9/11 Controversies From Either Side
Open question for the evening:
How is a Florida church burning the Koran on 9/11 any different than an Islamist-inspired mosque being built in the Ground Zero debris zone?
My answer: None. Both have the right to do it. But it isn’t the right thing to do.
Your thoughts?
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
QUESTION FROM DAN: Bruce, have you been advising Sarah Palin? Catch this on her Facebook page:
Book burning is antithetical to American ideals. People have a constitutional right to burn a Koran if they want to, but doing so is insensitive and an unnecessary provocation – much like building a mosque at Ground Zero.
Or maybe, she just reads GayPatriot.
97 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Here’s a difference…
.
If I burn a Bible… someone might say … Bad boy, you are a creep…
.
If I burn the Koran… Some Muslim might kill me …
.
Having spent 14 years in Saudi Arabia… I can testify to the Muslim mindset… I worked with Muslims every single time on duty …
Comment by Toes — September 7, 2010 @ 7:52 pm - September 7, 2010
I was making the exact same point to my husband this morning Bruce. The only difference is the potential and unfortunately expected reaction of the offended.
Comment by Patriot Goddess — September 7, 2010 @ 7:56 pm - September 7, 2010
I just can’t imagine why the church would want to do it. What denomination is it? And what is their rationale?
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 7, 2010 @ 7:58 pm - September 7, 2010
well and succinctly said, Bruce.
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — September 7, 2010 @ 8:07 pm - September 7, 2010
(continued) Also, do they care that a U.S. Army general has asked them to refrain?
In other words, whether it is right or wrong, their action is the type of thing I would expect from (say) a militant atheist group… or maybe Westboro Baptist.
I do think provocation can be legitimate, but with the following distinction in mind. Provoking people by creating / publishing something is different from provoking by burning / destroying something. The first one is the essential act of scholarship. The second, on its face, is only nihilism. At least on its face, burning the Koran would be no different from (say) burning _Huckleberry Finn_, the Bible, Beatle records or the American flag – i.e., nihilistic and therefore reprehensible. But before I judge firmly, I’d like to know what that church is thinking.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 7, 2010 @ 8:15 pm - September 7, 2010
They burn and stomp our flag and don’t seem to have a problem with THAT.
However, I’d like to think in this country we’re a little more classy and wouldn’t go through the extreme of making a big deal of burning the Koran.
Comment by Chris H — September 7, 2010 @ 8:20 pm - September 7, 2010
My opinions on the Ground Zero Victory Mosque and the Florida Koran Barbecue are the same as Bruce’s, with the added opinion that both should be opposed by decent people.
Question: Since my opinion of the GVZM makes me an “Islamophobe,” does having precisely the same opinion about the FKBBQ make me a Christophobe?
Comment by V the K — September 7, 2010 @ 8:26 pm - September 7, 2010
V: Putting on my Andrew Sullivan glute-enhancing pads… I dunno know, but maybe… you’re a self-hating Christianist?
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 7, 2010 @ 8:31 pm - September 7, 2010
In an ideal world, I’d argue it isn’t the right thing to do.
In the face of threats of violence, it may be necessary to do it as an assertion of American freedom against those who would limit it.
Unfortunately, it appears that the Obama Regime is going full-court press to declare that dissent against Islam is unpatriotic. That, my friend, is where the real concern needs to be.
http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/305453.php
Comment by Rhymes With Right — September 7, 2010 @ 8:34 pm - September 7, 2010
Again, at that point I would argue the difference between creating/publishing something (say, a drawing of Mohammed, or a tract on him, or a tract against socialism) and destroying/burning something.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 7, 2010 @ 8:39 pm - September 7, 2010
Also, doesn’t just the fact that people on all sides agree that the FKBBQ will lead to violence kinda say a lot about Islam?
Comment by V the K — September 7, 2010 @ 8:46 pm - September 7, 2010
I agree with your comment, Bruce.
But….taking the specifics out of the conversation, building a house of worship is a passive act whereas burning a religion’s “bible” is extremely provocative.
Comment by Bobbie — September 7, 2010 @ 8:58 pm - September 7, 2010
Pretty much the same. The main difference is that Americans will likely die if the Koran-burning goes forward. ..bruce..
Comment by bfwebster — September 7, 2010 @ 9:09 pm - September 7, 2010
They’re not that similar, though both are examples of bad ideas put forward under misleading pretenses.
Comment by Coco Rico — September 7, 2010 @ 9:14 pm - September 7, 2010
building a house of worship is a passive act
So, it would not be considered “provocative” to build a Museum of the Confederacy on the spot where Martin Luther King was shot, or at the site of the Selma Church bombing. Because there’s no way anyone could ever perceive a museum as provocative.
Comment by V the K — September 7, 2010 @ 9:17 pm - September 7, 2010
V, I believe the Museum of the Confederacy was built in a black neighborhood of Richmond and stood there for many years before closing. My cousins lived around there but I don’t know much more about it.
I agree with you, though. I would say, nonetheless, that physically burning a holy text is more provocative, to the extent that degrees of offensiveness matter.
Comment by Coco Rico — September 7, 2010 @ 9:19 pm - September 7, 2010
The thing is, burning the Koran lasts, what, ten minutes? It’s a stunt. But a Mosque at Ground Zero is like a permanent touchdown dance. And Muslims have a history of building mosques to mark their conquests; building the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount, for example.
Comment by V the K — September 7, 2010 @ 9:30 pm - September 7, 2010
GZVM and FKBBQ are different, because they are wrong for entirely different reasons.
GZVM: It’s creating something, yay! A community center + house of worship. The problem is the site. Constructing a Japanese cultural center at Pearl Harbor, an American one at Nagasaki, etc. would be equally insensitive and inappropriate.
FKBBQ: The site is no problem. The problem is that the group has chosen, as its means of protest/expression, one of the quintessential acts of tyrants throughout history: book-burning. Book-burning in the name of freedom? Huh?
The resemblance between them is only what Bruce touched on originally: That both are legally right (while being perhaps morally or spiritually wrong).
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 7, 2010 @ 9:38 pm - September 7, 2010
I don’t recall the liberals getting such vapors when Newsweak manufactured the Koran flushing kerfuffle. In fact, they helped to push the story. They never held Newsweak accountable for lying.
Therefore, it seems to me that this would be just spiffy if the church were doing it with the intent on trashing our soldiers.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — September 7, 2010 @ 9:38 pm - September 7, 2010
Right Wing Extreme is apparently a militia and was going to offer protection to the FKBBQ, but they withdrew:
Hmm.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 7, 2010 @ 9:53 pm - September 7, 2010
I have often wondered what the Koran publishers do with the stuff that gets screwed up during press runs and Korans that are missing a unit or have other defects. Is there some sort of proper etiquette for trashing Koran trash or do they just recycle it like just so much aborted fetal tissue?
