Both
non-practicing and churchgoing Christians are more likely than the
unaffiliated to hold negative views of immigrants, Muslims and Jews
The Pew Center survey,
which was conducted following a surge of immigration to Europe from
Muslim-majority countries, asked many questions about national identity,
religious pluralism and immigration.
Most Western Europeans say they are
willing to accept Muslims and Jews in their neighbourhoods and in their
families, and most reject negative statements about these groups. And,
on balance, more respondents say immigrants are honest and hardworking
than say the opposite.
But a clear pattern emerges: Both
church-attending and non-practicing Christians are more likely than
religiously unaffiliated adults in Western Europe to voice
anti-immigrant and anti-minority views.
For example, in the UK, 45% of
church-attending Christians say Islam is fundamentally incompatible with
British values and culture, as do roughly the same share of
non-practicing Christians (47%). But among religiously unaffiliated
adults, fewer (30%) say Islam is fundamentally incompatible with their
country’s values. There is a similar pattern across the region on
whether there should be restrictions on Muslim women’s dress, with
Christians more likely than “nones” to say Muslim women should not be
allowed to wear any religious clothing.
The figures you find in #1 raise some obvious
questions:
What is the meaning of Christian identity in Western Europe
today?
And how different are non-practicing Christians from religiously
unaffiliated Europeans – many of whom also come from Christian
backgrounds?
The Pew Research Center study – which
involved more than 24,000 telephone interviews with randomly selected
adults, including nearly 12,000 non-practicing Christians – finds that
Christian identity remains a meaningful marker in Western Europe, even
among those who seldom go to church. It is not just a “nominal”
identity devoid of practical importance. On the contrary, the
religious, political and cultural views of non-practicing Christians
often differ from those of church-attending Christians and religiously unaffiliated adults. For example:
Although many non-practicing Christians say they do not believe in
God “as described in the Bible,” they do tend to believe in some other
higher power or spiritual force. By contrast, most church-attending
Christians say they believe in the biblical depiction of God, though of most of them we do know they believe in the human doctrinal god, namely the trinity. And a
clear majority of religiously unaffiliated adults do not believe in any
type of higher power or spiritual force in the universe.
Non-practicing Christians tend to express more positive than
negative views toward churches and religious organizations, saying they
serve society by helping the poor and bringing communities together.
Their attitudes toward religious institutions are not quite as favourable
as those of church-attending Christians, but they are more likely than
religiously unaffiliated Europeans to say churches and other religious
organizations contribute positively to society.
Christian identity in Western Europe is associated with higher
levels of negative sentiment toward immigrants and religious minorities.
On balance, self-identified Christians – whether they attend church or
not – are more likely than religiously unaffiliated people to express
negative views of immigrants, as well as of Muslims and Jews.
Non-practicing Christians are less likely than church-attending
Christians to express nationalist views. Still, they are more likely
than “nones” to say that their culture is superior to others and that it
is necessary to have the country’s ancestry to share the national
identity (e.g., one must have Spanish family background to be truly
Spanish).
The vast majority of non-practicing Christians, like the vast
majority of the unaffiliated in Western Europe, favour legal abortion and
same-sex marriage. Church-attending Christians are more conservative on
these issues, though even among churchgoing Christians, there is
substantial support – and in several countries, majority support – for
legal abortion and same-sex marriage.
Nearly all churchgoing Christians who are parents or guardians of
minor children (those under 18) say they are raising those children in
the Christian faith. Among non-practicing Christians, somewhat fewer –
though still the overwhelming majority – say they are bringing up their
children as Christians. By contrast, religiously unaffiliated parents
generally are raising their children with no religion.
Religious identity and practice are not
the only factors behind Europeans’ beliefs and opinions on these issues.
For instance, highly educated Europeans are generally more accepting of
immigrants and religious minorities, and religiously unaffiliated
adults tend to have more years of schooling than non-practicing
Christians. But even after statistical techniques are used to control
for differences in education, age, gender and political ideology, the
survey shows that churchgoing Christians, non-practicing Christians and
unaffiliated Europeans express different religious, cultural and social
attitudes. (See below in this overview and Chapter 1.)
