Current fundementalist & reactive Islam is a fairly recent innovation.
Islam is not more touchy than other religions. It happens to be today, but historically it hasn't been so, and has at times been less touchy than the average religion.
The 1970s saw a rise in religious fundamentalism across the board.
Before the 1970s it was very unusual for Americans outside a few southern counties to walk around talking about their two-way conversations with Jesus. (And Jimmy Carter's brand of religious talk would have kept him out of national office.)
Israel was founded by a bunch of atheists as a socialist haven for European jews. It was a pretty irreligious nation until the 1970s.
And the theocratic revolution in Iran in the late 1970s was very new and unusual. The Islamic world was dominated by non-religious strong-men, not by theocrats. Even terrorists were a bunch of atheists. The PLO was more about Marx than Jihad, and were not suicidal. The suicide-bomber was a later fundementalist religious innovation.
When Islam was on top it was less reactive than Christianity. And that's not a coincidence. It was not very harsh to non-Muslims, which helped with recruiting. (It was better to be a jew in Egypt than in Spain.) A lot of people converted more because it opened doors to business opportunities than out of fear of persecution.
The Muslims have controlled the key Christian holy sites in Jerusalem for ages because way back in the day the warring Christian sects were always fighting over them, and it was decided that Muslims were the fairest brokers. They were seen as good managers and capable of fairness.
Saladin was, to Europeans, the perfect knight... the specific inspiration for European chivalry.
Contemporary Muslim reactivity does not come from the religion itself. Islam is no more intrinsically sensitive than any other religion. A conservative religious culture will feature a reactive and primitive interpretation of whatever the culture's religion is.
Since the degeneracy of fundementalist Islam is so similar to the mentality of conservative Christianity, it is easy to see that these things come from trends in culture and society more than from what is written in a holy book. The book is open to endless reinterpretation to suit the political/cultural trend.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Battle-God-Karen-Armstrong/dp/0345391691
In our supposedly secular age governed by reason and technology, fundamentalism has emerged as an overwhelming force in every major world religion. Why? This is the fascinating, disturbing question that bestselling author Karen Armstrong addresses in her brilliant new book The Battle for God. Writing with the broad perspective and deep understanding of human spirituality that won huge audiences for A History of God, Armstrong illuminates the spread of militant piety as a phenomenon peculiar to our moment in history.
Contrary to popular belief, fundamentalism is not a throwback to some ancient form of religion but rather a response to the spiritual crisis of the modern world. As Armstrong argues, the collapse of a piety rooted in myth and cult during the Renaissance forced people of faith to grasp for new ways of being religious--and fundamentalism was born. Armstrong focuses here on three fundamentalist movements: Protestant fundamentalism in America, Jewish fundamentalism in Israel, and Islamic fundamentalism in Egypt and Iran--exploring how each has developed its own unique way of combating the assaults of modernity.
= new reply since forum marked as read