Comment by heliotrope — September 7, 2010 @ 9:53 pm - September 7, 2010
I don’t know what that church’s motive is but if it was to expose the glaring hypocrisy of liberals and Muslims, especially those who support the Ground Zero mosque, I think the church succeeded.
Every since the GZ mosque controversy erupted liberal and Muslim supporters of the mosque have wrapped themselves in the Constitution, insisting that freedom of religion overrides the hurt feelings of Americans who are insulted by a symbol of Islam being built so close to where Muslims killed their loved ones and fellow citizens. Yet, when it comes to burning the Koran these same liberals and Muslims aren’t nearly so zealous and absolutist in defending another Constitutional right, the right to freedom of speech.
Apparently, the hurt feelings of Americans are irrelevant to the right of Muslims to practice freedom of religion but the hurt feelings of Muslims trump the right of Americans to practice freedom of expression. It seems that instead of a climate of hate coming from “Islamophobes”, liberals and Muslims are working to create a climate of repression where freedom of speech is stifled when the speech offends Muslims. In that context, then, I come down on the side of burning the Koran.
I understand the dangers that burning Mohammed’s book entails, but Muslims need to understand that the Constitution’s freedoms work BOTH ways. If they don’t want to accept that then they should move to Saudi Arabia where sharia law rules. And liberals can follow them.
Comment by Seane-Anna — September 7, 2010 @ 9:57 pm - September 7, 2010
I think the Koran BBQ is dumb and, yes, provocative (along the lines of flag burning). That being said, a couple of points:
1. It demonstrates (not accounting for taste or good sense) that we are not subject to the blasphemy laws found in the EU and Canada (not yet).
2. If a church with 50 members burning a book can ignite(?) the Muslim world (and endanger our troops) then Afghanistan and all the rest of it is a lost cause… bring our troops home and to hell with the rest.
Are we willing to consider that it may be that Islam is not compatible with western civilization?
Comment by SoCalRobert — September 7, 2010 @ 10:05 pm - September 7, 2010
I think the difference between the two acts are the motivations and intentions of the actors in each case.
Having a Koran burning party is an ugly expression and can only be interpretted as an act of bad faith towards Islam or Muslims. It’s not clear that the developers of the mosque are doing it with good intentions (as the developers claim), or if the intent is to build the mosque and over time it becomes a sort of monument to the terrorists who killed 3000 Americans.
Either way, that the proposed Koran burning is causing people half way around the world in Indonesia and Malaysia to riot is a gross over-reaction. After watching the Al-Quds demonstrations last week, and now these riots prompted by the Koran burning, it should be a wake up call to us all that maniacal Islamic extremists are found in many places, not just Iran, Saudia Arabia, and Al-Queda in Pakistan.
Comment by Scott — September 7, 2010 @ 10:11 pm - September 7, 2010
@ILC:
I don’t agree, because I’d expect that militant atheists — whatever their personality flaws — would actually feel stung at the heart when someone accused them of behaving like Inquisitors at an auto de fé.
Not to mention the fact that, in an American context, atheists skew leftward and thus are apt to hold a cherished belief in their own respect for freedom of speech and of the press (as one of the totems that distinguishes them from those awful right-wingers who respect the Buy-Bull but not the Constitution).
I’m not saying that it would never even cross an atheist’s mind to burn the Koran — I’m only predicting that it would be quite easy to dissuade him from physically carrying this out, if you know how to push an atheist’s shame-buttons.
Comment by Throbert McGee — September 7, 2010 @ 10:48 pm - September 7, 2010
Hopefully the shameful pastor in Florida will see the error of his ways and decide that in the interest of tolerance, goodwill and setting a good example for the Ground Zero Mosque assh*les, that he will forgo the Hitlerian book-burning and announce that while they have the right to do it, they have decided it would be unnecessarily offensive, provocative and in extremely poor taste.
But it appears that he’s just an ego-maniacal dumbsh*t who either can’t see or can’t admit when he’s wrong.
The contortions of those trying to differentiate between this and everybody draw mohammad day, on the other hand, are a laugh riot. The inability to differentiate between what’s trendy and what’s right.
Comment by American Elephant — September 7, 2010 @ 11:01 pm - September 7, 2010
It’s not something I count on. The left-wing rule is generally “Freedom of speech for me, not for thee.” Time and again I’ve seen left-wingers try to silence people who won’t agree with them. Even the ACLU, having charged itself with protecting the First Amendment, will usually only defend socialists. (You can cite their Nazi cases but remember, Nazis *are* socialists, or at least anti-capitalists; their very name is short for “national socialist”.)
Also, I think you already caught the following, but: I did use the qualifier, ‘militant’ atheist. There are non-militant atheists – Ayn Rand used to say that she was one – and they perhaps are more likely to take a consistent view of free speech.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 7, 2010 @ 11:23 pm - September 7, 2010
It occurred to me a few days ago to wonder whether the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church that will eventually be built across the street from the WTC Memorial is going to have a carillon.
Because even if there are no plans at present for the Cordoba Islamic Center to use amplified adhan calls that might carry for several blocks, if the Orthodox Christians are allowed to ring their bells, I’d fully expect the Muslims to want a piece of that action.
P.S. I’m aware that there are already churches with bells in the WTC’s general vicinity, including St. Paul’s Chapel and Trinity Church. But because of its immediate proximity to the WTC, St. Nicholas has the potential to be a high-profile test case if Muslims at the Cordoba building want to challenge the city’s zoning and noise-pollution laws.
Comment by Throbert McGee — September 7, 2010 @ 11:27 pm - September 7, 2010
A thought experiment….What will happen if the mosque is built at ground zero? Likely, after much consternation and gnashing of teeth, the American people adapts and moves on.
What if a Koran is burned by an outlandish preacher and his small congregation? Likely, a legitimate fear that their lives are in danger. How many fatwa’s will be forthcoming calling for the death of all involved.
This is a dangerous game and this fellow is either crazy or willing to sacrifice all to make a point.
I wonder, does Islam bluff?
Comment by jdcroft2001 — September 7, 2010 @ 11:43 pm - September 7, 2010
Bruce,
I strongly denounce both the Ground Zero Mosque and Florida Quran Burning. They are both provocative, ill-conceived, and plain wrong.
Instead of burning a Quran, why not simply reform Islam’s holy book? Expunge the very violent texts from the Quran through civil dialogue and commitment to religious reformation with the Muslim community.
