Top Menu

Lou Ann Zelenik Uses Abacus to Figure Out Islam is 15% Religion, 85% Political

OK, so I don’t know how Zelenik came up with these numbers, but she’s sticking to them:

Zelenik: “15% Of Islam Is A Religion, 85% Political.”

(newschannel5)

NASHVILLE, Tenn.- The question of religion is playing a major role in one of the most heated congressional primary races in the country.

Republican Lou Ann Zelenik is challenging incumbent republican Diane Black in the sixth congressional district. When asked if she believed if Islam was a real religion, Zelenick said she believed it to be mostly political.

“I consider 15 percent of Islam a religion, 85 percent political. It’s a total way of life. The only ones who do not call Islam a religion are the Muslims because it’s not a religion,” said Zelenik.

News Channel 5 Investigative reporter Ben Hall asked Zelenik asked if she felt Islam was a real religion or something else Zelenik was clear.

“I will tell you I don’t agree with everything that they say in the Islamic religion or ideology or whatever you want to call it, but I think it has been established by the Federal government and it’s protected as a religion and that’s what I am going to abide by is the law,” she said.

The entire interview of both candidates, including their take on the negative ads that have been such a big part of this campaign will air on Inside Politics on News Channel 5+ at 7 p.m. on July 27 or at 5 a.m. Sunday, July 29 on News Channel 5.

, , , , , ,

  • Lawrence of America

    re·li·gion   /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ Show Spelled[ri-lij-uhn] noun
    1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

    ( so Islam has the creation story,devotional and ritual observances i.e. Salat 5 times daily, Ramadan, Hajj, Zakat)CHECK

    2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
    ( the shehada, the 5 pillars, etc) CHECK

    3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
    ( Ulema, Azhar, for sunni’s. shiites have their councils as well) CHECK
    4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
    ( sufi’s have monks, sunnis have trained Imams/ Muftis/shiekhs/etc, shiites have Imams, ayatollahs, etc) Check
    5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
    (Does this really even have to be qualifed..duh) CHECK

  • Sir David ( Illuminati membership number 5:32) Warning Contains Irony

    Steve
    try this one for starters , there are many others on this site but I am sure you can use the search engine yourself
    http://www.loonwatch.com/?s=hitler+press+muslims+spencer&.x=0&.y=0

  • Géji

    @Nassir H. Says: “Nick McConnell, you’re probably one of the best Islamic scholars on the web, Ph.D. in Islamic Studies from the University of Wikipedia and all”

    Lol, good catch Nassir, you and Octane nailed Nicky’s whole empty, wiki blah to his cross, closely followed to finish what’s felt of him by moosern, well done guys!

  • MC

    @Steve

    Unfortunatly ideas are not always implemented correctly. After all, we are human. But as the saying goes, do not blame the gun for the murder so do not blame the religion for the injustice.

  • Steve

    “Religious minorities are not allowed to be persecuted, are allowed to worship, are allowed to manage their own affairs, pay less in taxes than Muslims, are exempt from military duty, and don’t have to follow sharia law.”

    Where is this implemented?

  • moosern

    @Nick, Where in Christian doctrine does it call for a separation of church and state? The establishment cause in our Constitution is there for the very reason that throughout European history the blending of Church and State was destructive. Our founding fathers were very much aware of this, having seen and known about centuries of warfare in Europe which had monarchs often invoking religion as a means to rally their troops and fill the coffers of themselves and the clergy. The influence of the clergy in Europe up until the 20th century led to corruption of both church and state (very similar to bank and state today). Nick, actually research the limits placed on rulers under Islamic law. The political aspect of Islam is limiting on the state. Religious minorities are not allowed to be persecuted, are allowed to worship, are allowed to manage their own affairs, pay less in taxes than Muslims, are exempt from military duty, and don’t have to follow sharia law.
    As of 2000 75 nations that have state religions 29 are Muslim, 40 are Christian 4 are Buddhist 1 Hindu and 1 Jewish. That means Christianity is the state religion of over half of the nations with state religions, those numbers don’t include the many countries, mainly in Europe, that have official religions meaning that the state has to approve religions before they can either be active or receive the benefits that the official religions enjoy. Caesarropapism only exists in Christianity today, the Pope being the head of state of The Vatican and the head of the Roman Catholic Church and Queen Elizabeth being the head of state of the countries of the British Commonwealth and the head of the Church of England. Iran is close to having this, but the Supreme leader of Iran is not the head of Shia Islam.