These are among the key findings of a new
Pew Research Center survey of 24,599 randomly selected adults across 15
countries in Western Europe. Interviews were conducted on mobile and
landline telephones from April to August, 2017, in 12 languages. The
survey examines not just traditional Christian religious beliefs and behaviours, opinions about the role of religious institutions in society,
and views on national identity, immigrants and religious minorities,
but also Europeans’ attitudes toward Eastern and New Age spiritual ideas
and practices. And the second half of this Overview more closely
examines the beliefs and other characteristics of the religiously
unaffiliated population in the region.
While the vast majority of Western
Europeans identify as either Christian or religiously unaffiliated, the
survey also includes interviews with people of other (non-Christian)
religions as well as with some who decline to answer questions about
their religious identity. But, in most countries, the survey’s sample
sizes do not allow for a detailed analysis of the attitudes of people in
this group. Furthermore, this category is composed largely of Muslim
respondents, and general population surveys may underrepresent Muslims
and other small religious groups in Europe because these minority
populations often are distributed differently throughout the country
than is the general population; additionally, some members of these
groups (especially recent immigrants) do not speak the national language
well enough to participate in a survey. As a result, this report does
not attempt to characterize the views of religious minorities such as
Muslims, Jews, Buddhists or Hindus in Western Europe.
Today we do find a lot of people, in our regions, who say they are Christian and with that mostly mean Roman Catholic, but nearly never go to worship services like mass.
The majority of Europe’s Christians are non-practicing, but they differ
from religiously unaffiliated people in their views on God, attitudes
toward Muslims and immigrants, and opinions about religion’s role in
society.
Western Europe, where Protestant
Christianity originated and Catholicism has been based for most of its
history, has become one of the world’s most secular regions. Although
the vast majority of adults say they were baptized, today many do not
describe themselves as Christians. Some say they gradually drifted away
from religion, stopped believing in religious teachings, or were
alienated by scandals or church positions on social issues, according to
a major new Pew Research Center survey of religious beliefs and
practices in Western Europe.
Yet most adults surveyed still do
consider themselves Christians, even if they seldom go to church.
Indeed, the survey shows that non-practicing Christians (defined, for
the purposes of this report, as people who identify as Christians, but
attend church services no more than a few times per year) make up the
biggest share of the population across the region. In every country
except Italy, they are more numerous than church-attending Christians
(those who go to religious services at least once a month). In the
United Kingdom, for example, there are roughly three times as many
non-practicing Christians (55%) as there are church-attending Christians
(18%) defined this way.
Non-practicing
Christians also outnumber the religiously unaffiliated population
(people who identify as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular,”
sometimes called the “nones”) in most of the countries surveyed.1 And,
even after a recent surge in immigration from the Middle East and North
Africa, there are many more non-practicing Christians in Western Europe
than people of all other religions combined (Muslims, Jews, Hindus,
Buddhists, etc.).
The 10% for Belgium is more 8%, where the Roman Catholic Churches are less filled and of the protestant churches the Pentecostals get most people in their church-services. Where we can find most people going to a religious service is by the Islamic community where the garage mosques and official mosques may count on a very good attendance on Friday night.
At Islam is Nazism with a God I gave an answer to the question on what I thought of her concern for freedom of speech.
A video is presented on that site and like on may sites we can find several remarks and find lots of sayings of which we can agree with or not. On the internet is a lot to find by which we can or do not want to interact with people face to face. In most instances people get to see and react to texts of people we don’t see and in most cases even don’t know them.
The danger of such encounters is that such visits to different websites as well as message boards may give the visitor not the feeling they really are talking with other human beings who have their feelings like we do have ours.