Instead of building an Islamic supremacist mega Mosque at New York’s Ground Zero region, why not simply move it someplace else? If its truly an Islamic CULTURAL CENTER then invite and welcome all religious faiths within its building.
To moderate Muslims and Muslims of conscience out there,
I am an American citizen. I condemn the Ground Zero Mosque and Florida Quran Burning. I am saying this honestly. I love Muslim people and all human beings. I DO NOT HATE YOU. I could never hate another human being. I am AGAINST the Islamic Jihadist political ideology. We need to make that great distinction and not ignorantly conflate the two manifestations.
To all Muslims of conscience out there who is reading my message; please join me and Americans of conscience to condemn the Ground Zero Mosque and Florida Quran Burning.
Always devoted,
-Totakikay
Comment by Totakikay — September 8, 2010 @ 12:49 am - September 8, 2010
Muslims around the world riot and kill over A CARTOON…and you have the gall and the _________ (God, I can’t even think what) to suggest “why not simply reform Islam’s holy book?”
Really? Just that easy, huh?
What part of the extremist Muslim “community” ..the part reacting to this..do you think is going to sit down with you or whatever committee, over Sunday tea and dialogue civilly and commit to reform of the religion and Quran they’ll DIE for?
Really….
And I thought the PeopleofWalmart were ignorant.
Comment by rodney — September 8, 2010 @ 1:13 am - September 8, 2010
Totakikay is an idiot. Reform the Quran? Do you know the slightest thing about the religion of the Muslim people you love so much? Good Lord.
On the Koran burning. The spokesmen and mouthpieces of our culture, government and religion have been prevaricating and lying for a decade, denying that even if –and it’s a huge if– Islam itself is deeply problematic for the West and America (being an expansionist theocracy and all), then Islam has a big problem. No one with power will confront them. The Pope tried and was shot down for it. But regular American people know that the connection between Islam and its terrorists is not an accident. This is an unsophisticated response but it addresses a gap that those reponsible have created.
Comment by EssEm — September 8, 2010 @ 1:57 am - September 8, 2010
Ach. Mistake. I should have written
“if Islam itself ISN’T deeply problematic”.
Comment by EssEm — September 8, 2010 @ 1:59 am - September 8, 2010
@31: I am asking the Muslim moderates and all Muslims of conscience to stand up against those two major provocations being planned. Of course I support defending oneself, one’s nation, and fighting militarily against those violent Islamic supremacists.
That Florida Quran Burning is provocative and its not going to end Islamic terror. So I am suggesting a humane alternative – the Muslim community needs to reform the Quran – repeal Sharia Law, replace the pages with peaceful text, etc. and every moderate Muslim cleric needs to stand up and send powerful anti-Islamist fatwas on the heads of the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic regimes. How many more Islamic terrorists need to be created? They exist because of the violent text from the Quran.
Let’s cut the root of the tree so it will never grow again the next season.
Comment by Totakikay — September 8, 2010 @ 2:22 am - September 8, 2010
The Koran burners are silly. I don’t see their point (but respect their right to express themselves in stupid ways).
The main difference I see is that one is a permanent monument and the other is a temporary act. The burning has little to no support in the Christian community whereas the “mosque” has more support in the Muslim community.
What’s more, in many Muslim-majority nations, Bibles, or all Christian symbols, are routinely destroyed (a point lost to the media).
Comment by Ben — September 8, 2010 @ 4:53 am - September 8, 2010
There’s no difference between these two acts, Bruce? That’s a very silly thing to say.
Building a mosque and Islamic community center on the doorstep of a site which was destroyed by Islamicist terrorists in the greatest act of terrorism ever is hardly comparable to burning one Koran.
The mosque can (and will be) seen be Islamicists as a symbol of Islam’s triumph over the infidels by carrying through the tradition of buidling mosques on conquered sites. And it will serve that function as long as it stands.
A single book burning, on the other hand? A one-moment act — not a lasting monument. Besides, people burn Bibles, Korans, and other books all the time.
What isn’t common is for people to build a temple of and monument to their religion right by the site where thousands were murdered in the name of said religion.
Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — September 8, 2010 @ 5:05 am - September 8, 2010
B. Daniel Blatt @ 4:
So the Gay Patriot blog has officially lost its mind today. Wonderful.
Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — September 8, 2010 @ 5:21 am - September 8, 2010
ILoveCapitalism @ 5:
So Hitler’s writing Mein Kampf was a better act than burning a copy of it would be?
burning the Koran would be no different from (say) burning Huckleberry Finn, the Bible, Beatle records or the American flag – i.e., nihilistic and therefore reprehensible.
This is sillier than Bruce’s post.
Burning copies of Huckleberry Finn, the Bible, or Beatle records (or Mein Kampf for that matter) isn’t nihilistic at all. It is simply a strong symbolic way of expressing one’s disgust with these works or with their authors. Publicly burning a book or record is, per se, no more anti-music or the written word than shredding a letter is anti-letter.
Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — September 8, 2010 @ 5:37 am - September 8, 2010
ILoveCapitalism @ 18:
Now you’re doing much better. The problem, however, is that this group isn’t a government and has not intention of and no power to stop people from publishing and reading the Koran.
Seane-Anna hit the proverbial nail squarely on the head:
Indeed, while Seane-Anna is completely correct, she is actually understating the problem. The real situation is much worse — as suggested by Rhymes with Right:
The United States is the most powerful country on Earth, yet many Americans are terrified of the world’s Muslims. Said Muslims, however, apparently have little or no fear of the US in spite of its power. Those who fret over how Muslims will react to one Koran burning are displaying the sort of cowardice that is the Islamcists only chance of winning.
Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — September 8, 2010 @ 5:52 am - September 8, 2010
The two cannot be compared. As has been said, one is a permanent structure, while the other is a temporary rebuking. Neither is the right thing to do, but to compare the two as similar, beyond provocation, is completely wrong.
If burning the Quran would actually bring the rise of nations against us and put our troops in harms way, there is no comparison at all in the response of each act. The response to the burning is so severe that we are actually now endangered in our own country by other nations when we exert our Constitutional rights. The Mosque, which is much more provocative than the Quran burning, would never elicit such a response because Americans, even in disagreement, will not be brought to murder over this act of arrogance and insensitivity. Therefore there is no rational comparison beyond the idea of provocation.
Comment by Holly — September 8, 2010 @ 5:54 am - September 8, 2010
Classical Liberal Dave,
I agree with you.
America and Americans are a compassionate and tolerant people, but lately we give way to powers that do not deserve our compassion or tolerance. We are emasculating ourselves and becoming a feminine creature and in Islam a feminine posture is to be ridiculed and beaten. All Islam has to do is exist, because in its presence we beat ourselves.