    Yes, there is influence of clergy on politics in Islamic countries. There is also influence of clerics in Christian countries, Buddhist countries, Hindu countries, The Jewish country and any country where religion isn’t outright banned. Just look at the influence the extremist Christians are attempting to lever in the US at present.

  • Pingback: Lou Ann Zelenik Uses Abacus to Figure Out Islam is 15% Religion, 85% Political | Spencer Watch()

  • Steve

    “read what happened to the Jews 1930′s and 40′s europe. Then think about what is happening to muslims now”

    Can you provide the comparisons please because I can’t really see any

  • Sir David ( Illuminati membership number 5:32) Warning Contains Irony

    Nick McConnel
    I had a look at your website and came across this
    “Actually, when clerics controlled some society (and still control many
    Islamic societies) ”

    Would you care to list these many Islamic societies?

    You seem to know or have you been mining wiki again lots about philosophy but I am not sure how much you know about Islam. Have you read the Quran ?

    You also wrote ” That’s one way that “truth” and terror can be intertwined, described brilliantly by George Orwell
    (Eric Arthur Blair, 1903–1950) in his 1949 book entitled 1984, e.g.,
    If all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed… then the lie passed into history and became truth.”

    The trouble is you have seem to accepted the truth of Ms Zelenik. Read the lessons of history ,read what happened to the Jews 1930’s and 40’s europe. Then think about what is happening to muslims now .
    What is the lie and what is the truth?

    I am not a muslim I just believe that people should be allowed to believe what they will. If rationality as you think it is to triumph it will do it by force of argument not force of lies.

    David

  • Nick McConnell

    Octane,

    I agree with your first paragraph. Note, however, that I didn’t write (nor even mean to suggest) that: “Christianity is not a system by itself.” I agree that making such a statement would be “incredibly misleading”, but again, I didn’t make it!

    What’s important is that, during the past few hundred years (in large measure thanks to the intelligence and bravery of, initially, such people as Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison), most Western nations have erected a “wall” to separate religion from politics. To be sure, it’s a wall that religious fundamentalists (of course including Christian fundamentalists) continuously attempt to breach, but in general, the wall continues to hold. Unfortunately, though, such “secularism” has yet to be established in most Muslim countries.

    I also agree that your example of the Vatican conflicts with the general trend of secularism in the West. But the Vatican is a relic of the past, the last holdout of Europe’s Dark Ages, now withered to only 44 hectares, and surely it won’t be much longer until it vanishes with the ignorance that created it.

    As for your questions, “what exactly makes Christianity a religion?”, and “what is [are] the criteria for making or constituting a religion?”, my opinion is that, fundamentally, it’s the same as the source of all organized religions, i.e., as the French writer Stendhal (Marie-Henri Beyle, 1783–1842) wrote: “All religions are founded on the fear of the many and the cleverness of the few.”

    With respect to your request for a “list” (of details) for “making or constituting a religion”, I’m sorry, but responding to your request would be, not only onerous, but (I think) rather superfluous. The essence of all religions is dogma (i.e., “principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true”); the essence of secularism (or humanism) is to base decisions, not on dogma, but on evidence.

    Thus, in the viewpoint of secularists (or humanists), i.e., those who realize that in the open system known as ‘reality’, the best we can do is ascertain the probability that some claim is true (see, e.g., http://zenofzero.net/docs/T1_Truth_&_Knowledge.pdf ), dogma doesn’t belong in the public forum. If a claim is made in the public forum (e.g., about “abortion, gay marriage… wars, holidays”) then secularists demand to see data that support the claim, and if no evidence (only dogma) is offered to support it, then we reject it as religious rubbish.

  • Hatethehaterz

    @Nick McConnell: Well according to your website, your PhD is in aerospace engineering; not religious studies or anything else which would serve to qualify your statements here on the topic of Islam. So Nasser does have a point when he critiques your statements as lacking legitimate knowledge of Islam or Muslims (getting info from wikipedia for example). Furthermore, I noticed that you frequent the site of richard dawkins (or at least you thanked people you interacted with on his site). His understanding of Islam is ignorant, biased, and highly misleading. If richard “Islam is an unmitigated evil” dawkins is a source of info for you, then I’m not surprised that your comments make little to no sense (I too had never heard of Allama Parvez until your comment).

    As far as labelling Islam “political,” you do understand what Zelenik and like minded people are going for here, don’t you? They have been trying for some time now to frame Islam as a “political ideology” as oppose to a religion; because then it would lose its protection under the 1st amendment (or that is their belief anyways). It is an attempt to deny American Muslims our right to practice our faith. So I find it problematic and counterproductive to label Islam in such a fashion.