N.S. Palmer who has degrees in mathematics, economics, philosophy, and
biology and is currently affiliated with Hebrew College, blogs for The Jerusalem Post and The Jewish Journal as well as his own blog where he writes
the people we encounter on the Internet seem less real to us than those
we meet in person. As a result, we tend to take them less seriously as
human beings. We are less inclined to worry about hurting their feelings
or treating them unjustly. Quite realistically, we are also less likely
to worry about arguments leading to physical confrontation or
retribution.
Perhaps it is that knowledge of not having to face that person and of being sure that we shall not encounter that person in real life, that gives for some the permission to do impermissible acts.
Often it is that anonymity which lets forget many that they should be talking decently and act politely to the other on the other end of the line.
It is like the professor says, that we
We are sitting in our homes where
nobody can see us. We are less inclined to feel shame if we do something
hurtful.{Why Are People So Mean on the Internet?}
It is that non-seen other, which makes so many chatters or internet users, to forget all decency and respect for the other.
Occasional anger and frustration make take on appropriate forms. Bottled up rage many let their steam go off when they get on the computer.
When we had the MSN Groups it started already to go the wrong way, people forgetting any decency, norm and values. Today it did not change for the better. The opposite, it became even worse, and many seem to take certain words or language for normal.
We seem to find more and more people who resort to insults, name-calling, and other kinds of online
vitriol. In a way they sometimes go so far we feel pity with them because they can not control their feelings nor their anger, which shows us how frustrated they are. Luckily we know they are either venting anger that has nothing to do with us, or
they are deliberately trying to goad us into a screaming match.
When we look at what is said on the internet, and see how many lies are told or how many are raging about, without any blush on the cheeks, we could wonder how much we should allow and how far Free speech may go.
Brooke Godlstein looks at those people who shout they are Hamas.
Their actions may have us wonder how far Free Speech goes. Can we allow
negation of the Holocaust? Can we allow people to cry for hatred against
one or another nation or race? the same could be asked about the
allowance of money entering a coutnry for funding of certain
organisations, be it right wing (Nazi, extreme Jewish/Christian or
Muslim fundamentalism) or extreme left wing (extreme Marxism or
Communism).
How far wants one to go to allow free speech when it is known that
those speakers are funded by terrorist organisations and also steer to
terrorist acts?
I think when a organisation wants to dominate and not allow an other
to have the right to speak it should be counter acted. They should be
able to have their say but others should have the right to react to them
as well. But here the State or Government has a duty to fulfil to have
everything under control and to watch those who want to dominate others
and could endanger our society. As soon as the secret intelligence
encounters dangerous elements they should make them public and show all
in the nation who those ‘preachers’ or ‘speakers’ are and what they do
plus what the danger of them for the nation is.
Pamella Geller is right to say we need to talk about this. Everything
should be considered and spoken off. It would be wrong to allow only
one party a voice and to censure an other.
A State have to assure all its citizens that they all have the right to
look at something, to study something, but also to criticise something.
As such Judaism, Christianity but also Islam should be able to judged
and criticised by the citizens of the nation, being them atheists, Jews,
Christians, Muslims, Hindu, Buddhists or from other religions. all
sorts of religions and nor religious group should be able to be put
under the magnifying glasses.
Though we do have to be careful not to call all religious people or
non-religious people savages. At the moment there is a tendency to
declare all religions awful and the cause of evil. In Europe, and
probably also in many parts of America, many think religion is the cause
of evil, and everything has to be done to stop religious awareness. In
North America the many Christians would cry high from their tower, but
by their heavy actions against other religions they could cause the same
reactions as we now have to undergo in Europe.
The interviewer of Geller shows she understood the Quran and the
meaning of Jihad = struggle. Geller her perspective of that Jihad or her
view of holy war is not the view of the bible nor the quaran wich both
speak about the holy war which has already gone on for ages (spoken of
in the Torah, Prophets, Hebrew Writings, Greek Writings, Quranic
verses).