Comment by Holly — September 8, 2010 @ 5:59 am - September 8, 2010
How much longer are we gonna keep handing victory to the Islamo-fascists?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — September 8, 2010 @ 6:18 am - September 8, 2010
Totakikay,
A couple years ago, there was a convention in FL of moderate muslims attempting to do just that. The only (American) press they got was Glenn Beck, and that was because of his outreach to moderates like the hot (and, of course, gay) Irshad Manji.
‘Moderate Muslims’ like CAIR (feh) condemned her and it.
CLD, Yes it’s the same ‘rights’ vs. ‘taste’ argument with the Touchdown Mosque. I don’t like the burning part (we’re better than that) but I agree that they should be allowed to do it. That the government is condemning an act of free speech I find worrisome.
As to the ‘reactions of others’ Well that’s why we have nukes and firecracker rounds (and a shuttle capable of delivering a 5 ton nickle/iron slug to orbit, to drop as needed).
And with reports like these I’m all for using them.
Comment by The_Livewire — September 8, 2010 @ 6:54 am - September 8, 2010
[...] the fact that the Dove World Outreach Center in Florida is planning a ‘Burn the Koran Day’ for 11 September is a sad indictment. Maybe the American way doesn’t teach about other [...]
Pingback by Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Righteous Crusade « Stephen's Liberal Journal — September 8, 2010 @ 7:46 am - September 8, 2010
Burning the Koran appeals to many people as an act of defiance. The Islamo-fanatics hold the keys to what they will accept and what they will fatwah with death sentences and unleashed crazies in the Allah akbar revenge tradition.
The Florida guy is asking to be brutally murdered and have his church torched. (Of course, no profiling will take place in the ensuing investigation.)
Why the Florida guy has decided to confront the Islamo-fanatics with a “bring it on” challenge is not clear. But he is little different from Salman Rushdie and his Satanic Verses learning experience.
How much protesting of the Koran burning is really just fear of the probable Islamo-fanatic brutal outcome resulting from the act? If the Florida guy is willing to martyr himself, is that not his First Amendment right as well?
Comment by heliotrope — September 8, 2010 @ 7:47 am - September 8, 2010
Why the Florida guy has decided to confront the Islamo-fanatics with a “bring it on” challenge is not clear.
The Dove World Outreach Center is a very small . . . small community and it is likely that this man’s actions are an attempt at bringing in some more folk into his ‘fold’ along with their pocket books.
Comment by rusty — September 8, 2010 @ 8:19 am - September 8, 2010
I can see perfectly well why the pastor might be doing it. Aside from rusty’s assertion that he’ll profit from this somehow, maybe it is just a single small group giving a big ‘F*ck you’ to an enemy of The United States and our way of life.
For what has now been decades, Lady Liberty has been told to look with compassion, understanding, equality and ‘protected rights’ as Islam (and I mean both the active extremists and the silent supposed moderates) poke a stick in her other eye….repeatedly.
Yes, our military is here and there, doing a great job, blah, blah, blah. But back home, we have to ‘sit down and behave’ while victory mosques are being seriously considered, lawsuits allowing burkas in ID photos, complaints regarding prayer areas in public airports and the like are clogging our justice system and numbing our minds; WHILE Christian actions and expressions are being constantly and continuously devalued, attacked and curtailed. WTF?
Comment by rodney — September 8, 2010 @ 8:54 am - September 8, 2010
I side with Totakikay. We have the ability to blow up whoever messes with us anyway. So why do we need this street fight? At least if you engage the other side reasonably, you have justice on your side as you bomb their hideout to smithereens.
Comment by Coco Rico — September 8, 2010 @ 10:12 am - September 8, 2010
I just don’t see how this hatefullness helps.
I can’t stand when nutts burn the American flag, I’m not sure I’ve seen anyone burn a Bible.
But this burning of the Koran, how’s does it help anything.
It’s all hateful. Can we act like civilized humans?
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 8, 2010 @ 10:17 am - September 8, 2010
Why, it would almost be like a gay artist sticking a crucifix in a bottle of urine.
Comment by Ashpenaz — September 8, 2010 @ 10:17 am - September 8, 2010
Yes, CLDave. That is a no-brainer. It’s called “the marketplace of ideas”… something we classical liberals believe in
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 8, 2010 @ 10:17 am - September 8, 2010
If you didn’t choose to understand my point, a point is soon reached where I no longer need defend it.
I never suggested they did. Only that book-burning, because it is an intrinsically destructive action as well as one associated with tyrants, is a markedly silly (and possibly indecent) way to participate in the marketplace of ideas. Right Wing Extreme (see comment #20) has the better idea: try to promote your idea or book, not burn copies of the other guy’s.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 8, 2010 @ 10:28 am - September 8, 2010
Finally, just to reiterate the following in case it gets lost: Yes, the FKBBQ people have the right to burn the Koran. Being foolish and indecent is their prerogative. I hope the Obama administration won’t try to shut them down (beyond what’s already been done – General Petraeus *asking* them to refrain) because that pressure, coming from the government, would be wrong.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 8, 2010 @ 10:38 am - September 8, 2010
“Why, it would almost be like a gay artist sticking a crucifix in a bottle of urine.”
Ash, how did Christians respond to Andres Serrano’s Christophobic act? By rampaging and rioting in the streets? No. They responded by peacefully protesting and asking the governmental agency which funded Serrano’s anti-Christian “art” to defund it. For that they were condemned as evil censors out to destroy freedom of speech. Ash, do you think the Muslims who’ll riot, rampage, and even murder over the Koran burning will be condemned by the liberal types who condemned the anti-Serrano Christians? We all know the answer to that question. Cowardice and climate of repression indeed!
Comment by Seane-Anna — September 8, 2010 @ 10:48 am - September 8, 2010
While I oppose a mosque being built near the WTC site, and oppose the burning of the Koran, I see these two acts differently. Among the differences are a one-time act by the pastor, as opposed to a more permanent structure.
American Elephant, I see the act of burning any book different than the act of constructing a cartoon. I abhor burning any book, while I don’t have any problem with persons drawing and publishing cartoons, even if the cartoon depicts a founder of a religion. However, I accept the right of persons to engage in book burning, as long as local ordinances of burning objects are not violated. My opinion may be the ranting of a lunatic liberal, but Bruce and other conservatives on this site also see the difference between burning the Koran and drawing cartoons of Mohammed.