    Islam is indeed a complete way of life. But that doesn’t make it any less of a religion. In fact it makes it more than a mere set of rituals to be practiced one or more day a week.

    I also don’t follow the comparison to communism. Which “communism” are you referring to? The egalitarian ideal of communism, which favors an equal distribution of wealth? Or the reality of communism which is (or has been) practiced in modern times in the form of authoritarian regimes? Islam does favor a more equalitarian distribution of wealth, but beyond that, I see nothing in common between the two. Unless that was just meant to be an insulting comparison?

  • Sir David ( Illuminati membership number 5:32) Warning Contains Irony

    I wonder if Ms Zelenik knows that 48% of statistics are made up ! 😉

    Also nice one Nassir . I like the University of Wiki line 😉

    As for Nick McConnel you may have a point in where Ms Zelenik got her figures from although I dont see the connection myself and would not votes for someone who does not understand mathermatics never mind she is obviously a nut, nice to see you do have a brain when you try . We like people who have their own opinions here and dont like those who just copy from wiki or the works of Robert Spencer , TROP or other sites with out giving their sources If you have a Phd ,why drop your standards?

    Sir David
    Vice President
    Leftwing Mooslim Alliance
    West Anjou Branch

  • Garibaldi

    It’s good to see you commenting again Nassir.

  • Octane

    Oh and the above was directed @Nick McConnell

  • Octane

    [“Well, Steve, I can agree with you that “most religions are political” (or maybe better: most organized religions have been and continue to be involved in politics), but there are features of Islam that distinguish it from “approved” political activities in Christianity.”]

    This is an odd statement to make. Since really Christianity especially now and certainly in the past has been the very essence of a political ideology. Much of which we see displayed in political policy from abortion, gay marriage, political imagery/statements made by politicians to governmental operations wars, holidays. The list goes on. Here Christian belief is a system it dictates reproductive rights, who you sleep with, has a legal system that states its based on Judeo-Christian law, Sundays are a day of rest so everything should be closed technically etc. To summarize Christian beliefs dictate, marriage, sex, work, war etc. So to state that Christianity is not a system by itself is incredibly misleading.

    [In contrast, fundamentalist Islam doesn’t recognize a distinction between “mosque and state”. For example, as “the right-hand man of the founder of Pakistan” and “prominent Islamic scholar” Allama Pervez (1903-85) wrote:

    “Islam is not a ‘religion’ in the ordinary sense of the word. ‘Religion’ is the English equivalent for the Arabic word Mazhah, which does not occur even once in the whole of the Holy Quran. The Quran has, instead, used the word Addeen for Islam, which means a particular way of life.”]

    By your classification Vatican City is pretty much done in for because here we have no separation of church and state. So does that mean that Christianity is a political system? Especially since the Vatican is considered a country/state.

    [“Thus, the basic document of Islam (the Quran) seems to make it clear that Islam was never meant to be “just” a religion; instead, it was to be an all-encompasing ideology, similar in extent to Communism. That many modern Muslims seek to separate “mosque and state” is an innovation welcomed by “secular Muslims” but abhorred by Islamic fundamentalists.”]

    Ok here is a question what exactly makes Christianity a religion? What is the criteria for making or constituting a religion?
    List those down and lets compare. I await your reply.

  • Anj

    Ouch nasser!
    That’s gotta hurt. Nick next time remember your arse from your elbow!
    Good job Nasser!

  • Nick McConnell

    Nassir,

    I may be a moron; others can form their own opinions. In that regard, I invite them to check out my website at (http://zenofzero.net/ ), where they’ll find that, in fact, at least some others don’t consider me to be a moron, e.g., I do have my Ph.D.

    Meanwhile, though, your response has resulted in a more significant charge against you (than your claim that I’m a moron), namely, that you’re impolite. As a result, I’ll not communicate with you further.

    Yet, for others, there’s another point that might be worthwhile considering. Whereas a religion is probably best defined by the people who practice it (rather than via assessments by any “scholars”) and whereas I wouldn’t be surprised if roughly 85% of the Egyptians who voted in their recent elections expressed their desire for Islamic parties (and about 15% for secularists), then perhaps such results are the basis of Zelenik’s statement.

  • Nassir H.

    @Nick McConnell, you’re probably one of the best Islamic scholars on the web, Ph.D. in Islamic Studies from the University of Wikipedia and all. We can tell from the misleading quotations you got straight from the Wikipedia article about Allama Pervez.

