Shariah law forbids criticism of Islam. And here we are.Read the rest here.
We are witnessing an Islamized America. This is well beyond political correctness. We are enforcing Shariah law. We will not insult Islam -- that is Shariah law. We self-censor -- that is Shariah law. We disrespect ourselves and our nation so that we might respect Islam. This is dhimmitude ...
10 comments:
Let me know when Geller is arrested for violating sharia law by criticizing Islam.
It's happening in Europe and Canada now. What makes you think it can't happen here?
The 1st Amendment
Somehow, so-called "campaign finance reform" slipped past the Supreme Court.
All it takes is for five justices on that court to say that "hate speech" is not protected speech. From there on, it's just a race to define what constitutes hate speech.
Who doubts that a political party (pick one) would then proceed to depict opposition to their agenda as hate speech?
They used to have freedom of speech in Canada and Europe, too. Now they don't. If Muslims find your speech offensive, you're under arrest or handed a summons. Read up on the recent shenanigans played against Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant in Canada by Canada's so-called Human Rights Commission.
Lee,
That is what the ACLU is for-they've done a pretty good job over the decades of protecting American's civil rights from government heavy-handedness. This looks like typical right-wing hysteria targeting some group we are supposed to be afraid of. Muslims are a tiny minority in this country, so I guess that makes them good targets, even though that makes the notion that they could somehow impose Sharia law on the rest of us laughable to rational people.
> That is what the ACLU is for-they've done a pretty good job over the decades of protecting American's civil rights from government heavy-handedness.
They've done an even better job of protecting left-wing political interests. Like most liberals, they're idea of defending someone's rights depends greatly on the specifics of the case.
> This looks like typical right-wing hysteria targeting some group we are supposed to be afraid of.
If you're not afraid of radical Islam yet, you're not paying attention. You shouldn't need hysterical old me to inform you of this danger.
> Muslims are a tiny minority in this country, so I guess that makes them good targets, even though that makes the notion that they could somehow impose Sharia law on the rest of us laughable to rational people.
Do you mean the same rational people who are so petrified of Creationists and Intelligent Design people?
Or perhaps you mean the same rational people who, every time some nut blows up a building, use it as an excuse to attack conservative talk radio and clamor for the return of the "Fairness Doctrine"?
Or perhaps the same rational people who, every time some nut kills an abortion doctor, are standing there with a bucket of tar just waiting to paint all Christians with the same brush? Even though it's a lot easier to find fullthroated condemnation of such acts in the ranks of Christians?
If someone had said forty years ago that an Archbishop of Canterbury would advocate the establishment of Sharia law in England, the rational people would have laughed. Now, it's the Muslims who are laughing.
Dhmmitude starts with an attitude: "If someone offends my religious sensibiities, I'm going to kill you." Like it or not, this attitude, once it's pervasive, tends to affect what people say.
The artists who make art out of peeing on crucifies and smearing feces on likenesses of the Virgin Mary are touted as ground-breaking and brave by the rational people, and absolutely none of them are concerned with whether Christians find it offensive. But did you ever notice, nobody's getting any grants from the NEA to make art out of a urine-soaked Koran or smear dung on a statue of Mohammed?
I guess they're not really so brave after all. Nobody is worried about being killed by a crazed Presbyterian. And certainly, if it happened, nobody would apologize for the killer. And certainly, if it happened, the rational people would see it as an indictment of Christians.
If Muslims acquire the numbers here, there will be much more such dhimmitude. It's happening in Europe and Canada, the two bellwethers for liberal activism in America. It will happen here because liberals here think the same way here as there: the people cannot be trusted with the truth, or with the power to act on it. So we will lull them to sleep while we sacrifice their cultural heritage to the god of socialism.
Radical Islam is a threat, primarily in the Middle East. The notion that teh muzlimz are going to take over the US and turn it into an Islamic Republic is ludicrous on its face, just like all the previous xenophobic hysteria over the Irish and the Chinese and the Italians and the commies and the Japanese and the Mexicans. This country is renewed and energized by immigration, not destroyed. Its amazing how people on the Right thump their chests about how patriotic they are and how great America is, yet they have so little faith in the strength and greatness of America that they get hysterical about the "threat" presented by a few people different from them, as though America hasn't assimilated wave after wave of immigrants with the power of our ideals. Its nothing but an appeal to primitive tribalism.
