Well, Iâ€™ve received quite a few emails asking me about â€œcourageism.â€ I know, youâ€™re probably shaking your head and trying to sound it out. I really canâ€™t help you with that since there isnâ€™t a dictionary entry on itâ€”yet. In fact, we may be looking at the â€œword of the yearâ€ for 2006 or 2007.
HSLDA attorney Scott Somerville has asked me to join in on the discussion of this interesting word which he defines as â€œthe only real alternative to â€˜terrorismâ€™.â€ I’ll be interviewing him this week, so you’ll have a chance to learn more about what he thinks about the topic.
Anway, Iâ€™ve wanted to chime in on the whole â€œcartoon warâ€ blog burst, and here is my excuse.
The discussion began with the infamous Muhammad cartoon riots that have spread across the globe. For me, this has shown that we arenâ€™t looking at a â€œreligion of peaceâ€ as is preached by many, but rather an Islam fascism that is worse than Hitlerâ€™s Germany. It is a radicalism that is sweeping our globe faster than communism. It is the evil of our time, my time, and possibly my childrenâ€™s time. It is something that I and my fellow Americanâ€™s must be left to fight with. It will never be totally wiped out. It can be held back, but never completely annihilated. And as a nation we must not falter in our stand against it.
I respect the newspapers who have taken a stand now for freedom of the pressâ€”freedom to make fun of anything, even me, my God, and my homeland. Certainly I can get mad, angry, or whatever else, but they have the absolute right to make fun of me in a cartoon. But for me to respond to a cartoon by calling for the heads of the cartoonists is absurd. To call for a change in the laws so that there is no long freedom of the press is absurd. These newspapers have shown courageism. Courage to stand against terrorism. This courage is defined as “knowingly and intentionally putting one’s life at risk.” Putting oneâ€™s life at risk, I might add, for freedom.
As I said, weâ€™re facing the great evil of our timeâ€”larger than Germany, larger than Russia, and larger than Japan. And the difference between us and them is one thing: courageism. We believe in freedom, which takes true courage. The man who blows himself up does not show courage. What he shows is that he has been fooledâ€”connedâ€”into believing, yes, a lie. Islam is about spreading the religion at all costs. Now, of course, this does not mean that every Muslim is going to want to blow himself up, but the Koran clearly teaches that those who do not convert to Islam must be killed. In my book, thatâ€™s just like saying if youâ€™re not German, you should be killed. If youâ€™re not Japanese, you should be killed. If youâ€™re not white, you should be killed.
But back to courageism. What exactly is it? How can we define it?
Well, after some thought, hereâ€™s my definition:
Courageism: Cur uge is um. Courageism is the opposite of terrorism. It is the exertion of courage in the face of great obstacles, particularly death. It has been shown by many great leaders who chose not to use violence in overcoming obstacles placed in their paths. Example: Martin Luther King Jr. showed courageism in his speech â€œI have a dream.â€
Now, for me, courageism was at first an unneeded word. It was something that was just a replacement for courage. But now I think I see a need to make a word that is the obvious word for anti-terrorism. Of course, we now need to debate and discuss who shows courageism, whether it be Martin Luther King, Jr. or the newspapers in Europe and some here in the states. I think we need to turn this discussion to â€œwho shows courageismâ€ and â€œhow is it defined.â€ So, letâ€™s work this out and start defining our termsâ€¦are you ready?
Interview With Daryl Cobranchi