Bruce Bawer's latest letter from Europe, First They Came for the Gays, is another powerful reminder on why the clash of civilizations matters to us, and on the dangers from the warped "Blame the West First" multiculturalism that's taken hold throughout the continent (and which is also being promoted by many, in the guise of "progressivism," on our shores).
There's much more from Bruce at BruceBawer.com
79 Comments for “Warning from Europe”
posted by Bobby on
Great article! Liberals need to stop justifying gay bashing by saying that muslims are discriminated in europe. Blacks were discriminated in America and yet they never resorted to gay bashing as a form of revenge for their own problems. Muslims in europe have equal rights just like anyone else, they have no right to impose sharia law on the rest of us.
posted by RIchard on
I have respect for Bawer — from reading his earlier work — but like most conservatives he simply does not understand reality.
Conservatives need to stop being racist and xenophobic under the guise of preventing terrorism or radical Islam.
Most Muslims do have equal rights in Europe in European nations. Discrimination, harassment, name calling, etc are rather commonplace.
posted by RIchard on
Sorry, should read “do not have equal rights…”
posted by Harke Ploegstra on
Traditionally, the Dutch gay movement has supported emancipation of these muslims groups into Dutch society.
In the last ten years, occurrences such as the bashings have made these muslims extremely impopular with Dutch homosexuals.(and Jews and women).
As a group, they did it to themselves. Which is sad, because innocent people suffer.
posted by Jeshicar on
No discription for those muslim. We are all equal on earth. We all love the world. No one should be looked down upon. We LGBT also have this problem sometimes. But we escially gay have get more rights. Thanks for giving us more right. And we all bisexual at the bisexual club http://www.bimingle.com support muslim to get equal rights. You will be loved by the world.
posted by Jorge on
Blacks were discriminated in America and yet they never resorted to gay bashing as a form of revenge for their own problems.
Not true. There’s a trend of hostility against gays among blacks, and there’s a trend of white mainstream-bashing among blacks using past and current oppression as an excuse. The two can and do combine. Some blacks consider homosexuality to be “white”. That’s why they have this thing about having homosexual sex but they’re not gay. The difference is that the gay bashing people do get away with is much more benign in this country.
posted by Bobby on
Jorge, don’t confuse homophobia with gay bashing. Lately our society seems to be going crazy, and people are being prosecuted for “hate speech” and other unimportant matters that can’t cmopare with actual violence.
“Conservatives need to stop being racist and xenophobic under the guise of preventing terrorism or radical Islam.”
—This is a perfect example of blame the victim. A gay man gets beat up by a muslim, we blame the gay for being there, the muslim for being oppressed, and nothing gets done. Let me make it real clear, muslims are not your friends, they are anti-women, anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-sex. They are not interested in adapting, but in making everyone else adapt to them. And don’t lecture me about moderate muslims, those often get death threats and face lots of intimidation, which keeps them quiet.
Maybe it’s time for liberals to stop worrying about the sensitivities of minorities that hate their guts. Seriously, what a weak movement, liberals are so courageous when talking to christian fundamentalists, but the moment they see a muslim, they cower in fear. I guess it’s because they know that muslims will actually kill them and not give them that bullshit “love the sinner, hate the sin.”
posted by KamatariSeta on
I really think that the biggest problem, as simple as this may sound, is that so many leftists an “liberals” are just too piss in their pants afraid of being seen as racists. The reality is that many on the left have defined “racism” so broadly that they’ve backed themselves into a corner, and at this point, in their minds, any criticism of anything minorities do is considered “racist”.
posted by Randy on
I really don’t understand why we just don’t adopt one standard and apply it to everyone. That standard should be that all gay men and women deserve to be treated with the same respect accorded anyone else, and that physical violence cannot be tolerated in any form by anyone.
I don’t care if I’m beat up by a jew, a muslim, a christian, a black, white, boy, man, whatever — I shouldn’t be beat up at all.
