nice try...

Submitted by donvan (United States), Feb 26, 2007 at 10:12

The term "Muslim" defined as "One who submits to God" implies that anyone who "Submits" to God is a "Muslim" .

This is absurd and insulting to all non Muhammedians. This is an excellent example of attempting to dismiss and define the language to comport to Islamic definition. Muslims are Muhammedians and Muhammedians they will remain.

The term "Muslim" is as ambiguious as is the rest of the Islamic dogma. As you well know, a belief system is defined by the body of beliefs, customs ,and ritual practices. It should be obvious that the founder and primary advocate of a belief system should have the followers called by the name of that founder. Of course if the agenda is to truncate discussion and inquiry, impose a criteria for what words mean and why "Muhammedian" "Muhammedism" or even "Muhammedistic" are not definable and meaningful in the english language.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".