The bigger issue here is, at what point do we hamstring ourselves to do something that is legal, and not offensive to ourselves, but my be offensive to others, and further, something that may induce violence by irrational thugs? I oppose the burning of the Koran, because I oppose burning of books. The fact that I and others may be offended is secondary, because my being offended shouldn’t stop anyone else’s right to free speech. And I understand that people do find depiction’s of Mohammed offensive. Fine, then don’t draw Mohammed and accept that others have the right to do things that are perfectly legal and not offensive to them.
And what if our opposition to the mosque is offensive to Muslims? What if our protests incite violence? Should Gen. Patraeus suggest that we just shut up about our opposition to the mosque?
I am troubled that actions such as Koran burning or drawing depictions of Mohammed may incite violence and possibly undermine our troops. If that’s really the case, then as another poster in this thread, or another (I forgot who) suggested, then perhaps we should get the hell out. Can we really defend people who don’t believe that we are entitled to basic rights?
Comment by Pat — September 8, 2010 @ 11:22 am - September 8, 2010
I’m gonna burn a stack of Bibles to show my hatred of organized religion. Then I will burn a stack of Glenn Beck books to show my hatred of racist morons.
Comment by steve — September 8, 2010 @ 11:27 am - September 8, 2010
These Islamo-fanatics are typical nativists. We dare not “mock” their religion in any form because they will deliver the punishment for blasphemy. Of course, there is no handy list of 10 or so commandments. They just pull out an endless number of addenda, one fatwah at a time. And if there is no convenient fatwah at hand, they merely get a compliant Imam to issue one.
I do not truck in the “eye for an eye” business, but Islamo-fanatics have got it down to the “infidel life for a mild insult against Islam” level.
We are rapidly catching up with Paris, Amsterdam, Bonn, London, Stockholm and other places where the Islamo-fanatics set the rules for their riots and car burnings, and fundamentalist street fairs and sharia-fests. Soon they will be doing stoning, if they haven’t already carried them out.
Either we figure out how to confront “freedom of religion” in its socially harmful contexts, or we simply allow our republic to fall to theocracy. Too many weenies went along with “better Red than dead” in the past and now the same virus is infecting weenies with the disease of placing “principle” over practical survival.
Given enough tension, the Florida guy could be akin to the anarchist who shot the Archduke Ferdinand and set off a global war. Who wants that?
But, if our troops are going to pay a greater price because an isolated nutcase in the hinterlands can rile up the Islamo-fanatics in the sub-third world, we have a far greater problem than we will admit. Afghanistan can not be tamed and civilized. We bombed the poop out of granite and got lots and lots of our good men and women killed. The kleptocracy that remains is sucking up development money through an aorta leading straight to our treasury. No person living will see the day when Afghanistan reaches the level of Sri Lanka or similar basket cases. Their tribal elders will confederate in a system of mutual bribery with the controlling theocratic dictatorship in a permanent feudal truce.
I am not sure what “principle” is being defended in either the ground zero mosque case or in the Florida nut job Bible burning. In the most simple of terms, if the Imam can get the financing for the mosque and he is determined to go ahead with it, I say let him. If the nut job owns a Koran he wants to burn or pee on or whatever, I say let him.
But, make no mistake, both the Iman and the preacher are without principle in each case. And the ACLU and all the rest are just flying monkeys and harpies in all of this. Bloomberg and Obama, in particular, have acted without principle. If they were going to preach on the topic at hand, they failed to deliver.
Because you can show a “clear” right, it does not mean you are absolved of being responsible and acting responsibly. That is the principle that has gone AWOL in all of this.
Comment by heliotrope — September 8, 2010 @ 11:31 am - September 8, 2010
If anything, this will serve the purpose of showing just how violent and barbaric the Muslim world is. A Koran gets burned and they’ll go berzerk, just as they do when you draw a picture of murderous Muhammed. It will show who the violent extremists really are.
Comment by Az Mo — September 8, 2010 @ 11:32 am - September 8, 2010
Totakikay, I’m not sure what you mean by reforming the Koran. It is what it is. What was written 1400 years ago is the Koran. I don’t see how reforming the Koran changes anything. If it is “reformed,” that is not going to render the original Koran obselete, or change what was written in the original Koran.
I think a more useful tact is to have people understand that the Koran was written in the 600s or so. Today, it’s 2010. What might have been okay and acceptable behavior then is not acceptable today.
Comment by Pat — September 8, 2010 @ 11:33 am - September 8, 2010
I read this suggestion in the New York Daily News: just bury a pig at the site of the proposed GZ mosque. It will never be built.
Comment by Jim Michaud — September 8, 2010 @ 11:57 am - September 8, 2010
I’m gonna burn a stack of Bibles to show my hatred of organized religion.
Better yet, steve, why not burn a stack of Korans and a Torah or two?
After all, those are both “organized religions”, aren’t they?
So answer the question, bigot steve; why do you oppose burning Korans, but then scream about how you hate “organized religion”?
Answer: You’re an anti-Christian bigot and a hypocrite.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — September 8, 2010 @ 12:38 pm - September 8, 2010
NDT,
steve knows the worst Christians will do is pray for him.
Comment by The_Livewire — September 8, 2010 @ 12:50 pm - September 8, 2010
Oh, c’mon… even if the nursing staff actually let steve play with matches… does anyone believe he would actually undertake to physically assemble Bibles and Glenn Beck books to burn? I mean, that’s perilously close to work.
He might whine about starting a government book burning program… maybe as part of a Stimulus-funded Green Energy project… but it’s unrealistic to think he would actually do anything.
Besides, to the progressive, claiming in a comments thread that you would do something is the same as actually doing it. So, in his mind, the deed is done.
Comment by V the K — September 8, 2010 @ 1:26 pm - September 8, 2010
Just FYI, do you guys know what the Government of Saudi Arabia does to people caught with Bibles in their country? The Bibles are shredded, and the possessor of the Bible is given lashes.
Steve and Saudis have much to discuss. And Obama bowed to those people, don’t forget.
Comment by V the K — September 8, 2010 @ 1:37 pm - September 8, 2010
Is it true that this pastor is allied with the Westboro Baptist Church?
I started off believing that pastor Jones was only making a political statement, but i’m not so sure now. Is he an otherwise reasonable person, or is he just another nut-case?
I do find it interesting that the whole of the United States is judged by it’s ‘worst example’, while other countries are judged by their ‘best intention’.
.