I think sometimes these people have this notion that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Right wingers and fundies hate muslims and gays. Therefore, muslims must be our friends in arms against them. It’s stupid logic, and dangerous.
posted by KamatariSeta on
As I said, part of this problem is that many on the left have backed themselves in to a corner. In their zeal to atone for past wrongs, both real and imagined, and to empower minorities that have traditionally been marginalized, they adopt an attitude of hypersensitivity. Many of them don’t GENUINELY think that “x minority can do no wrong”, but they become, for a variety of reasons, very uncomfortable in criticizing the actions of certain minorities, and fear that doing so makes them just as bad as the oppressors they seek to oppose.
This reluctance to criticize has been taken to truly foolish levels, as some leftists end up in a mindset where every wrong done by x or y minority HAS to be explained away as the result of something else, such as feelings of disempowerment.
There is also the issue of minorities being treated more harshly than the majority, which does happen, to be sure, but I think some on the left also take their desire to fight this to an extreme level, and feel they have to defend ANY member of a minority who commits a crime as part of their battle against an unequal justice system.
Most of this has grown out of legitimate fears and complaints, but it has been taken to such extremes that its hard to fathom how it got there.
As I said before, in slightly less precise language, there is also the issue of the great anxiety many on the left have about racial issues; White Guilt is certainly not an unusual condition to be found among the type of multiculturalists this article describes, and many have internalized this guilt to such an extent that ANY disagreement or criticism of an ethnic minority is seen as racism, or at least POTENTIALLY racist.
So, part of the problem is that some of the more radical racial politics of the left have become widespread enough to be a bit of a headache when it comes to these issues.
posted by Bobby on
” and at this point, in their minds, any criticism of anything minorities do is considered “racist”.
—And that’s exactly the problem, the muslims are being given carte blanche to say and do whatever they want while the rest of society doesn’t have those same rights. Muslims unlike other minorities, aren’t used to criticism, aren’t used to justifying their beliefs and behaviors. They need to remember that what they do to others can be done to them. If they commit hate crimes against gays, eventually some gays will commit hate crimes against muslims. If they bomb a bar, gays will bomb a mosque. I hope it doesn’t come to that, but if they keep seeding the roots of their own destruction, what can you expect?
posted by Richard on
Bobby;
I may be new to this message board, but you seem like some one who does not have a firm grip on reality.
The right-wing in Europe has been fueling a racist/xenophobic attack on immigrants and multiculturalism for decades, and gays are certainly on the list as well.
Attacking one form of prejudice (homophobia) while endorsing another (racism) is hardly productive to the complex issues that are unfolding in many parts of Europe.
“A gay man gets beat up by a muslim, we blame the gay for being there.”
No, but we do not blame every single Muslim for the crime, nor do we use it as an excuse to bash immigrants.
Case in point your comment, “muslims are not your friends.”
Well, some LGBT people are in fact Muslim.
Their are also many notable Muslim artists, intellectuals, human rights advocates, etc. They just dont get on the Fox News.
“They are not interested in adapting”.
Again, catering to racism is hardly the best way to combat homophobia. First generation immigrants have almost never ‘adapted’, compared to their children and grandchildren.
Religious fundamentalism or extreamism tends to be a bad thing for liberal democracy. Be it Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Atheist.
While I do not recall stating that I am a ‘liberal’, I have no problem be critical of religious fundamentalism or extreamism.
posted by Richard on
“The muslims are being given carte blanche to say and do whatever they want.”
When people start talking about “the muslims”, “the blacks”, “the jews”, “the gays” it is a fair bet that they are basing opinions off prejudices.
No one can do, “whatever they want” in an industrial developed, representative democratic society.
People have certainly been critical of the beliefs and behaviors of certain Muslims people.
