Often, we see an individual that uses politics as a means of becoming prominent and almost as a new religion. I think an individual named Hunter is like that. He seems to just wish the government would become more conservative. I think we have much agreement on that, but for different reasons. He has become apostate and has accepted a rather simplistic view of naturalism.

He complains about the attack in Barcelona and yet has no basis for doing such. The events of Barcelona are just matter in motion in his worldview. We reduce to atoms in a cosmic accident. The world just is and cannot provide ethical obligations and norms. What incentive remains for his viewers to not accept communism? If Hunter is correct, then you and Antifa are merely just having a disagreement of opinions. Hunter doesn’t have a worldview that provides a basis for ethics.Therefore, he has no basis for criticizing Islam. He holds to atheism. How many atheists like Stalin, Mao, and Lenin killed people last century?

I am not excusing the events that occurred and believe they comport well with Islam. My point is that the events also comport just as well with atheism. Secularism allowed for the allowance for Islamic radicalism to grow and secularism is a product of atheism.

What is Hunter’s solution? Well, he has none. We only can hope to share information and hope that changes minds. The two questions are “What to turn too?” and “Why should they?” You see Hunter has provided no reason to find his alternative is better than Islam. They share the same seat, but one shows their true colors.

My point is that without Christ you have no basis to present a criticism of Islam and the only thing that reaches the hearts and minds of individuals is the Gospel. I also agree that political moves need to be made in order to protect innocents. I am only providing the worldview in which that makes sense?