Comment by gastorgrab — September 8, 2010 @ 2:39 pm - September 8, 2010
Intellectually I agree with Bruce; but, viscerally I say they should go ahead with the burning the Koran. I can´t forget that radical muslims occupied the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem. For forty days, they cooked their meals on the the various altars. They tore pages out of the Bible and missals which they used as toilet paper. I can´t remember hearing or reading an apology from an imam or an ayatollah, particularly those that have been labeled moderates, to the christian community for the desecration of one our holy sites. An apology for that act would be a lot more meaningful to me than building a 13 story nuslim cultural center/mosque close to Ground Zero. I would believe in the sincerity of the mosque supporters if they would lobby the City of New York to allow St. Nicholas´ Greek Orthodox Cathedral rebuild on its original site, for which they have been denied.
Comment by Roberto — September 8, 2010 @ 3:38 pm - September 8, 2010
I say, ‘Burn, baby, burn!’. I probably would not feel this way had the censoring of those South Park episodes not happened. But, Comedy Central bowed to the Muzzies, and the Muzzies counted it as a win. Add on the Trophy Mosque, and the Administration’s absolute lack of courage to name radical Islam what it is, and I am all out of fuzzy, warm feelings for the Religion of Peace ™.
Comment by Brendan in Philly — September 8, 2010 @ 4:07 pm - September 8, 2010
That sounds so cute.
@65: Its sad when I remember about what happened to the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem, Israel. I love Israel, both spiritually and emotionally. Israel is the Holy Land of the Jewish and Christian people but radical Islamists have almost stolen it.
Comment by Totakikay — September 8, 2010 @ 4:54 pm - September 8, 2010
Bruce: I agree with your main point that both are within the protected rights of their proponents, who are also a-holes who for doing both. Emotionally though I find myself in agreement with Roberto (#65) too.
Coco Rico: I believe the Museum of the Confederacy was built in a black neighborhood of Richmond and stood there for many years before closing.
Incorrect. The Museum of the Confederacy was opened in 1896 in the former Confederate “White House” (i.e. presidential mansion Jeffferson Davis used). The museum grew and expanded into a new building right next door, which is what is known as the MoC today. It’s an interesting musuem, as well as the Confederate “White House”, if you’re a history buff. Beyond that I personally don’t pay it much mind.
Helio: Is there some sort of proper etiquette for trashing Koran trash or do they just recycle it like just so much aborted fetal tissue?
From what I understand usually they are burned or buried. If memory serves I believe ancient Jews used to do the same thing – thank goodness too considering how helpful this old practice has been for modern archaeologists and biblical studies. I presume that in this case it’s not the actual burning of a Qur’an that’s a problem for Muslim critics but the reason why.
EssEm: Totakikay is an idiot. Reform the Quran? Do you know the slightest thing about the religion of the Muslim people you love so much? Good Lord.
Perhaps Totakikay is practicing his/her faith by being what St. Francis called a “fool for Christ”. Regardless, he/she wouldn’t be the first to note that Islam could use a Martin Luther or even a pope.
Comment by John — September 8, 2010 @ 4:58 pm - September 8, 2010
Do issues have only relative value?
Without the ground zero mosque, most people would be outraged at any scheduled book-burning. Why should the context matter?
As much as we’d like to tie these two events together, we have an obligation to judge each act on it’s own merit. It’s true that we cant do anything to stop Pastor Jones, but it’s also true that he cannot stop any protest of his actions.
Before the New Black Panther Party takes notice, FREE people should protest Terry Jones. They should do so before Al Sharpton and ‘Workers World Party’ get a chance to.
Don’t let the race-baiters take the lead on this!
Whatever the result, the supporters of the WTC mosque will be on the hot seat. It will place them on the same level with Terry Jones supporters.
.
Comment by gastorgrab — September 8, 2010 @ 4:59 pm - September 8, 2010
@58: My explanation below will clarify about what I mean on “reforming” Islam.
Pamela Geller* is quoted on a May 2010 WorldNetDaily article stating this:
Geller’s suggestion is what I have been similarly suggesting in the comments I have typed (above). This is what I mean – expunging the Quran of its violent Jihadi texts – will be a form of “reformation” to me.
*Pamela Geller is a blogger of Atlas Shrugs; Geller has appeared on many news reports talking about the Ground Zero mosque controversy; She is the author of the recently released book titled “The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America.” In addition, I used to be a devout Christian but I now consider myself a Deist.
Comment by Totakikay — September 8, 2010 @ 7:20 pm - September 8, 2010
@71: The last line in my comment was supposed to say, “Pamela Geller is Jewish, not a Muslim. In addition, I used to be a devout Christian but I now consider myself a Deist.”
Pat, your comment @58 is what I also think. The Islamic terrorists are following a totalitarian ideology from the 7th century. That’s the reason why I urge the Muslim community* to start taking charge and be a beacon of hope for the rest of the world.
*When I say the phrase “Muslim community” I am specifically talking about the Muslim moderates and all Muslims of conscience. It can not include the violent Islamic supremacists, let me make that clear.
Comment by Totakikay — September 8, 2010 @ 7:38 pm - September 8, 2010
I’d love to hear Rauf’s opinion.
Or his wife, Daisy’s opinion.
Yes, they are parallel situations: Constitutionally protected AND unwise.
Funny how Obama thought it above his pay grade to touch on the ”wisdom” of building the GZ mosque but sends out as many lap dogs as he can against the WISDOM of the koran burning.
Comment by Nan G — September 8, 2010 @ 8:23 pm - September 8, 2010
Bruce, you asked: How is a Florida church burning the Koran on 9/11 any different than an Islamist-inspired mosque being built in the Ground Zero debris zone?
One other thing occurs to me: intent.
Remember Daisy and Rauf saying their GZ mosque was supposed to ”build bridges?”
Do you think he means the same thing you think of when you think of ”building bridges?”
Islam deals with this in the old 1964 classic Muslim text, Milestones by Sayyid Qutb.
He deals with building bridges so all Muslims can understand the concept.
Here’s what he says on page 263:
The chasm between Islam and Jahiliyyah* is great, and a bridge is not to be built across it so that the people on the two sides may mix with each other, but only so that the people of Jahiliyyah may come over to Islam.
*Jahiliyyah = non-Muslim cultures, religions, societies, et al.
Now, in contrast, I think the Christian group is being honest about their expectations if they burn korans on 9-11.
They are NOT using pretense.
Rauf is.
Comment by Nan G — September 8, 2010 @ 8:37 pm - September 8, 2010
Heard an interesting suggestion today. The pastor should offer to cancel the FKBBQ if Iran agrees to cancel the stoning of that woman accused of adultery.
Love to see how that played out.