Geller telling that christians would not behead others in the name of
Christ does not seem to know her history nor the present Asian
situation where still such things happen today. Even in the States of
America we can find people like the Westboro Baptist Church who shout
hate and hurt other people a lot. In the States there have been also
Christians who said they were against killing the unborn but did not
mind killing doctors who worked at abortion clinics. That are also
Christians who bring damage to others in the name of their religion. The
same we can find fundamentalist Jews who kill others, so called in the
name of their religion. Look at what happens in Israel and how certain
fundamentalists take in the land of others and protect their settlements
with violence.
But please do not forget that politician violence and non-religious
related violence is still the most common violence. The majority of
terrorist acts have nothing to do with religion. The majority of
believers in the different religions, pagan or not pagan, preach for
self-development in a peaceful atmosphere.
We do not have to abridge or stop our free speech for not offending
any body, be it savages or even civilised human beings who think
differently. When not having the same idea it will always be possible to
have a conflict of ideas and can there be the possibility to offend
some one. That is part of the consequences of free speech, we have to
endure or to allow.
When Geller talks about savages and savagery would she consider the
native American as savages, like her ancestors did or would she
recognise that many Europeans who came to conquer the country of those
natives behaved as savages? Did she ever thought of the fact that
certain Muslims may consider those white people who live there in the
North American halfround, who fornicate and have no good morals, could
also be considered savages today by other nations or peoples?
The indigenous people of America had also their own civilised rules
of conduct and way of life, which came disturbed by the colonial
intruders. the same for the white Europeans who conquered spaces in the
Southern halfround of this globe. In the name of Christ they also
oppressed many peoples and pushed their own believes and faith into
their throat. Many so called Christians even did not mind to take people
captive and rape and sell them, not even interested if they would die
in bad circumstances or not.
Perhaps it would not be bad to reflect on the similarity of the early
crusades and collonialisation with the present crusade of certain
Muslims or Arabic peoples.
It is true that we have a problem today which many try to avoid or to
go out of the way, thinking it would go away by not talking about it.
Not talking about it is wrong. We just should do everything to have it
possible to talk about those issues and to have clear voices showing all
the issues and how certain people could be a danger for the community.
Though each person who wants to bring something in debate and wants
to talk against something, like being against a book or movie, should
have knowledge of that book or move. Not like Geller not having seen the
trailer nor the movie. And a trailer can not even say it all. When one
wants to be against something the person has to know what he or she is
against, and as such should have had contact with it, read or seen it.
today we do find too many christians who are against the Quran because
they think certain things are standing in that book, because they only
heard the false preachers misusing that book and twisting verses. The
same about several Christians who do not know their own Scriptures,
often never having read the full Bible, from A to Z, but in the ban of
false teachers who only present verses taken out of context and looked
at from human doctrine.
the interviewer has good reason to say that when Geller wants to take
on this issue we would expect to have her taken interest in that issue
and having studied it. She telling it does not mater and she did not
need to know … proofs she only wants to take her own idea and wants
others to go for her restricted ideas only, not needing to have the real
truth of what is all behind it or how it really is and who is really
spoken about.
She is right to say we do not have to like what is said, because that
is freedom of speech, but than she too should allow others the same
right to have that freedom, to talk like she does about things they seem
not to know so well. It is for others then to come in to the circle of
debate and show both parties that they might have it at the wrong end of
the stick.
Personally I thing, and certainly for politicians, those who have a
higher position in society or have a special role in a community,
should take up their responsibility and to look at things in a
honourable and humble way, trying to stay correct to the matter, having
looked at it seriously, in honour and conscience. It is the task of a
politician to know the subject, to have studied it before speaking about
it. She has to take care that she or he is honest to both parties
involved and try to enlighten all, with showing what can be known and
trying to uncover what is hidden for the public.
