Perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised, but I am. At today’s national Prayer breakfast, Barack Obama made some remarks. That’s surprising enough, really- he doesn’t seem to be too big on prayer- but it’s the contents of the speech that are so insulting.
After talking some time about Mohammedan terror, he went on to say this (quote taken from the CSPAN link above)
HUMANITY HAS BEEN GRAPPLING WITH THESE QUESTIONS THROUGHOUT HUMAN HISTORY, AND UNLESS WE GET ON OUR HIGH HORSE AND THINK THAT THIS IS UNIQUE TO SOME OTHER PLACE, REMEMBER THAT DURING THE CRUSADES AND THE INQUISITION PEOPLE COMMITTED TERRIBLE DEEDS IN THE NAME OF CHRIST. IN OUR HOME COUNTRY, SLAVERY AND JIM CROW ALL TOO OFTEN WAS JUSTIFIED IN THE NAME OF CHRIST.
Take a look at that again. We should not “get on our high horse” about Mohammedan terror because “during the Crusades and the Inquisition people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” also because “slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”
You have to love the moral equivalence there, right? Because of things that happened 1000 (ish) years ago (the Crusades), several hundred years ago (the Inquisition- I presume he means the Spanish Inquisition), and decades ago (Slavery and Jim Crow) we should not “get on our high horse” and think ourselves better than Mohammedan terrorists.
Seriously, he could have saved some poor closed caption transcriber a lot of words by simply saying “Godwin” and sitting back down.
But. lest the historical inaccuracies continue to propagate, I felt I should address them. Let’s do it in reverse order:
Jim Crow laws (enacted by southern Democrats, mostly) were laws designed to keep blacks from doing a great many things, including vote. To my knowledge, never once was Christ invoked as a reason blacks should not vote. So while southern Democrats were, indeed, Christian, there is no indication it was their Christianity that excused Jim Crow laws.
Slavery existed long before the United States of America, and continues to this day (largely because of Mohammedans, in fact). Slavery as practiced in the United States (and other places) was a horrible evil. And, indeed, some people did claim that African slaves were slaves because of Noah’s curse on Ham.
However. It was precisely this nation’s foundation on Christian principles which lead many religious types to oppose slavery. Far more Christians (as Christians) were abolitionists than were slavery apologists. If you are going to claim that Slavery existed “in the name of Christ” it is only right that you also point out that it was opposed (violently, when that became necessary) in the name of Christ. Indeed, the Battle Hymn of the Republic states: “as He died to make men holy let us die to make men free.”
Apparently the President is unaware that there were numerous agencies which went by “the Inquisition.” The first- called the Medieval Inquisition- was created specifically to *stop* violence against so-called heretics. They used much more strict evidentiary requirements than kings of the day, and when heresy was found allowed the heretic to repent and rejoin society.
Eventually, Kings took over the reigns of the Inquisition. This lead to the now infamous “Spanish Inquisition.” But even there the reality is vastly different from popular belief. Yes, the Spanish Inquisition was a terror for a time. It was built on Jew hatred, and was used as a tool of political force. But not for terribly long. It was then reformed and became the most lenient and merciful court in Europe. The witch hunts which spread throughout Europe (and put thousands of innocents to death) did not gain foothold in either Spain or Italy specifically because of the Spanish and Papal Inquisitions. Indeed, almost everything you think you know about “The” Inquisition is likely wrong.
The Crusades were responses to Mohammedan aggression, pure and simple. It was only after Mohammedans took over several of Christianity’s Holy cities- and then began butchering pilgrims- that the first Crusade was declared. The second, third, and fourth Crusades were each called specifically to restore Jerusalem to Christian hands.
The thing about the Crusades was that they were *wars.* Wars fought in the middle ages were brutal affairs at the best of times. Yes, atrocities were committed by both sides. But where Mohammedans claimed such atrocities were justified, the Church opposed all such instances by the Crusaders.
In short, there is absolutely no moral equivalence between Mohammedanism, which really does preach death to the unbeliever and conversion by the sword, and Christianity, which teaches personal nonviolence (turn the other cheek, he who lives by the sword will die by the sword, etc.). To suggest there exists such an equivalence is insulting to Christians. Worse, it is a way to white-wash or soft-sell Mohammedan Terror.
If we are going to confront Mohammedan Terror, we must admit the truth: the writings of Mohammedanism teach forced conversion, death to the unbeliever, and jihad. Mohammedanism is an evil death cult, and it must be treated as such. These comments show, yet again, that the President is either unwilling or unable to understand that fundamental fact.