> Radical Islam is a threat, primarily in the Middle East...
By all means, explain that to the Europeans, whose cities have been ravaged with violent protests and arson (remember those, er, "youths" in Paris and Athens?), and whose news media has been cowed into publishing nothing that might be construed as offensive to Muslims.
The World Trade Center was in New York. Do you doubt that if Atta had had a nuke they would have used it?
And Ft. Bragg is in Texas.
And you're living in a dream world.
> The notion that teh muzlimz are going to take over the US and turn it into an Islamic Republic is ludicrous on its face...
Ludicrous? Perhaps, today. Or next week. What about in forty years?
Richard Fernandez made an interesting point in a column a while back, but since 9/11. The difference between the Soviets and the radical Muslims is the Soviets had the means but not the desire to kill us, while the Muslims have the desire but lack the means. Today, that is. What happens if they acquire the ability to strike us at any time, and then to melt into the landscape, and we're left without a country to retaliate against and no visible target other than the generalized Islamic world itself?
What do we do after a number of U.S. cities have been turned into smoldering ruins, by suitcases from Allah bearing nuclear gifts?
Anything to keep the peace, right? There will be tremendous pressure to comply with whatever requests are made. There's your dhimmitude.
But it gets even better. Who do we try placating? There is no unity among Islamic terrorist groups. Let's say al Qaida is responsible for bombing Boston, so we try to appease al Qaida. But the Taliban is a different group, so they explode a bomb in a DC suburb. So we try to appease Taliban, and then Hezbollah sets one off in Atlanta.
At some point, we'll be confronted with a choice: nuke the entire Islamic world in hopes of getting the bad guys, or get into oblivion ourselves and sit still for it.
Tell me, oh rational person. What do we do?
The way it looks to me, Iran will have the bomb sooner or later, thanks very much to some very weak diplomacy by the West and its grovelling leader. When Iran gets it, they all get it. Hope you're not one of those liberals who doesn't like fireworks.
> ...just like all the previous xenophobic hysteria over the Irish and the Chinese and the Italians and the commies and the Japanese and the Mexicans.
Did any of those groups passionately hate the U.S. and refuse to assimilate? And if so, was there any chance they would use nukes?
> This country is renewed and energized by immigration, not destroyed.
You don't get it. Islam is different. Their theology tells them to become jihadists. They don't assimilate. Not to mention: they're crazy. E.g., more than half of them polled think 9/11 was a Mossad plot. And more than half of them also think it was a great victory for Islam. Like I said: crazy.
The choice is not going to be having a Christian nation vs. a worldly/socialist/agnostic nation. If the West loses this struggle, Islam wins. Say what you want about Jerry Falwell trying to force his religion on you, but Jerry never pulled a gun on an atheist, and none of his followers ever strapped on a bomb and hit the local bistro.
> Its amazing how people on the Right thump their chests about how patriotic they are...
What's amazing to me is that the people on the Left, who are supposed to be so sophisticated and nuanced in their thinking, believe that somehow our Republic exists magically and eternally invulnerable and that we can dispense with preserving or defending it. Everything we have today is simply taken for granted.
Show them a complicated piece of software and explain how easy changing one little line of code can break everything, and they'll nod in understanding. But our society is a lot more complex than a piece of code, yet liberals wander in and out of our laws and institutions, smacking everything in sight with a sledgehammer, and then expect -- no, demand -- that everything else continue to function as before.
> Its nothing but an appeal to primitive tribalism.
It's an appeal to reason, common sense, and decency. When the cities start going up in smoke, when our people are so "diverse" that they no longer feel any kinship to each other, when our military is too depleted from political correctness and lack of funding, and when our once-great economy finally collapses under the burden of too many liabilities -- well, at least if we were tribal, we might make an attempt to preserve our civilization, which liberals seem to desperately want dead.
Post a Comment