Geller considers herself as the messenger, but she forgets or does not
want to see she herself is excluding the freedom of speech for those
who do not agree with her or have an other view. She also seems not
willing to see that the media have an important role to play in show
both sides of the medal. The media also has to bring the voices of all
parties involved. That is also part of the freedom of speech, and giving
the public the right to come to their own conclusions, without imposing
their own views (hopefully – though all media stations are naturally
influenced in a certain way or have a certain starting view).
Nobody may be couched in silencing the voice of freedom of speech.
Typological groups according to the Pew Research Center. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
A new Pew Research Center analysis
of international census and survey data finds that there is a religion
gender gap: Women generally are more religious than men by several key
measures of religious commitment, although this pattern is not universal
and can vary by religious tradition.
In some countries and faiths, men are more religious than women, at
least by some measures. For instance, among Muslims and Orthodox Jews,
men are more likely than women to attend worship services at least
weekly, the new study finds.
Religiousness also can be measured by
asking people how important religion is to them personally. In more than
half of the 84 countries surveyed (46), roughly equal shares of men and
women say that religion is “very important” to them. However, in 36
other countries, more women than men say religion is important in their
lives – and usually by wide margins. As a result, across all 84
countries, women surpass men in this aspect of religious commitment by
an average of 5 percentage points (65% vs. 60%). Only in Mozambique and
Israel do men say that religion is very important to them more often
than women do.
The biggest exception to the general
pattern of women being more religious than men occurs in weekly
attendance at worship services. Across the 81 countries where Pew
Research Center data are available for this measure, more men than women
attend worship at least once a week (48% vs. 42%).
This attendance gap is largely driven by
27 countries in the survey with large Muslim populations. In many
Islamic societies, men are expected to attend communal Friday worship
services in the mosque, while women can fulfill this obligation either
inside or outside the mosque. There are similar religious norms
regarding worship attendance among Orthodox Jews in Israel. As a result,
men in these 28 countries report far greater rates of attendance than
women, often by margins of at least 20 percentage points.
By contrast, in countries that have large
Christian populations (30 of the 81 studied on this measure), women are
more likely to report attending services weekly. And in 23 other
countries, men and women report attending about equally.
According to an other Pew Research Center published last month, surveys in 63 countries have asked Muslims and
Christians about belief in heaven, hell and angels and showed that lots of people are still convinced that they might be tortured for ever after they die or that they go to heaven when they are finished here on earth.
In 47 of the 63 countries (75%), men and women are about equally likely
to profess a belief in heaven. Women are more likely to believe in
heaven in 15 countries, often by margins of 5 percentage points or more.
Men and women in 52 of 63 countries (83%) are about equally likely to
say they believe in hell. Women hold this belief more than men in 10
countries, while men surpass women in this belief in Lebanon. Overall,
when the 63 countries are taken together, an average of 81% of women and
80% of men believe in hell.
Across all 63 countries, a greater share of women than men believe in angels by an average gap of 3 percentage points.
Looking at Christians only, there are just a handful of countries where
the genders differ significantly in their beliefs in these concepts. A
larger share of Christian men believe in heaven in only one country
(Lebanon); Christian men are more likely than Christian women to believe
in hell in two countries (the United States and Lebanon) and to believe
in angels in one country (Zambia). On the other hand, more Christian
women than Christian men profess belief in heaven in five countries
(Russia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Chile, Botswana and the United States), in
hell in four countries (Kazakhstan, Russia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and
Chile) and in angels in nine countries (Kazakhstan, Russia, Uruguay,
Bosnia-Herzegovina, Chile, Argentina, Ecuador, Uganda and Guatemala).
“Religion and politics are necessarily related. We
need religion as a guide. We need it because we are imperfect, and our
government needs the church because only those humble enough to admit
they’re sinners can bring to democracy the tolerance it requires in
order to survive.”
a Christian, a Muslim, and a Jew found it time to join together to do what many in
Hollywood deemed impossible: launch a Biblically-themed network
television show about the collision of politics and religion that would
appeal to both faith-based and secular audiences.
