What Do Islam and Secularism Have in Common?
Last Saturday night, my wife and I watched one of the most disturbing documentaries we have ever seen. It left us in tears and extremely angry.
It was about Muslim “honor killing”–in America.
Since that time, I’ve thought a lot on what is behind this practice and what it has in common with the spirit of secularism that is on the rise in America.
I think I know what Islam and Secularism have in common.
But before that: What in the world is “honor killing?”
For two years, Fox News investigated the short lives and violent deaths of Texas teenagers Amina and Sarah Said (pictured above). They were 17 and 18–daughters of Christie and Yaser Abdul Said of Irving, Texas–when their young lives were taken from them.
The story goes like this. Yaser Abdul Said, an Egyptian Muslim immigrant, convinced Christie’s parents to let him marry her when she was fifteen and he was in his late twenties. Christie was from a nominal Baptist home. Early on in the marriage, Said demanded that his children be raised as Muslims. Their first child named Islam, made the demand clear. Christie then bore him two daughters, Amina and Sarah.
This was not a happy home. Yaser ruled it with an iron fist and even molested his daughters early on. During their teenage years he stalked them with a video camera and warned them to not date non-Muslims. When both of them, as typical teenagers, freely chose to “quietly” date some Hispanic boys, Yaser went through the roof–forcing Christie to flee the home with her two daughters. A week later, during the Christmas holidays of 2007, Yaser convinced them to return.
Christie and Sara arrived back first, and Amina followed a few days later. When she entered the home, her father kissed her and told both girls he wanted to take them out for dinner. He told Christie they were going to a local Denny’s Restaurant.
Hours later, the girls bodies were found, riddled with bullets in their dad’s borrowed taxi cab on New Year’s Day 2008. As 911 operators listened in, Sarah appeared to name her father as the killer — her dying words: “Help! Help! My dad shot me… and now I’m dying!”
What kind of spirit is behind a man who would viciously kill his two beautiful daughters in cold blood?
On that fateful day, Yaser Abdul Said, vanished into the night–never to be seen again. There’s is a $10,000 reward being offered to anyone who has information that will lead to his capture.
This kind of crime isn’t supposed to happen in America’s heartland — an honor killing.
Robert Spencer of Human Events wrote a story on the double murders of Amina and Sara Said one week after the tragedy. He said:
“Honor killing, the practice of murdering a female family member who is believed to have sullied the family honor, enjoys widespread acceptance in some areas of the Islamic world. However, Islam Said, the brother of Amina and Sarah, has denied that the murders had anything to do with Islam at all. “It’s not religion,” he insisted. “It’s something else. Religion has nothing to do with it.”
“And to be sure, the Qur’an or Islamic tradition does not sanction honor killing. But these dismissals are too easy, principally because they fail to take into account important evidence. In some areas, honor killing is assumed to be an Islamic practice. There is evidence that Islamic culture inculcates attitudes that could lead directly to the murders of these two girls in Texas.”
He’s right. And now honor killings don’t only happen in the Middle East. The brutal Arizona killing last year of Noor Almaleki by her Iraqi immigrant father was also on home soil. Noor’s father, Faleh Almaleki, disapproved of her American lifestyle (wearing jeans, posting on MySpace) and dreams (marrying for love). He beat her and ultimately ran her over in his SUV, not once but twice, to prevent her from dishonoring the family, equating her with a “small fire” that needed to be extinguished in order to keep the family safe.
He is in jail, awaiting trial for first-degree murder. “For an Iraqi, honor is the most valuable thing,” he said after his arrest. “No one messed up our life except Noor.” Noor’s mother supported him, saying, “You are not a criminal. I know how good-hearted and compassionate you are.”
I don’t think so. There’s a spirit behind these murders. Notice some of the words in both stories: “demanded,” “prevent,” “wouldn’t tolerate,” “force,” “iron fist,” and finally “kill.”
