Here are my questions/thoughts:
- Why wasn't the Pope's speech vetted before he delivered it? (Complete text here.)
- Come on, he apologized. Our Popes never apologize. That in itself is akin to a miracle. Yet it's still not enough?
- The worldwide Islamic reaction--and the resulting deaths--certainly do not fit the offense.
- Why do Western religions tolerate such disproportionate retaliations from radical Muslims, and allow thier own religions to be maligned with nary a peep?
- Isn't Islam at its core a religion that promotoes peace? Is the visibility of the radical segment an extreme example of "the squeaky wheel gets the grease," or is it truly representative of Islamic sensibility? (I believe it's the former.)
- This is more reason than ever for this administration to steer clear of the 'Islamic fascists' rhetoric, IMHO. I'm surprised that hasn't drawn more ire already. At least the term 'terrorists' acknowledges the separation of church and state, no matter what the church.
- The ultimate irony of this controversy is that the Pope's speech states that spreading religion through violence is not in accordance with God's will. And how do the radicals respond to the use of their ancient teachings as a (negative) example? With violence. How can this possibly refute the quote?