Why Islam Needs a Reformation

by Madeleine Kando

 The latest terror attack in San Bernardino has caused a huge discussion on gun control laws or rather, the lack of it in the United States. Only today did the news finally focus on the motive behind the attack, which was to show 'sympathy' for ISIS and its cause: the establishment of a global caliphate and to impose Sharia law throughout the world.

Ayaan Hirshi Ali, author of 'Heretic: Why Islam Needs a Reformation', would classify the San Bernardino terrorists as 'Medina Muslims'. Medina Muslims want a return to the original 7th century brand of Islam, impose Sharia law and wage war (Jihad) against the 'Infidel'. Only 3% of Muslims belong to this group, but that's about 48 million Jihadists, enough to scare the bejesus out of anyone. She calls them by that name because , after Muhammad went to Medina, he became ‘radicalized’ and started to attack unbelievers, if they refused to convert.

She distinguishes them from 'Mecca Muslims' (the majority of Muslims), who practice their religion and are not inclined to violence. Mecca Muslims, however are in a constant state of 'cognitive dissonance', trying to fit their religious values in a modern world. There are two alternatives for this group to live without cognitive dissonance: leave their faith, as Hirshi Ali did or become radicalized and join the Medina Muslims. The third group of Muslims, the one Hirshi Ali belongs to, she calls the 'Reformist Muslims'.

Terrorism is the modern day equivalent of the 16th century European Wars of Religion. As the title of her book suggests, Hirshi Ali argues that the only way to stop the religiously motivated killings, is if Islam undergoes a Reformation, similar to the Protestant Reformation in the Catholic Church.

But she doesn’t stop there. Being an ex-Muslim herself, she identifies five precepts that are inherently harmful and prevent Islam from going through a reformation.

The first and foremost point is for Islam to open itself up to criticism, including satire. There is nothing more invigorating and empowering than for a doctrine or world view to be challenged. Islam would gain from a healthy dose of scrutiny. It would weed out the parts that are causing so much suffering to Muslims themselves, especially women. The Quran, after all is written by men, and the fact that reason has been removed from its text, proves that it can be put back by men. The second precept that should be reformed, is the notion that life after death is more important than life before death. Life is more than a long final exam, a test to see if you will be admitted to the afterlife, with the 70 virgins and date trees, where wives don't get pregnant, don't blow their nose, or menstruate. There is a death cult in Islam, which is directly related to martyrdom. Although it is not unique to Islam, (Christian history is full of martyrs, that is why we have so many saints in our religion), but the difference between the Muslim and Christian variety is that a Christian martyr usually sacrifices his own life to save someone else's, whereas a Muslim martyr sacrifices his own life to take as many other lives as possible.

The third precept, according to Hirshi Ali, is to 'shackle Sharia law'. Sharia law means that all political and social acts are governed by religious law. Imagine if priests were functioning as our judges, if the church could decide what punishment you would get if you didn't pay your rent? For example, there is a beating etiquette in Sharia law, which says you cannot just beat your wife for no reason, only if she doesn't satisfy you sexually. And then to make sure that you don't beat her on her face since that might make her ugly. In the West, laws are there to protect the most vulnerable, but Sharia law leads to abuse and is worst for the most vulnerable in society: women, homosexuals, etc.

Christianity is lucky in that it already has a traditional division between church and state. "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" is a sentence in Matthew, which reflects a traditional division in Christian thought by which state and church have separate spheres of influence.

The fourth precept is to end the practice of 'commanding right, forbidding wrong'. Islam is so much a religion of 'do' and 'don'ts', but removing this religious vigilantism would be a good step towards more tolerance. Having a modesty brigade walk around with big sticks is like outlawing broken windows or panhandling. It doesn't address the underlying problem.

And finally, to call an end to the concept of Jihad, to allow other religions (or no religion at all) to exist side by side with Islam. The first thing is to admit that Islam is not a religion of peace. If, for some Muslims, the interpretation of jihad is a purely spiritual activity, we should challenge all Muslims to embrace that interpretation and take jihad off the table in mosques. Christianity had its crusades but gave up its militancy over time. The same could happen in Islam.

The role of the West, according to Hirshi Ali, is to stop apologizing for Islam and its bad ideas and support its dissidents. The barbaric punishments under Sharia law should be denounced by every decent human being. Hiding behind the veil of political correctness and say that it is disrespectful of Islam, like so many liberals are doing, is morally wrong. We should condemn stoning, genital mutilation, cutting off of hands and other atrocities performed in the name of Allah.

I cannot wait for the moment that President Obama will finally call a spade a spade. To admit that the root causes of the current “Islam problem” are certain aspects of Islam itself, and that we need an Islamic Reformation that includes separation of church and state, civil liberties and freedom of religion. leave comment here