'Simply put, you must agree with all of the following assertions:
1) Islam does not represent the forces of Satan or the Anti-Christ bent on destruction of the Christian world.
2) There is no 1,400 year old "war with the West/Christianity" being waged by Muslims or anyone else.
3) Islam as a religion is no more inherently incompatible with modernity, minority rights, women's rights, or democratic pluralism than most religions.
4) Medieval, anachronistic, obscure terms like "dhimmitude" or "taqiyya" are suitable for polite intellectual discussion. They are not and never will be appropriate to slap in the face of everyday Muslims or their friends.
5) Muslims have no more need to prove that they can be good Americans, loyal citizens, decent people, or enemies of terrorism than anyone else does.
Is this a test of "ideological purity?"
Why yes. Yes it is.'
I bring this to your attention merely as an extension of my post the other day about the suppression of debate by the Political Correctoids. "not suitable for polite intellectual discussion"? I am overcome with the heady fumes of The Soviet Commissar breathing down my neck. Perhaps a little bit like the Roman Catholic church in its more authoritarian moods, the PC brigade are very definite about things that are debatable to the point where the disinterested observer would suspect an underlying streak of insecurity.
'Islam as a religion is no more inherently incompatible with modernity, minority rights, women's rights, or democratic pluralism than most religions.' Thats a huge amount of intellectual territory to give up, what with the sheer tonnage of evidence to the contrary.
In fact, if you add up all the intellectual standpoints ruled out of play by these rules, what in the current world political scene would you have left to talk about?