Editor,
In response to Tom Woodard's letter headlined, "Time has come for Muslims to unite against violence" in Tuesday's Daily Lobo: It is absurd to make the claim that the actions of the lunatic fringe of the Muslim world embody Islamic teachings.
Such extremists or radicals are by definition not representative of the totality. The same ludicrous argument could be made that the actions of the IRA, the Ku Klux Klan or Timothy McVeigh are reflective of the teachings of Christianity.
It is a simple matter to distort religious interpretations in support of an ideological agenda. One of several controversial statements attributed to Jesus in the Bible is "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword," in Matthew 10:34. Its main significance in that context is that it is often offered as evidence that Jesus advocated violence - a view that is repugnant to many Christians.
This distortion is also indicative in Woodard's statement that the Quran calls for conversion by the sword. Islam forbids any form of compulsion in regards to religion.
Although somewhat skewed in its interpretation, there is some truth to Woodard's statement that Islam imposes a tax on non-Muslims living under Islamic rule, but this is diminutive compared to the taxes that are obligatory on all Muslims in an Islamic society. The non-Muslims who pay the tax are exempt from having to serve in any war that the Muslim state endures, even if it is in the defense of said non-Muslims. If a non-Muslim chooses to aid the state in any conflict, he or she is exempt from paying the tax.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
Additionally, Woodard's claim that 5 percent of Muslims support violence is both unfounded and ridiculous. I challenge Woodard to bring forth evidence of anything even close to his estimate.
It is my feeling that Muslims do not need to continuously apologize for the actions done by Islamic radicals - to do so would be an admission that these individuals are in fact an element of Islam.
I do not expect other religious leaders to continuously apologize for iniquitous actions made under guise of religious rationalization. Even so, Islamic scholars have repeatedly condemned the events of Sept. 11, 2001, the insurgency in Iraq, the England train station violence and other atrocious acts carried out by these so-called Muslims.
My suggestion is that Woodard first do his research before making blatant statements about Islamic interpretation and references.
Dawud Shakir
UNM student