Comment by V the K — September 8, 2010 @ 8:42 pm - September 8, 2010
For those commenters here who accuse the Koran burners of acting like Nazis consider this: I just saw on Yahoo! News that Hillary Clinton has called on the news media to be “patriotic” and not cover the Florida church’s Koran burning event. I think a government official offering “suggestions” to the media about what stories to cover is for more tyranny-in-the-making than book burning by a small church that has NO political power.
Comment by Seane-Anna — September 8, 2010 @ 8:56 pm - September 8, 2010
Great comment Nan G! I’d forgotten about Sayyid Qutb. The quote you posted here should serve as a cold dose of reality to all those people who persist in believing that Islamists can be reasonable. It SHOULD serve as a cold dose of reality but it probably won’t.
Comment by Seane-Anna — September 8, 2010 @ 9:01 pm - September 8, 2010
Why don’t we burn down the Stonewall bar?
Comment by Ashpenaz — September 8, 2010 @ 10:06 pm - September 8, 2010
“Why don’t we burn down the Stonewall bar?”
Not quite sure what point you’re trying to make Ash, but let me explain why burning down the Stonewall bar or any other building is different from burning the Koran.
You see, Ash, ARSON IS ILLEGAL, and for good reason. It’s not a form of free speech because when you burn down a building you run serious risk of INJURING or KILLING people. You don’t have that risk with book burning, flag burning, or any other burning of small objects. Such acts may be provocative, hateful, or just plain stupid but they’re not dangerous to property nor, most importantly, to people. So that’s why burning down the Stonewall bar shouldn’t happen; not because the act would be offensive to the gays, but because the act would be a CRIME.
But may be you subscribe to the view of Bill Ayers, Obama’s terrorist friend, who said blowing up building’s isn’t terrorism so long as you don’t kill anyone. So as long as burning down the Stonewall bar didn’t kill anybody I guess it would be legal in your world, huh Ash?
Comment by Seane-Anna — September 8, 2010 @ 11:01 pm - September 8, 2010
Because gays have never, ever committed violent crimes in order to make a point. . .
Comment by Ashpenaz — September 8, 2010 @ 11:34 pm - September 8, 2010
“Because gays have never, ever committed violent crimes in order to make a point. . .”
Really? What about the Stonewall Inn riot gays are so proud of? You know, the one where gays attacked the police and tried to burn the bar down with people inside. That wasn’t violent? That wasn’t a crime? That wasn’t an attempt to make a point?
Comment by Seane-Anna — September 9, 2010 @ 12:29 am - September 9, 2010
Seane-Anna, I think Ashpenaz was being sarcastic. He is as negative about Stonewall as you are. Of course, the original crime that happened at Stonewall was two men dancing with each other. Can you believe that was a crime?
Comment by Pat — September 9, 2010 @ 7:23 am - September 9, 2010
There was a time when two men dancing with each other was as provocative as burning a Quran and having a gay bar anywhere was met with as much resistance as a mosque near Ground Zero.
Comment by Ashpenaz — September 9, 2010 @ 9:36 am - September 9, 2010
Ash, a key word in your comment: WAS. Times have thankfully changed, and the Seane-Anna style of thinking dwindles in this country with each passing year.
Comment by Jim Michaud — September 9, 2010 @ 9:58 am - September 9, 2010
There was a time when two men dancing with each other was as provocative as burning a Quran and having a gay bar anywhere was met with as much resistance as a mosque near Ground Zero.
Ashpenaz, I agree. But this is not the position you have stated before. In fact, you have said that gay persons in the past were not oppressed.
Since you mention gay bar and mosque in the same sentence, one way to see if the Muslims in the community are really interested in diversity is to allow to have a gay bar in the immediate vicinity of the mosque. I know that wasn’t your point, but wanted to throw that in.
Times have thankfully changed, and the Seane-Anna style of thinking dwindles in this country with each passing year.
Jim, thank God for that.
Comment by Pat — September 9, 2010 @ 11:21 am - September 9, 2010
I am against this abhorrent idea of burning Qurans. To explain what I mean in full, I am satirizing the gay left. From the victimhood perspective of the gay left, two men dancing and gay bars have always been provocative. Sticking a crucifix in urine or stoning a Mormon church are simply acts of gentle protest.
Do you want to learn about what it REALLY feels like to be a victim? Wear a hijab–you don’t see many drag queens doing that. Leave your desk at work, pull out a mat, face east, and pray. That will get people to stop talking about the picture of you and that special someone on your desk. Try to explain to someone that Americans have killed more innocent Afghans than were killed on 9/11. That will lead to a bashing faster than Scissor Sisters blaring from your IPod.
My point, straightforwardly put, is that Muslims have it much worse in this country than gays. If we really want to stand up for an oppressed community, we need to stand up for Muslims at a time when they are being accused of things which they did not do–any more than ACT-UP speaks for the gay community. Iranian Muslims under Sharia law are not the same as American Muslims in a democracy. We can’t blame the evils from the fringes of a community on the whole community–or haven’t we learned that level of tolerance from our “years of oppression?” Since we have no sympathy WHATSOEVER for any other oppressed group, I suspect that maybe we weren’t that oppressed to begin with. Because, if we were, we wouldn’t want it to happen to other people.
Comment by Ashpenaz — September 9, 2010 @ 11:37 am - September 9, 2010
Ash, wasn’t Stonewall a mob front business?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — September 9, 2010 @ 12:31 pm - September 9, 2010
Ash is deluding himself if he thinks that muslims in America don´t want Sharia law implemented. Has he taken a poll of American muslims to substantiate his claim? I doubt that American muslims are no different than those in Great Britain, where they have been pushing for, and at times practicing, within their communities. It was enough for the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, as an ex-oficio member of the House of Lords, to suggest that certain parts of of Sharia could be practiced in Great Britain. It appears to be an attempt to pacify an agitating group of people.
Comment by Roberto — September 9, 2010 @ 1:08 pm - September 9, 2010
As if gays don’t want “special” laws for their “special” relationships.
Comment by Ashpenaz — September 9, 2010 @ 2:37 pm - September 9, 2010
I believe in individual rights of American citizens, not “special rights” for Gay Americans and Muslim Americans, or any other “special class” of people in America.
@89: Speaking of civil rights laws; I recently read about hate crimes against Muslims due to the controversy of the Ground Zero mosque. Hate crimes against Jews and gays are on a steady rise but I highly doubt hate crimes are a major concern for Muslims. That news report about a hate crime against a Muslim in New York recently was actually committed by a Left-wing extremist who is affiliated with the Ground Zero mosque planners.
We need to REPEAL hate crimes/hate speech laws from the books. Those civil rights laws can be exploited by Islamic supremacists and Leftists against unsuspecting, innocent Americans to advance their own personal-political agendas.