Your endorsement of vigilant violence is simply horrible, but not shocking given that you are one of “the conservatives”.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Bobby, you’re a very angry young man, what’s really upsetting you ?
posted by Bobby on
I wasn’t endorsing vigilantism, if you read my post, you’ll notice I wrote “I hope it doesn’t happen.” I’m only being a prophet of doom. Muslims are alienating a lot of people by their behavior, if it continues, they’re going to suffer the consequences.
“The right-wing in Europe has been fueling a racist/xenophobic attack on immigrants and multiculturalism for decades, and gays are certainly on the list as well.”
—True, but they have little political power, the media doesn’t cover their views and they are likely to face hate crime charges. Remember Livingstone? He has defended muslim homophobia, he refers to a cleric that wants to execute gays as a progressive.
“No, but we do not blame every single Muslim for the crime, nor do we use it as an excuse to bash immigrants.”
—Moderate muslims aren’t standing up to radical Islam, they’re afraid. It’s up to society to take a stand against radical Islam. I’m not interested in bashing immigrants as long as they don’t bash my way of life. If gays are afraid to hold hands in Europe because of muslims, then that’s an immigrant affecting their way of life. You need to read the article again.
“Well, some LGBT people are in fact Muslim.”
—Yes, and they are deeply persecuted by other muslims.
“Their are also many notable Muslim artists, intellectuals, human rights advocates, etc. They just dont get on the Fox News.”
—Your insults against Fox News are unwarranted and unfair, lots of people get on Fox News, democrats, libertarians, radicals, code pink, the difference is that they’re challenged, they’re questioned. It’s not like Nightline, did you see their report on Obama? Jesus, those people are in love with Obama, they didn’t interview a single critic, didn’t even ask a hard question. They just promoted him as the next JFK.
“First generation immigrants have almost never ‘adapted’, compared to their children and grandchildren.”
—This is not a case of an Italian not learning English, or a German not learning dutch, or they keeping to themselves. This is a case of attacking others.
“While I do not recall stating that I am a ‘liberal’, I have no problem be critical of religious fundamentalism or extremism.”
—Neither do I, but if you’re not afraid to criticize Christian Fundamentalism, you shouldn’t be afraid to criticize and condemn muslim fundamentalism. Muslim fundamentalism is very different, and dangerous. When South Park wanted to show Mohammed in an episode, Comedy Central wouldn’t let them do it. Yet South Park does have a character of Jesus, which some might find very offensive, and Comedy Central allows it. Why? Because Christians are used to having their culture ridiculed, they accept it as part of free speech, their own bible tells them that part of being a Christian is being persecuted and ridiculed. Muslims don’t have such views, muslims believe that they are right, you are wrong, and their views must prevail.
Muslims are offended by Europe, they’re offended by gay, abortion, open sexuality in the media, pork being available in schools, and they’re not afraid to fight, they’re not afraid to demand changes, and they’re not afraid to use violence to achieve those changes. In fact, if muslims didn’t hate Israel or want to convert everyone, they would be the perfect social conservatives, and maybe then the left would not be afraid to criticize them as much as they criticize the right.
“Bobby, you’re a very angry young man, what’s really upsetting you ?”
—I’m angry because gays have achieved a lot of progress in Europe, including being able to hold hands in public without teenagers yelling “f-gg-t” and now all their achievements are under threat by newcomers. I’m angry because in a continent where homosexuality is supposed to be normal, it’s becoming abnormal again thanks to a bunch of queer hating immigrants. I’m angry because those who denounce radical Islam face death threats, and sometimes death itself. Anyone who values freedom, should be angry too.
Cheers.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
I don’t think that’s it. I think you’re unhappy with your personal life and you’re blaming everyone but yourself.
posted by Bobby on
Randi, do you think every liberal and every conservative that gets angry is unhappy? Don’t you think that anger is a sign of passion? Does it not make you angry that gay bashings are increasing in Europe?
posted by Ross on
Richard, it seems you’re the one who doesn’t “understand reality”. Your rationale that the rise in European gay-bashings is due to oppressed immigrants lashing out at racism and a lack of rights is disingenuous. According to your theory, attackers should be represented equally across the multi-culti board, not just by Muslims but by Hindus, Chinese, Romanies, etc. They aren’t; only one specific religo-cultural background is involved.