The makers of the show want to be faithful to the Bible and show people the Work of God. They say
In being faithful to the scriptures, we decided not to shy away from
the sexuality and violence that is either implied or explicit in the
text. To do so, would sanitize the reality of the biblical time and
place, while at the same time bypassing important parallels that we
still confront and struggle with today. We made this choice to open a
conversation about how one reconciles faith with the realities of the
world—whether in ancient Israel or in the contemporary U.S.
It seems there has to be some violence shown in the show.
We assumed we might be met with some resistance from Biblical
literalists, as there is always the chance when dealing with religious
material that faith-based audiences might negatively react to our
interpretation of scriptural inconsistencies.
Surprisingly though, the most vitriolic criticism has not come from
faith-based viewers, but from secular media outlets and bloggers, many
of whom argued that the war, violence and brutality depicted in the show
would alienate religious viewers. Clearly, these reviewers are
unfamiliar with the Bible.
Today we hear also lots of people criticising the Koran and Muslims because they would keep to all sorts of cruel stories. But those complaining about those violent stories do forget or do not know that those same stories can be found in the Jewish as well as the Christian Bible.
People should be aware that
The world of the Old Testament, as described in the Bible, is often
brutal and violent—a world where slavery and rape were the victor’s
prerogative, and genocide was an accepted approach to foreign policy.
The faithful know this better than anyone.
It are often the kafir or non-believers and those who do not know the religious texts who go in attack against one or the other religion. In Christendom we also have lots of people who have taken Jesus as their god instead of believing what Jesus and God say about each other. Many of those so called Christians do not know the other true Christians, who in Christianity proclaim only OneTrue God, the God of Abraham, like the God of the Jews and the God of Muslims.
Often it our those Christians who keep to a three-headed god do not come to see Who the God is of the Holy Scriptures and do not realise how the whole world shall come to get to know the Only One True God, Allah, the Elohim Hashem Jehovah, Who is OneGod of gods and Host of hosts, greater than and above all gods.
The makers of the show are devoted to their respective faiths, and passionate
about their artistry. They say
That’s why we are convinced that if the
entertainment industry fails to show faith-based programming, we will
miss out on opportunities to explore and understand the rich values and
moral complexities that exist at the heart of our religious texts.
And conclude:
It is our hope that secular critics will understand that it is vital
to our fabric as a nation to explore our faith through art—to let our
values, morals and faith serve as scaffolding for our creativity. That’s
what we have tried to do with Of Kings And Prophets.
But after just two episodes ABC has decided to cancel its biblical drama Of Kings and Prophets.
The move came after the show received low
ratings and sponsors were pressured to pull their advertising.
The show attempted to tell the story of King David’s ascent to the
throne and King Saul’s demise. While an exciting premise, ABC failed to
deliver a product that resonated with most viewers. Of Kings and Prophets downplayed religious themes in favor of sex, violence, and intrigue for entertainment value.
ABC also took plenty of artistic licenses and made some odd character
choices. For example, the prophet Samuel was portrayed as a jealous,
bloodthirsty, and senile old man who misrepresented the will of Elohim.
Samuel ordered Saul to annihilate the Amalekites seemingly out of spite,
not because God wanted it.
The Islamophobia in many democratic countries makes it a danger for the religious freedom. Even the coutnry that always says it is so proud to be the 'Country of the free' and where they shout carrying weapons is part of the freedom, they seem to be willing to restrict the freedom of religion.
Lots of Americans are wanting that others only believe what they believe and how they practice their Christian faith.
According to many their president is an obstruction for Christians but I think he is the best for all Americans, believers and non-believers who all should have the same right when living in a free country. America at the moment has also a president with sense. At the moment he is also aware of the danger coming over America.
With all the fear going on and a bully shouting America should put up walls against others coming in, the president sees it useful to call to his people
The recent terrorist attack that was carried out by Muslim extremists in
San Bernardino, California was a tragic event. The killing of 14
innocent people have caused many U.S. citizens to live in fear,
and they would like special measures and surveillance placed on all
Muslims. Some people would even like them all deported from the country.