They’re not exactly synonymous with good and compassionate.
We’ve seen another Muslim example of this spirit this week. The Afghanistan Taliban murdered ten Christian doctors in cold blood, execution-style. These doctors, from several countries and church backgrounds had been providing medical services to Afghan villagers. They hiked for more than ten hours over rugged mountains — unarmed and without security — to bring medical care to isolated Afghan villagers until their humanitarian mission took a tragic turn.
Ten members of the Christian medical team — six Americans, two Afghans, one German and a Briton — were gunned down in a gruesome slaughter that the Taliban said they carried out. The gunmen spared an Afghan driver, who recited verses from the Quran as he begged for his life.
Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid told the AP that they killed the foreigners because they were “spying for the Americans” and “preaching Christianity.”
These three tragic losses of human life point to one obvious spirit or attitude.
Control.
Yaser Abdul Said wanted to control Amina and Sara. Faleh Almaleki wanted to control his daughter, Noor. The Afghan Taliban wanted to control its territory. And they were all willing to murder to assert that control.
What does this have to do with secularism? In fact, what is secularism?
Secularism or its twin–atheism–is faith in man and his ability to solve his own problems. The faith of secularism usually leads to increased government power which acts as the “savior” of the little people. This power is amassed through strong-armed leaders who say they know what’s best.
We’re learning a lot about secularism in America today because it is militantly on the rise. As Newt Gingrich has rightly pointed out, the current Administration–what Rush Limbaugh calls “the regime” – is totally secular in its outlook and policy positions. Out of its secular faith, the current Administration has taken over car companies (Government Motors), taken control of the large financial institutions (Dodd-Frank), is trying to take over healthcare (Obamacare),and really would like to do the same with energy (Cap and Tax) and numerous other arenas of American life.
What do the faiths of Islam and Secularism share in common?
A spirit of control.
Secularism’s control is not always murderous. But it goes that direction over time. In the 20th century secularism begat Fascism and communism. Both ended up killing millions of people.
The worst form of control is the spirit of murder.
You could see it in the face of Yasser Said. He wanted to control his daughters. That spirit of control led him to even kill his precious girls.
The essence of Obamacare and Wall Street Regulations is also about control. The secularists want to control America, its people, its finances. They want to control what we eat, what kinds of cars we drive, and what types of energy we use. They even want women to “control” their bodies through abortion on demand–the largest form of murder in the world today.
However, it was the Christian faith that built America–not Islam, not secularism.
Christianity is about freedom. “Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty (2 Corinthians 3:17). You can tell the goodness or evil of a world view by what it demands or controls.
Three religious worldviews are vying for power in the world today. Two operate by control, i.e. tyranny. The other operates by freedom i.e. love and respect.
But let’s go one step further. There is a being that is behind the first two world views. He’s all about control and destruction. His name is Satan.
There’s another Person at the center of the truth. Jesus Christ. He came to set people free.
In November, we will choose which direction to go–more and more controls or a re-birth of liberty.
Choose wisely America. Your future hangs in the balance.
Vote for People Who Lead Like Jesus
Many of us are filling our primary ballots this week or in coming weeks. The number one reference for all of our voting decisions should be:
Who will govern the most like Jesus?
He was the greatest leader of history. He is now the President of all presidents, Senator of all senators, Rep of all reps, Judge of all judges (King of kings and Lord of lords in ancient language).
No human being is as good a leader as Jesus. But some are closer than others. Some display some or much of his character–others very little.
If we want a good society, led by good leaders, we need to choose people who–among the voting choices–most resemble Jesus.
My 1989 book on leadership (Leadership for the 21st Century) contains the most concise description of Jesus’ leadership qualities that I’ve ever seen. It was written by William McDonald. I encourage you to study the points and then vote for people who most resemble Jesus.