Secondly, if the rise in gay bashings is in response to the attackers’ negative immigrant experiences, and not due to the prejudice innate in their religo-cultural backgrounds, then it follows that they wouldn’t bash gays in their countries of origin. Yes?
Are you ready to concede yet that the problem isn’t Europe’s lack of rights and tolerance, but may lie elsewhere?
posted by Pat on
Europe is not as fully welcoming to immigrants as the U.S. is. What I mean by that is that although Europeans are perhaps more tolerant of immigrants than we are, it doesn’t extend to full acceptance. But in the case of many Muslims that emigrate to Europe, it doesn’t matter. They don’t want acceptance of Europe’s culture the way it is now, they want to impose their values and culture, and many have exploited the social system and some have resorted to violence, including gay bashing. And it’s been tolerated for too long. Some of Europe is finally waking up to this and see that there is a real problem. I hope it’s not too late.
I don’t know Bobby well enough to know whether he is unhappy enough, but I certainly share the anger there. It does tick me off that, on South Park, that they can show a depiction of Jesus in several episodes, but not Mohammed. And why is that? Because one religion’s adherents are more imbecilic, infantile, and reprehensive when there feelings get hurt? Yeah, that’s fair. What’s next, a law being passed that teddy bears can’t have certain names?
posted by Pat on
typo. “enough” in second paragraph should be “or not.” Anyway, the point being someone’s anger at an injustice does not equate to one’s happiness or lack thereof.
posted by Bobby on
“And why is that? Because one religion’s adherents are more imbecilic, infantile, and reprehensive when there feelings get hurt?”
—Exactly. Christians are used to being criticized and challenged, and unlike muslims, have learned to work around the culture, developing their own TV stations, movies, activity centers, schools, stores, etc. They may not want open gays in their churches, but as long as gays keep to themselves, they don’t mind. And when that woman on ESPN said “Fuck Jesus,” they did get upset, and sent letters, but nobody got physically attacked. Christians know that being violent makes them look bad, and it’s against their religion. In fact, in America we’re spoiled, in America people get crazy when Ann Coulter says something offensive. But in europe, Coulter would have already been killed or be in jail for “hate speech.” So the only question is, how will europeans get their muslims under control? How will they get them to embrace free speech and individual rights when their religion and their culture sees that as foreign concepts?
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Yes I’d agree with Ross, I don’t believe gay bashings in Europe are due to imimgrants lashing out at racism or a lack of rights. Its because the culture they come from is homophobic. As far as Bobby goes, he’s angry at far more than just this, you see it in every post of his.
posted by Richard on
“I wasn’t endorsing vigilantism,”
You were pretty close, and have certainly endorsed an assortment of racial prejudices.
You said: Muslims are alienating a lot of people by their behavior, if it continues, they’re going to suffer the consequences.
Some are, some are not. A similar thing could be said about LGBT.
You said: True, but they have little political power,
Well they are gaining power, with xenophobia being a key factor. Also, it is easy to find the right-wing press in Europe.
“The media” — a dubious term — in Europe has often been openly affiliated with one political party or faction.
You said: Moderate muslims aren’t standing up to radical Islam, they’re afraid.
Many are, and have been. This has been an issue within the Muslim community for many decades. Yet, the right-wing prefers ‘radical’, ‘terrorist’ Muslims on the six o’clock news.
You said: If gays are afraid to hold hands in Europe because of muslims,
Well, gays are afraid to hold hands in most nations, because of homophobia. Laying it at the door of one ethnic or religious group does not help things.
