Tuesday, July 25, 2006

On the Western Standard Pile-On

Is it irony that these posts came out the same day nearly the same day?

Western Standard
I cannot abide by apologists calling Islam a religion of peace. Not when every new day brings fresh tales of violence. Not when the devil that they call Allah rewards murder with polygamous sex. Not when their undeserved supremacy is fought for in countries big and small around the globe.

...

Islam must be labelled for what it truly represents: wholesale slaughter and a corrupt ideology of sex and death. It must be stopped.
[H/T, Cerberus]

BloodThirstyLiberal
Chirstians [sic], ew.

Shame on me. And shame on anyone who is so superior, so sophisticated, to dismiss sincere and devout people on prejudice, on ugly and despicable bigotry.

So they believe in something; we should all be so lucky.
[H/T, Relapsed Catholic]

Two very different views from what seem to be similar thinking people, on how to handle viewing a particular religion. The latter I can support, whole-heartedly. The former, makes me very scared.

I bet you something, though. When I get the Inevitable Hate MailTM, I'll find out that ugly and despicable bigotry is to be tolerated provided it's against "them" and not "us". Who "them" is and who "us" are, depends on your point of view, of course.

Before you can comment though, with the unbridled rage I'm anticipating, you need to explain to me if the above two statements are compatible.

Tags: ,

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Pretty brave to imply islam isn't a faith of peace, look what happened to Theo van Gogh .

Muslims will kill anyone accusing islam of not being tolerant and Peaceful, submit or die.

Kathy said...

Well, you are assuming that Islam and Christianity are "equal" and I don't happen to think they are. As a Christian, I don't believe Islam to be true; it is a man made religion somewhat akin to Scientology, but more heavily armed.

So: a "recovering liberal" who used to hate Christians comes to realize they aren't so bad after all, because he sees them doing something he thinks is positive.

Contrast this with someone who used to be indifferent about Muslims, concluding after 5 years of news reports, that she doesn't like them, because she sees them doing things she feels are negative.

Yes, I do want my "side" to "win", actually. There was a time when that wouldn't have been considered gauche.

Cerberus said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Cerberus said...

Anonymous: If they will kill anyone who disagrees with them, how come you aren't dead? Millions upon millions of Muslims in Canada and the US and I'm not aware of any Canadian or American Muslim killing a single person actually.

As for the original question, the difference between the two is obvious.

- The group critizes and demeans a religion.

- One group criticizes and demeans a religion and demands that it be banned (some of the other comments asked for executions) before more are killed (see note above: how many Canadian or American Muslims have killed any Canadian or American in the last century?).

One thinks you are silly to have faith and practice a certain religion. The other thinks you shouldn't be allowed to practice a certain religion.

And thank you Kathy for reminding me why I am so proud of the historic arc in Western culture that has moved ever more secular, away from the religious conflicts that have killed millions upon millions over the centuries.

Ted
Cerberus

Kathy said...

Actually Ted, one says he used to think it was silly to have a religion but doesn't think so anymore.

Can you please point out the "millions and millions" killed by religions in the past. As a matter of fact, millions and millions HAVE been killed, by your beloved progressive secularists: from the French Revolution to Communist China.

Thanks for reminding me why I'm so glad I'm no longer a liberal atheist! As a wise man once observed, a liberal is a man who won't take his own side in an argument, and that's a great description of people like you.

Cerberus said...

Are you kidding me, Kathy? From natives in North and South America (millions and millions right there alone), to Jewish pograms throughout European history, to KKK lynchings, to the Oklahoma bombing, to the British civil war, to the Holocaust (Hitler may have been an atheist and there may have been no state religion and many many German and Italian Christians may have done what they could to stop it, but Italians and Germans were born and raised and remained Christian), to the Inquisition, to Ireland and Northern Ireland, to the ... to the... to the...

I'm not saying non-Christians have been clean. I'm saying our society has moved away from a society based upon religion to a society based upon state laws and human rights because of sectarian religious conflict. Indeed, US society was founded on that, despite what the religicons and Republicans say.

The same secularization would be good for strict fundamentalist Muslims in fact. How's that for a non-PC comment!?!

Ted
Cerberus

Kathy said...

Ted, can you back up your "millions & millions" assertion with stats from sources that don't use the words "smallpox blankets" and/or "Howard Zinn".

You may want to read this first:
http://www.conservativeforum.org/EssaysForm.asp?ID=6082

You don't really feel sorry for the Aztecs, do you?
http://www.newcriterion.com/archive/20/sept01/keith.htm

Did you know Timothy McVeigh's pastor kicked him out of his church for being a violent nutcase?

The KKK aren't Christians. They don't believe Jesus was a Jew and hold other heresies too numerous to mention. Just because they and Phelps et al call themselves Christians doesn't mean they are. I can just as easily call myself an eggplant, or a gay couple can call themselves "married" but neither is true or can be true.

Membership in the Church requires assent to certain dogma and they are quite open in their flouting of doctrine.