But always remember to place your ultimate trust in…
Jesus -the Greatest Leader of Men
By William McDonald
1. Jesus clearly envisioned the destination to which he was leading his people–the kingdom of God. The first principle of his leadership was that he knew precisely where he would lead the faithful and how to get there. Reversals and mid⌐course corrections were unnecessary under his leadership (Luke 9:51, 22:15,16).
2. Jesus led without forcing his values on anyone or coercing anyone into following. That is, he never drafted anyone in violation of individual autonomy. Much prayer preceded the call of those who would be his closest colleagues in ministry (Luke 6:12,13).
3. Jesus was not obsessed with gaining the psychological power of great numbers of warm bodies. Volunteers who would not pay the price of total commitment were turned away rather than being signed up on their own terms (Luke 9:57-62).
4. Jesus won the hearts of his followers by leading through friendship rather than fear. He shared with them his secrets and his strategy as rapidly as they could benefit from and implement them (Luke 18:26-30).
5. Jesus had no reason to hide his human finitude by impressive staging. Instead of barricading himself in inaccessibility (behind walls and many subordinates), he ate and slept with the troops, leaving them only for quiet times alone with his Father. Even little children had access to him (Luke 18:15-17).
6. Jesus was unafraid as all great leaders must be. The visible faces of clay could neither intimidate nor dissuade him from his objectives. Nor could the invisible powers of darkness deter him from accomplishing his mission (Luke 13:31⌐35).
7. Jesus never compromised his moral integrity in order to accomplish his objectives of his revolution. He operated above demeaning dirty tricks, back⌐door gifts, assassinations, rash unredeemable promises, or even flattery (Luke 11:52-54).
8. Jesus was patently selfless in his motives of leadership. He sought to bring believers to the depth of experience with his Father that he already enjoyed (Luke 10:22).
9. Instead of providing distracting entertainment for people to enable them to forget momentarily their confusion, guilt, suffering, loneliness, and unmet needs, Jesus provided solutions, corrections, and resources to meet those basic needs. The result for believers was lasting foundation for joy (Luke 4:40⌐44, 9:37⌐43).
10. Jesus did not squander nature and its resources; he took control as Adam was told to do, taking “dominion” without wasting or polluting, in order to utilize nature to bless and help humanity (Luke 9:17).
11. Jesus, a forceful public speaker, could hold the attention of large gatherings without taking advantage of people. His speech was spiced with colorful, unforgettable sayings and illustrations. When facing large crowds, he did not become superheated and tyrannical. There were no harangues, but always with them there was a deepening of his compassion. He gave clear and simple directions for finding one’s way into the kingdom of God (Luke 5:1, 8:4-15, 13:22-30).
12. Jesus was appropriately tough or tender in dealing with everyone and every crisis. He gained the respect and loyalty of men and women alike. His leadership style of personal relationships fit the situation with just the right amount of pressure being exerted in every case.
13. Jesus never “pled poverty” for the kingdom of God, “took”offerings by psychological jerks, or extracted monies legalistically from the reluctant. But likewise he never did refuse people the privilege of giving who offered their gifts prompted by love (Luke 8:1-3).
14. Jesus’ genuine wholesomeness was that of a man who was sure of himself. This made it possible for people to confidently put their faith in him and to gladly follow him. His winsomeness consisted of a perfect balance between self-assurance and affability (Luke 6:20-49).
15. Jesus was the concrete expression of what he taught (Luke 6:20-49). If one could not clearly understand where he was leading by what he was saying, he could find the same truths expressed and reinforced in Jesus’ whole demeanor and activities. Those who were not abstract thinkers (four out of ten) could see the truth unfurled in his unforgettable actions and lifestyle (Luke 23:47).
16. Jesus was able to lead effectively and with full respect without the advantages of special identifying clothing and insignia that are universally recognized as symbols of authority. Royalty, the priesthood (Exodus 28:2), and the military must all step down to this leader dressed in ordinary clothes (and a special anointing) whose presence commanded respect wherever he was (Luke 4:18-22).