You said: Your insults against Fox News are unwarranted and unfair…
Yeah, they are so, ‘fair and balanced’ right ;0) Many different people may watch, but it is basically the GOP Pravda.
Actually, if you look at our own history, ethnic-sectarian conflict was pretty ripe in America. It did not really settle down until after WWII.
It went way beyond simply not speaking English well. It was deep rooted anger, hate, frustration and fear that often erupted into violence.
Muslim fundamentalism is not very different from Christian fundamentalism or Jewish fundamentalism, etc. What is different are the institutions that these faiths operate in.
The ‘South Park’ depiction of Jesus Christ is also not mocking. It may offend the Christian right, but that series believes (in jest) that Mormanism is the one true faith.
Christians were not always so ‘tolerent’ of social and political freedom. That is also something that came out after second world war.
posted by Richard on
You said: Your rationale that the rise in European gay-bashings is due to oppressed immigrants lashing out at racism and a lack of rights is disingenuous.
I never made such an argument. The rise of the political-cultural right-wing in Europe is a product of many different factors.
Immigration is a factor, but not in the simplistic way that the right-wing tries to depict it.
You said: attackers should be represented equally across the multi-culti board,
Not necesarily. Not if most of the immigrants coming to Europe (or a given nation) are Muslim and not if polices are different.
The rise in European gay-bashing, much like immigrant-bashing or other examples of prejudices or intolerance are a product of many different factors.
Islam used to be a highly tolerant and cosmopolitan faith, even with regards to sexual and gender issues. Their are many moderate and liberal Muslims. Their are many LGBT Muslims.
Opposing hompohobia or gay-bashing by engaging in racial prejudices and immigrant bashing is counterproductive.
A social problem, i.e. homophobia, is a product of many different individual and institutional problems that need to be addressed.
posted by Richard on
The rioting that erupted in Paris a few years back, involved lots of French-Africans Muslim youth.
But they were about as secular as the youth white French Catholic youth.
The violence was not an attempt to establish a theocracy, and the youth rebels had fairly reasonable demands.
French-Africans are treated much like African Americans were in the 1960s South.
posted by Bobby on
Richard,
“I wasn’t endorsing vigilantism,”
You were pretty close, and have certainly endorsed an assortment of racial prejudices.”
—Explaining the possible consequences of actions is not endorsing vigilantism.
“Some are, some are not. A similar thing could be said about LGBT.”
—Yes, and the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence should not go to Catholic Churches and try to take communion. Specially when they’re people that ridicule the catholic church. Nor should gays go to straight bars and hit on men. Most gays have common sense not to do that.
“Well they are gaining power, with xenophobia being a key factor. Also, it is easy to find the right-wing press in Europe.”
—I don’t know what you define as right-wing, I can tell you that in Europe right-wing parties suffer persecution and hate speech charges. Muslims don’t go to jail for their hate speech.
“Well, gays are afraid to hold hands in most nations, because of homophobia.”
—You didn’t read the article, the article clearly states that before gays in Amsterdam where not afraid to hold hands in public, and that now they’re starting to be afraid.
“Muslim fundamentalism is not very different from Christian fundamentalism or Jewish fundamentalism, etc.”
—How dare you, when was the last time you read about a christian or jewish suicide bomber? When was the last time a christian or a jew flew a plane against a building? You’re afraid to condemn muslim fundamentalism so you compare it to other forms of fundamentalism.
“The ‘South Park’ depiction of Jesus Christ is also not mocking. It may offend the Christian right, but that series believes (in jest) that Mormanism is the one true faith.”
—It may not be mocking to you, it will be mocking to others. So why can’t we make fun of Mohammed like we make fun of Jesus? Why is Mohammad more special? He isn’t, in a free society, everything is fair game. Muslims got all riled up over a mohammed cartoon, yet Christians had to put up with a virgin mary made of elephant dung and a cross dunked in urine. They didn’t like it, but they didn’t riot nor did they call for the deaths of the artists who made it.
