Asalaamu Caleykum Waraxmatullaahi Wabarakaatuh brothers & sisters in Islam and hello to non Muslim
Bacadu Salaam,
Italian intellectuals: moral and spiritual crisis prevents Europe from reacting to Islamic terrorism
Rome, Mar. 01, 2006 (CNA) - A significant number of Italian lawmakers, politicians and intellectuals, led by the president of the Italian Senate, Marcello Pera and including such individuals as Italy’s Culture Minister, Rocco Buttiglione, has presented a manifesto in which they attribute the confusion and fear in Europe over Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism to “a moral and spiritual crisis” that prevents the continent from finding “the courage to react.”
The manifesto, endorsed by more than 70 different leaders in government, trade unions and universities, states that the west is “under attack from the outside by Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism” and is “incapable of responding to the challenge.” “We feel guilty for our well-being, we are ashamed of our traditions, and we think terrorism is a reaction to our mistakes. But terrorism is a direct attack on our civilization and on the whole of humanity,” the document argues.
“Europe is sick,” it continues. “The birth rate continues to fall, as well as [Europe’s] competitiveness, unity and action on the world scene. It hides and denies its own identity and thus fails to provide itself a legitimate constitution of its citizens. It determines relations with the United States are broken and makes anti-Americanism its flag.”
The statement echoes the words of Pope Benedict XVI that today, the “West no longer loves itself,” and that to overcome this crisis “more determination and more courage regarding the issue of our civilization” are needed.
Western civilization, it notes, has been the “source of universal and undeniable principles, contrasting, in the name of a common historical and cultural tradition, the temptation today to build an alternative Europe set against the United States.”
The document also argues for better integration of immigrants and defends the right to life “from conception to natural death.” The family, it underscores, is the natural foundation of society, and marriage “must be protected and differentiated from any other type of union or bond.”
The signers acknowledge the distinction between Church and State, “without giving in to the secular temptation to relegate the religious dimension to solely the private sphere.”
Source CNA
====
The non Muslims on this board your reaction about this article??
Italian intellectuals: moral and spiritual crisis prevents E
Moderators: Moderators, Junior Moderators
Forum rules
This General Forum is for general discussions from daily chitchat to more serious discussions among Somalinet Forums members. Please do not use it as your Personal Message center (PM). If you want to contact a particular person or a group of people, please use the PM feature. If you want to contact the moderators, pls PM them. If you insist leaving a public message for the mods or other members, it will be deleted.
This General Forum is for general discussions from daily chitchat to more serious discussions among Somalinet Forums members. Please do not use it as your Personal Message center (PM). If you want to contact a particular person or a group of people, please use the PM feature. If you want to contact the moderators, pls PM them. If you insist leaving a public message for the mods or other members, it will be deleted.
-
Steeler [Crawler2]
- SomaliNet Super

- Posts: 12405
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2001 7:00 pm
The case is over-stated, but there is truth in this. Europe has in principal become pacifist in it's outlook. The reason is it's very violent 20th century history, and the mistaken notion - common in many cultures, that values are universal, when in fact they are not.
For example most Europeans would say it is wrong to use violence to further our political or moral values. They would also say that using violence is wrong to protect commercial or economic interests of the state. In fact, short of direct attack by a marauding Army, they are not comfortable with state sponsored violence in any form.
Now they are confronted with an entity that doesn't share this moral outlook. Fundamentalist Islam believes that the employment of violence to further the rule of Dar Al Islam is fard - required. It has now reached the point that many rationalize the blowing up of some Cafe or other or beheading people or whatever as legitimate acts of violence in order not only to protect Islamic lands, but to expand the reach of Shari'a. The basic tenet driving this belief is the belief that Shari'a is the only legitimate law, and that all other societies which do not use Shari'a are illegitimate and that any method to ensure the domination of Dar Al Islam is legitimate.
Europeans, for the most part, don't grasp this. Conceptually they are talking past their opponents because they just aren't speaking the same moral language. One is dealing in relativist terms, the other is dealing in absolute terms.
For example most Europeans would say it is wrong to use violence to further our political or moral values. They would also say that using violence is wrong to protect commercial or economic interests of the state. In fact, short of direct attack by a marauding Army, they are not comfortable with state sponsored violence in any form.
Now they are confronted with an entity that doesn't share this moral outlook. Fundamentalist Islam believes that the employment of violence to further the rule of Dar Al Islam is fard - required. It has now reached the point that many rationalize the blowing up of some Cafe or other or beheading people or whatever as legitimate acts of violence in order not only to protect Islamic lands, but to expand the reach of Shari'a. The basic tenet driving this belief is the belief that Shari'a is the only legitimate law, and that all other societies which do not use Shari'a are illegitimate and that any method to ensure the domination of Dar Al Islam is legitimate.
Europeans, for the most part, don't grasp this. Conceptually they are talking past their opponents because they just aren't speaking the same moral language. One is dealing in relativist terms, the other is dealing in absolute terms.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 0 Replies
- 771 Views
-
Last post by TarTar
-
- 42 Replies
- 8638 Views
-
Last post by ExSomalispotter
-
- 5 Replies
- 827 Views
-
Last post by InoCabdi
-
- 1 Replies
- 424 Views
-
Last post by hanqadh
-
- 28 Replies
- 1213 Views
-
Last post by Cilmiile
-
- 0 Replies
- 230 Views
-
Last post by newsbot
-
- 22 Replies
- 3536 Views
-
Last post by DR-YALAXOOW
-
- 0 Replies
- 810 Views
-
Last post by Typhoon
-
- 5 Replies
- 466 Views
-
Last post by abgaalKING
-
- 7 Replies
- 674 Views
-
Last post by Basra-