17. In decision⌐making, Jesus was neither indecisive nor rash. Prayerfulness was the fulcrum of his administration. Hence, the kingdom of God was never held back for want of resolute action, nor did it lurch forward on opportunistic whims and crash programs (Luke 6:12-16).
18. The power that Jesus tapped was not that whose source was in individuals; rather it was the power given him by God. This made it possible for him always to have something valuable to give freely to the people who followed him. (Most worldly leaders aggrandize power by first taking it
from people, abrogating some of their rights and confiscating certain of their resources; and later in a display of paternalism they return some of what was previously taken.) Jesus did not need to do that for he depended heavily on divine resources to found the kingdom of God (Luke 3:22; cf. Acts 10:38).
19. Jesus was consistently resolute in that he followed through to the end with his goals for the kingdom. He would not surrender his aims for lesser ones when the going become difficult and his leadership was misunderstood. Thus he never backed off from the full⌐time responsibility of leadership (Luke 2:45-51).
20. Jesus knew well his followers and dealt with each one appropriately–not using the same patterns of assignment and expectation with such diverse men as Peter and John. He cultivated the development of the two⌐talent man and one twice as talented by giving each the proper resources and relationship in which to develop (John 21:17-22).
21. Jesus knew how to pace both himself and the revolution, sensing when to advance and when to withdraw from the crowds of people, when to refuel, and when to face up to his most trying hours. In the words of the Old Testament, he knew when and how “to go in and out among the people,” and as a result his timing was never off (Luke 9:18⌐27, 19:28).
22. Jesus’ settled concept of his own identity and of the one who sent him made his leadership rise above popularity. Therefore, he was psychologically impervious to popular praise of himself–it did not inflate him–and to negative criticism of himself–it did not deflate him. Knowing at all times what the Father thought of him gave great evenness and steadiness to his leadership (Lk.4:22,28,29 19:37-41).
23. Jesus had a uniquely positive revolutionary methodology (John 18:36):
- not arms, but faith, hope and love
- not explosives, but mountain⌐moving faith
- not sabotage of the enemy, but doing good to those hating you
- not fear, but the love that crowds out all fear
- not crowd-pleasing propaganda, but the truth
- not firing squads, but raising the dead
- not deceit and intrigue, but parables, proverbs and enigmas
24. Jesus accomplished his revolution without dependence on the power structures of the world. He operated without any of the following standard foundations for kingdoms (Luke 29:1-8, 19-26):
- institutional backing
- political machines and party affiliation
- government support or anti⌐government patriotism
- class⌐struggle exploitation–playing on desires for upward mobility
25. Jesus met all of mankind’s deepest needs–those that only the Creator and Savior of man can supply. Consequently, he is the only leader of all time that when the deepest gratitude of followers wells up, and admiration calls for praise and exultation, it is not wrong to actually worship this leader as LORD AND GOD (Luke 24:52).
Vote for people who most resemble Jesus.
And worship the only Leader in whom we can put our complete faith and hope.
Job Killers Vs. Job Creators
Since the number one household issue in the United States right now is jobs–the need for a free and robust economy–I thought it would be helpful to share with you the best article I’ve seen on the subject this year.
Newt Gingrich is certainly one of the clearest political thinkers in America today. He has also undergone a spiritual transformation in his life which shows in his writing and speaking. I encourage you to watch his new documentary, Nine Days that Changed the World, that shares the moral and spiritual backdrop of the fall of the Iron Curtain. It’s liberation was not accomplished by men–but by the power of God through faith and prayer.
This Economics 101 lesson is the bottom line of the fall elections. It’s interesting to me that Speaker Gingrich uses the terms “Killers” vs. “Creators.” Isn’t the real battle in the world between Lucifer, a killer of men’s souls and livelihoods, and God, our magnificent Creator and Sustainer? RB
July 21, 2010 – Job Killers vs. Job Creators
By Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House
The campaign this fall can be boiled down to a simple choice: job-killers versus job-creators.