Be honest, you don’t like christians, you don’t like jews, but you like muslims so whatever they do, you’ll make excuses for them.
But I warn you, most muslims are not gonna like you. In California, there was a gay group protesting against Israel in one of those palestine-solidarity things, the muslims kept shouting at them epithets and other hateful words. So don’t think for a minute that your pro-muslim bias is gonna protect you from their homophobia.
posted by Ross on
Richard, none of your response to me makes sense. You deny connecting Muslims’ negative immigrant experience to the rise in European gay-bashings and harassment, yet in your first comment to Bawer’s column you wrote, “Most Muslims do (not) have equal rights in Europe in European nations. Discrimination, harassment, name calling, etc are rather commonplace.as well.” How is that not an attempt to rationalise a link between a rise in gay bashing and Muslim aggression?
You also deny that “attackers should be represented equally across the multi-culti board” because “most of the immigrants coming to Europe (or a given nation) are Muslim and not if polices are different”, which is nonsense as non-Muslims make up the majority of immigrants to Europe. Check each country’s immigration stats if you disagree. Nevertheless, according to your wisdom, there should still be some gay bashing going on by disaffected non-Muslim immigrants. In reality there isn’t.
You keep making excuses, like referring to the past or that there are gay Muslims, to distract attention away from the contemporary reality that Bruce Bawer was explaining. He actually said, as pointed out by a commenter above, that gays in the Netherlands used to be safe in public but that now the situation is changing. The issue here is that political Islam, as fomented by a couple of Mid East regimes now actively using the West’s openness and tolerance to push their own brands of intolerance among susceptible minds, is creating a negative environment for native Europeans.
Sure, most Muslims are ordinary Joes just like you and I, who want to get on with living a productive, decent life. But don’t be blind to the reality that there are strains of Islam active in sowing social division for their own ends, and are enabled by appeasers and apologists, such as yourself, throughout bureaucracies, academia, the media, and law. Gay bashings and intolerance are a product of cultural differences being deliberately reinforced, but not by the “right wing” as you claim.
[For the record, and to undercut your justifications, I’m not right wing; I’m a gay man who has lived with Muslims in Europe and stayed with their families in Arab countries. I’m not talking from prejudice but experience. By the way, to which left wing group do you belong, Richard?]
posted by Pat on
The ‘South Park’ depiction of Jesus Christ is also not mocking. It may offend the Christian right, but that series believes (in jest) that Mormanism is the one true faith.
Richard, one can argue that the Jesus Christ depiction was not mocking. But have you seen the bleeding Virgin Mary statue episode? Of course, we have no way of knowing how mocking the depiction of Mohammed would be because it was censored, but I would be surprised if it comes close to the Virgin Mary episode.
As for the Mormon episode, my take is that Stone and Parker were trying to show how unbelievable the Mormon faith was with the telling of Joseph Smith story. But at the end, they seemed to make the point that the beliefs of Christian and other faiths are just as questionable, but more believable only because the events happened well over a thousand years as opposed to less than 200 years.
Islam used to be a highly tolerant and cosmopolitan faith, even with regards to sexual and gender issues. Their are many moderate and liberal Muslims. Their are many LGBT Muslims.
I agree with that, but that’s not the issue here. The fact is that too many Muslim immigrants have no interest in integrating in their new countries and want to impose their own values, beliefs, and laws on others. If they still want to hate homosexuals, sure go right ahead. But if it impels them to violence when they see two men holding hands, maybe they made a wrong decision to emigrate. And maybe the new country made the wrong decision in allowing these individuals to enter the country.
posted by Richard on
Bobby;
I read your comments as a slight endorsement of vigilantism. Such behavior (targeting people because of their race, color, creed, etc.)oaught not to be seen as legit. Period.
The fact that some Muslims say or do things which are illegal or just plain mean, does not mean it acceptable to target Muslims for harassment, violence, discrimination.
