be a “good” Muslim.
This is why the United Nations should immediately demand that Islam define itself, and to whom Muslims are accountable.
Are all non-Muslims infidels? Is it OK for Muslims to lie to Infidels? To force non-Muslims to pay a jizya? They need to tell the world, starting with their own subscribers, whether violent jihad, beheadings of children, genital mutilation, polygamy, murder of homosexuals, honor killing, rape, slaughter and/or sale into slavery of young school girls is part of their doctrine or not. Each of these issues would need to be addressed in short order, or the geo-political system of Islam should be seen as an enemy government, not a religion, and should be treated accordingly.
Certainly, countries like the United States, which has suffered major loss of life at the hands of Islam, should demand an international council and require the sects of Muslims who want to live and work in the United States to declare their identity and their answers to the defining issues above. Then nations can begin to act based upon that information and decide if the tenets of their system actually qualify as a religion or as the views of foreign invaders that must be defeated.