I just finished reading part of a transcript from an interview on MSNBC this morning of Howard Dean, former governor of Vermont, and reliable liberal.  The topic was the massacre of twelve employees of a Paris magazine that had spoofed the prophet Muhammed with a cartoon picture with caption.  All I can say is, “Wow!”  I was simply flabbergasted.  Here is part of what Dean said about the terrorist who committed this outrageous act:

“You know, this is a chronic problem,” Dean said. “I stopped calling these people Muslim terrorists. They’re about as Muslim as I am. I mean, they have no respect for whatever anybody else’s life. That’s not what the Koran says. You know, Europe has an enormous radical problem. I think ISIS is a cult, not an Islamist cult. I think it’s a cult. I think you got to deal with these people.”  “You know, the interesting thing here is we talked about guns the last time regarding the United States, regarding how guns get in the hands of the kind of people that kill the two police officers here two weeks ago — France has tremendous gun control laws, yet, these people are able to get Kalashnikovs,” he continued. “So, this is really complicated stuff. I think you have to treat these people basically as mass murders. But I do not think we should accord them any particular religious respects because I think whatever they are claiming, motivation clearly is a twisted cultage mind.”

Is Dean even living in the real world?  But I do have to stop myself and ask whether he might not represent many other very liberal figures in elite positions.  The worst aspect of Dean’s comments are his complete and utter misunderstanding of the role of religion in the world, as if it has no influence at all on people (except perhaps those he might describe as “right wing fundamentalists”).  Let’s be clear.  These terrorists, yes, terrorists, were Muslim and they attacked the newspaper precisely because they were Muslims and terrorists.  Now to be sure, they are radical Muslims.  This group, though relatively small percentage-wise, compared to the total Muslim population, is nevertheless still Muslim.  They are a religious group.  Dean may even be correct to call them a cult, but the very name of cult implies—noo, cries out—religion, albeit distorted religion.  We do not begin to address the terrorism problem correctly until we understand its connection to religious belief, no matter how much on the fringe of the mainstream it may be.

Of course, Dean couldn’t resist the temptation to turn the discussion to guns and gun control.  It seems to amaze him that these “non-terrorists” could get their hands on guns and kill people.  How can we stop this, he muses?  Indeed what he means is not stricter security or a harder stance against terrorists, but really just getting guns removed from everyone.  Then, miraculously, he apparently believes, the problem will disappear.

But back to the subject, for better or worse, religion must not be ignored as both a negative element, when it turns away from the one true God, or as a very positive factor in world history and events when it produces a truly biblical outcome.  To say it plays no role, as Dean effectively did, is to whistle past the graveyard.