What people need to understand is that there have been many hundreds,
if not thousands of attacks and killings in the history of this country
carried out by American Christian and non-Muslim terrorists than there
have been by Muslims. The crime facts show that if you or a loved one
was to be murdered, it would most likely to be done by the hands of
a family member or friend than anyone else. The next most
probable terrorist that may try and take your life would be at church by
a crazed Christian hell bent on doing God's work or at school or a
movie theater by a drugged up teenager who wants their 5 minutes of sick
fame.
So, let us use logic and reason to show us our true realities and do
not let media fear and or religious nuts sway you from the truth.
The facts are that there are currently over 7 million Muslims living
in the United States of America and their numbers are growing every
year. To put it simply, there will be many more people of this faith
coming to the states in the near future, and Muslims will always be a
part of the American landscape. In fact, they have been here since the
founding of our country.
Map of the Muslim Population by Percentage in the World (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
All places with connection to Christian culture, like St. Elian's tomb, the monastery around it (Mar Elian Monastery), an ancient structure located just outside a Syrian town captured by the group earlier this month, got bulldozed down. What began as demonstrations against the nation's Ba'athist president, Bashar al-Assad, has become a complex fight among the Syrian regime; moderate rebels; Kurds; and Islamists, such as al-Nusra Front and the Islamic State.
Muslims made use of it to convert people to what they call the true Islam and to go and destroy all 'heathen' monuments.
Places where archaeologists have worked excavating and preserving like the site of Palmyra for 40 years are destroyed for being a witness in later centuries. The torture and beheading of leading Syrian archaeologist Khaled al-Asaad had to be again one of the many killings to frighten people and to make them choose for ISIS.
Already hundreds of Christian families have fled central Syrian towns as Islamic State fighters advanced toward them.
But also Muslims are looking for an escape of the terrorist so called Muslim fanatics. More and more Mohammedan people are daring to speak out that it can not be that those ISIS people would be real Muslims. Problem is that some Muslims are finding ways to accuse Israel of infiltrating and funding groups against Muslim groups so that the Muslim world would be destabilised. Some said to me that they had seen video where when zoomed in could be seen fighters wearing a David star. I myself did not see any proof of that yet and consider it propaganda material which is used to set one group of people up against an other group.
The Druze, a centuries-old Arab community and an offshoot of Shia Islam, is the latest religious minority in the Levant to suffer the wrath of Islamic extremists. Jabhat al-Nusra or the Nusra Front, an al-Qaeda affiliated group fighting the Assad regime in Syria, in June of this year killed nearly two dozen members of the Druze community in Syria’s northern region near the town of Idlib. Nusra, like the Islamic State (ISIS or IS) and other radical Sunni groups, views the Druze, much like the Shia, as “apostate” Muslims that should be killed. Islamic militants have already attacked Shia and Christian communities and their places of worship in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain.
In her thoughtful New York Times Magazine article, “The Shadows of Death,” Eliza Griswold has chronicled the plight of Christians in the Middle East and how attacks by radical Islamic groups have led to the Middle East emptying itself of Christians. This is a sad tale for the Christian community, for other religious minorities, and for the region as a whole. The Druze community in Syria is becoming understandably apprehensive about whether it would face a similar fate.
As the intolerance of religious minorities —Christians, Druze, and Shia— bubbles to the surface, the Sunni majority becomes more regressive. The artistic, cultural, economic, religious, and social diversity, which has been part of the multiethnic and multi-religious mosaic in the Levant and across the region, is rapidly disappearing to be replaced by backwardness and retrogression.
In the mean time those looking for a better place to live in Europe are considered by several Europeans a threat to their Judeo-Christian society with a danger of having Muslims infiltrating our Western culture, plus finding people who do not want to adapt to our Western culture, but making stronger groups of people they fear would become 'parasites' in our economy and having them wanting to have mosques build in our regions.