    In contrast, fundamentalist Islam doesn’t recognize a distinction between “mosque and state”. For example, as “the right-hand man of the founder of Pakistan” and “prominent Islamic scholar” Allama Pervez (1903-85) wrote:

    “Islam is not a ‘religion’ in the ordinary sense of the word. ‘Religion’ is the English equivalent for the Arabic word Mazhah, which does not occur even once in the whole of the Holy Quran. The Quran has, instead, used the word Addeen for Islam, which means a particular way of life.”

    Please do tell where you got the quotation describing Allama Pervez as a “prominent Islamic scholar.” There’s a reason why you didn’t try back up your nonsense with evidence; the Wikipedia article you got your “information” from actually says Pervez was a “prominent Quranist Islamic scholar.” Note how you left out “Quranist” because it clearly indicates that his views were largely rejected by the Islamic mainstream

    You insinuate that he is a “fundamentalist,” yet you don’t really back up this claim with anything other than huffing and puffing about what he thinks about the word “mazhah.” In fact it is clear that he is anything but a fundamentalist: he rejected Hadith, denied that ‘Aisha was 9 when she married the Prophet, criticized the Jamaat-e-Islami, and was palpably anticlerical. He thinks premodern Muslim rulers fabricated the Hadith.

    Your quote describing him as Jinnah’s “right hand man” is again from the Wikipedia article—although it’s worth mentioning that no citation is given for this in the article itself. Personally, I had never heard of Allama Pervez before your rant. Not that him being associated with Jinnah would matter. As mentioned, he was quite unorthodox in his views. Jinnah himself was liberal when it came to Islam. In fact, the loony “Ibn Warraq” claims (falsely) that Jinnah was an atheist. (Yet another case of loonies contradicting each other left and right, but that discussion is for another time).

    Now, a word about Pervez’s claim about “mazhah.” I think he means “madhab” (i.e. doctrine, which is also used to describe Islamic schools of jurisprudence) not “mazhah”—I have no idea where he got that word, though it’s probably related to the fact that South Asians sometimes pronounce the Arabic “dh” as “z.” As for “addeen,” both my Arabic dictionary and Google Translate render it as “religion.” But apparently it’s more complicated then that.

    Anyways, congratulations, you’re a moron.

  • mindy1

    WTF is in the water in that state D:

  • Nick McConnell

    Well, Steve, I can agree with you that “most religions are political” (or maybe better: most organized religions have been and continue to be involved in politics), but there are features of Islam that distinguish it from “approved” political activities in Christianity.

    Thus, writers of the New Testament seem to have adopted the ideas of the Stoic philosopher Epictetus, whose book “The Discourse” states (Book Three):

    “But the soul will never reject the manifest appearance of the good, any more than persons will reject Caesar’s coin… When then the coin which another uses is a different coin, if a man presents this coin, he receives that which is sold for it.”

    I expect that the above idea is the origin of the famous line in the New Testament (e.g., at Luke 14, 25) that starts, “Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s”, which is interpreted by many (if not most) Christians as support for the separation of “church and state”.

    In contrast, fundamentalist Islam doesn’t recognize a distinction between “mosque and state”. For example, as “the right-hand man of the founder of Pakistan” and “prominent Islamic scholar” Allama Pervez (1903-85) wrote:

    “Islam is not a ‘religion’ in the ordinary sense of the word. ‘Religion’ is the English equivalent for the Arabic word Mazhah, which does not occur even once in the whole of the Holy Quran. The Quran has, instead, used the word Addeen for Islam, which means a particular way of life.”

    Thus, the basic document of Islam (the Quran) seems to make it clear that Islam was never meant to be “just” a religion; instead, it was to be an all-encompasing ideology, similar in extent to Communism. That many modern Muslims seek to separate “mosque and state” is an innovation welcomed by “secular Muslims” but abhorred by Islamic fundamentalists.

  • @Emperor

    I wonder how she came up with those numbers, probably just pulled them out of thin air.

  • Mohammad

    Don’t know what she’s smoking, im a muslim, I call it a religion.

  • Fred

    Orthodox Jews also consider Judaism to be a complete way of life, too. (The Jewish Halacha is analogous to Shariah.)

    I wonder if she would make the same argument regarding orthodox Jews?

  • Steve

    most religions are political

  • Sir David ( Illuminati membership number 5:32) Warning Contains Irony

    I’m confused . So she thinks the federal govts job is to decide what a religion is ? Then she decides Islam is 15 % religion and 85% Political ( not sure what that means by political )
    mmmmm sounds like she is nuts to me

    Sir David

Powered by Loon Watchers