With so many Americans out of work, candidates will win decisive victories if they can show their opponent’s policies will kill jobs and their policies will create jobs.
Governing is about having the right principles, policies, processes and people.
Successful leaders hold principles that work in the real world, and these principles lead them to the right policies. And because they are determined to measure results, they develop processes that work. Finally, with the right principles, policies, and processes, they look for people who are driven, practical, and experienced to get the right things done the right way.
Unfortunately, under the Pelosi-Reid Congress and the Obama presidency, government has become a job-killing system thanks to a set of principles, policies, processes and people that are completely disconnected from reality.
I describe this alien ideology in my book To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular-Socialist Machine. It is a fundamentally anti-work, anti-investment, anti-entrepreneurial ideology that has led to economic stagnation and spiritual decay wherever it has been tried.
We can already see the results of this radical ideology in America.
The American work ethic is being replaced with a mindset that favors “gaming” the system to get away with working as little as possible.
American productivity is being replaced with a set of union work rules and bureaucracy that makes us too slow, too expensive and too cumbersome.
The historic American commitment to local representation and local control is being replaced by an emphasis on federal concentration of power and rule by bureaucrats and judges that is stripping Americans of their rights and responsibilities.
A commitment to religious freedom and God-given rights is being replaced by a secular oppression that increasingly resembles the government-imposed atheism of Soviet totalitarianism. (I encourage you to watch the documentary Nine Days that Changed the World, which Callista and I host and produced, to learn about the plight of the Polish people under Communism and the brave moral leadership of Pope John Paul II that helped topple the Soviet Union.)
The secular-socialist machine of the left has made the recession worse by suppressing the natural resiliency of the American economy and setting the stage for even worse economic challenges in the future.
For President Obama, the years he spent studying and teaching the radicalism of Saul Alinsky laid the foundation for a job-killing, anti-business attitude.
If you believe business is bad, you will convince it to go away.
If you are determined to tax small business owners, entrepreneurs, successful corporate leaders, investors, and innovators they will either avoid taxable behavior or leave the country entirely.
If you impose absurd regulatory controls totally out of touch with reality, you will kill jobs.
The Obama Administration’s moratorium on offshore drilling has already sent high-paying good jobs and tax-paying, profitable companies out of the United States. Obama has been good for jobs in Egypt and the Congo (where the first two oil rigs have gone) but he has killed jobs in Louisiana.
The President’s proposed energy taxes will kill jobs in America but they will create jobs in China (which this year passed America as the world’s largest user of energy).
The recently passed government control of the financial system will be good for jobs in London, Tokyo, Frankfurt, Shanghai and other foreign financial centers but it will kill jobs and profits in the United States.
We have seen job killers implement job-killing policies before.
President Carter had a whole series of job-killing policies from 1977 to 1980 and they worked. They killed a lot of jobs.
Politicians in Detroit have been killing jobs for two decades. Only with Mayor Dave Bing’s new job-oriented approach has there been any hope of rebuilding Detroit’s economy.
We have all seen the state governments of New York and California adopt policies that kill jobs and drive businesses and successful individuals out of their states.
On the other side, we have seen a job creator like Gov. Rick Perry implement policies which in 2008 led Texas to create as many jobs as the other 49 states combined.
Governors Mitch Daniels in Indiana, Tim Pawlenty in Minnesota, Haley Barbour in Mississippi, Sonny Perdue in Georgia, and Bobby Jindal in Louisiana are all examples of principled job creators whose policies work.
We are in the worst economy since the Great Depression.
The only recent improvements in unemployment numbers have come about because people have quit looking for work and so are no longer counted as unemployed.
Under this model, if President Obama could convince every unemployed American to quit looking for work, we would have zero percent unemployment.
The number would be great but the reality would be horrible.