Comment by Totakikay — September 9, 2010 @ 3:39 pm - September 9, 2010
Take that silly statement back.
There are bunches of Muslims who, like grounded gays, just go about their daily lives and no one pays a bit of attention to them as Muslims or gays.
You have no stats to back up this silly notion of who has the greater claim to being victimized.
In fact, Ashpenaz, you are essentially clueless about Islam. In the hustle and bustle of Cairo, the call to prayer winds up being a smattering of people paying heed while the rest just ignore the bobbing. The women are largely no differently dressed than Western women, but a few go all the way to black tents with eye grills. You imply that Muslims have some sort of SOP for dress codes and Mecca bobbing.
My experience among Muslims extends to much time spent in Eqypt, Indonesia, Turkey, Morocco, Tunisia, Jordan and Iran in the time of the Shah. Now if you want to see an aggregation of edgy Muslims, go to London or Paris or Malmo or Dearborn or Stockton or Bonn or Amsterdam or southernmost Thailand or spots on Java.
This whole Taliban copy-cat crap is recent, hybrid and intentionally confrontational. You must have seen the flood devastation in Pakistan. Did you notice there was a total absence of Muslim identity markers among the people filmed? You know why? They don’t live and breathe the high octane Imam hate vapors.
Comment by heliotrope — September 9, 2010 @ 5:10 pm - September 9, 2010
ILoveCapitalism,
I’m afraid you’re just being stupid. Really.
I did understand your point. You stated it quite clearly. And I clearly stated my rebuttal:
If anyone is being obtuse here, it is you, ILC, not I. If you do not want to defend your view of book burning as intrinsically nihilistic against my objection, I can’t make you. However, you have no business accusing me of refusing to understand you.
Wow. So real classical liberals (unlike phony ones like myself) would consider publishing a call for the murder of all homosexuals a more noble act than the public burning of such a tract? Go figure.
Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — September 9, 2010 @ 5:47 pm - September 9, 2010
And then the event is cancelled. Jones and Imam Musri are going to try to get the GZVM moved.
http://www.baynews9.com/article/news/2010/september/148630/Gainesville-pastor-cancels-Quran-burning
Comment by ThatGayConservative — September 9, 2010 @ 6:23 pm - September 9, 2010
Now that Terry Jones has called off the event, the Westboro Baptist Church is threatening to continue the burn.
I call on everyone and his brother to converge on the Westboro Baptist Church! Let’s protest them for a change! Let’s make their lives hell!
GOD HATES THE WESTBORO BAPTIST CHURCH!
.
Comment by gastorgrab — September 9, 2010 @ 6:39 pm - September 9, 2010
Slightly off topic, but Pat and Jim since you two are so committed to diversity I hope you’re fighting for the legalization of polygamy, incest, bestiality, and pedophilia/pederasty right along with gay marriage. I mean, where does diversity end for you and the other devotees of that rather noxious religion? If the removal of stigma from the aberrant sex group called homosexuals is vital for our civilization to advance, then won’t we advance even more by destigmatizing all of the other aberrant sex groups as well?
Why don’t you demand that plural wives be brought into the schools to inform children that families with one dad and two moms are wonderful examples of diversity? And then why don’t you have a NAMBLA member come and explain to the kids how beneficial a sexual relationship with an adult can be, provided it’s “loving” of course. Just more diversity. And no, I’m not being facetious. Where does diversity end? And who gets to decided when, where, or if to draw the line?
Why is it absolutely vital to society to normalize and celebrate homosexuality but it’s ok to continue to stigmatize all other aberrant sexualities? Why is opposing gay marriage hate but opposing plural marriage isn’t? If it’s inherently bigoted to object to someone’s sexual desires/behaviors, then how can gays object to polygamy or incest or bestiality, etc., without becoming bigots themselves? Again I ask, where does diversity end and who gets to decide where, when, or if to draw the line?
I’m waiting for your answers Pat and Jim, although I suspect they’ll be mostly sarcastic heat and no thoughtful light.
Comment by Seane-Anna — September 9, 2010 @ 9:44 pm - September 9, 2010
I’m waiting for your answers Pat and Jim, although I suspect they’ll be mostly sarcastic heat and no thoughtful light.
Like virtually all of your posts?
It’s very simple Seane-Anna. I thought long and hard about homosexuality, whether it’s abherrant or not. You apparently decided (or more likely, let some religion decide for you) that it is. I decided otherwise. In fact, I believe that homosexuality is as legitimate as heterosexuality. No, I am under no illusions that homosexuals can procreate, just as I am under no illusions that infertile persons and/or postmenopausal women can procreate. Yet, we celebrate and support those of the former who choose to date and marry. (At least I do, maybe you don’t). The human race is much more about popping out children.
Where I agree with you, is that I oppose the other behaviors that you mention. So I have no interest in trying to normalize those behaviors. Is it convenient? Maybe so. But if, for example, I had any attraction to children, I would refrain from acting on it, not only because it is against the law, but because it is wrong. I assume that you would do the same. But what about you? Isn’t it convenient for you? Apparently you are straight, so you can have any of your relationships normalized. Oh, God is on your side, so that’s okay, right? Me too. God is on my side.
But I’ll go one step further. Even though you exhibit abherrent and abnormal behaviors, I support the right of an adult male to date and marry you. Sorry you can’t do the same for me, but that’s okay. As Jim suggested, your way of thinking is becoming more outdated. People are more able to think for themselves, instead of relying solely on what people thought 2000 or so years ago. But don’t feel too bad. Your thinking is similar to right wing Islamists. I suppose they aren’t going to change their mind and/or think for themselves either.
I am curious though. Why do you come here to comment? No, I have no interest in banning you, even if I had the power to. What is it that you get from coming here? Are you trying to save us gay people, particularly the ones who are conservatives, to right themselves, and abandon their homosexuality?
Comment by Pat — September 10, 2010 @ 7:31 am - September 10, 2010
So if Islamists go berzerk because some Christians burn a pile of their holy books, it’s okay for conservatives to have a big fit because some Muslims want to build a mosque that’s vaguely close to Ground Zero?
That’s pathetic. If it matters to you that there is a mosque near Ground Zero, if that idea alone is going to cause you some kind of mental anguish, than you’re a pathetic moron of a human being – just like someone who gets all pissed off because someone wants to burn their favorite book.
The lesson here is that religion is incredibly stupid, and that it only seems to be getting more so as humankind increasingly figures out how needless it’s been. Here you are excusing the behaviors and opinions of the conservative movement by pointing to the behaviors and opinions of radical Muslims – do you realize that?
Comment by Levi — September 10, 2010 @ 9:41 am - September 10, 2010