“The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence should not go to Catholic Churches and try to take communion.”
Yes, but when they engage in such disruptive behavior, that dose not follow that all gay people should be treated as if they are disruptive.
Most European political parties, especially minor ones, are treated better then similar minor parties within the United States.
Same-sex couples are often afraid to hold hands in public, even in liberal European nations.
If the harassment of gays has increased in Europe, it is likely part of a larger right-wing trend in Europe, which is certainly not only the work of fanatics of a certain ethnicity.
Immigration politics operate very differently, compared to the United States.
Citzenship is often more tightly controlled, and the type of civil rights polices we put in place in the 1960s – 1970s, did not arrive in Europe until much later.
Europeans tend to be more racist then Americans, but less sexist. Disability issues are also behind in Europe, compared to the US.
I have traveled and worked in many different nations. It was a rare thing for same-sex couples to hold hands in Europe, then and now.
Again, the right-wing has been on the rise in Europe since the 1970s and it includes both native born and immigrants who target people for being different.
“When was the last time you read about a christian or jewish suicide bomber?”
Their are numerous examples of religious fundamentalists who have engaged in suicide attacks, hate crimes, etc.
Yet, we know its wrong to treat people as criminals or terrorists because they are Christian or Jewish.
People have blown up or target gay bars and people. Gone after abortion clinics.
The major difference is that religion in
industrial, developed democratic nations has to operate within certain rules.
I am not afraid to condemn religious fundamentalism, and often do.
You asked: So why can’t we make fun of Mohammed like we make fun of Jesus?
Well, “we” did not do either form of satire.
The difference is that religious institutions in democratic nations have to follow different rules then religious institutions in non-democratic nations.
democratization changes how institutions operate, including religious ones.
Yes, many Muslims were offended by the European Mohammed cartoons. Yet, only the ones that responded with violence were acting immorally.
The fact that satire against Christian symbols or institutions or leaders tends to occur from people raised within the faith is an important factor.
I — unlike you — do not like or dislike a person because they may be Christian, Jewish or Muslim.
I do not make excuses for people who do things that are immoral.
posted by Nico de Lange on
First, the intro. I live in Cape Town, South Africa, am 33 years old and have been enjoying this site for ages. This is my very first comment, though.
I think you guys are completely taken in by an author who doesn’t know his behind from his nose.
I mean, since when is gay-bashing or the persecution of gays an Islamic evil only? Have you guys forgotten so quickly about the sodomy laws in Texas and numerous other states in the US? Or for that matter, why then was it necessary for the US Congress to enact the recent hate crimes law (I can’t think of its proper title right now). There are still several countries in South America where homosexuality is outlawed. Only last year, Jerusalem Pride had to cancel plans to march in the Holy City, because of threats of violence by the city’s ultra-orthodox Jews. And the only country in all of Africa where homosexuality is legal is South Africa – and even here, notwithstanding our constitutional guarantee of equality or the fact that we are one of only a handful of countries in the world that recognize same-sex marriage on an equal footing with heterosexual marriages, there are frequent cases of black lesbians in the townships being raped (or gang-raped) ‘in order to heal them’.
Moreover, as with everything else, there is a great deal of difference in attitudes towards gays or homosexuality from country to country, in the Arab world. For example, although male homosexual acts are officially punishable by death in Saudi-Arabia, it has been years since the last execution of a gay man. And in Egypt homosexuality isn’t legal, but neither is it a punishable offense.
In the Arab world, as in sub-Saharan Africa, the prime duty of every male is to continue his bloodline – failure to do so invariably means that he and his family will be shamed in the eyes of the community. But, in the same breath, if he is married and had fathered children, and if he is discreet, then he may pursue his homosexual desires without anyone (generally) even remarking on it.
It was not so very long ago that we in the West had to endure the same attitudes and were obliged to behave in the same way – just ask any gay man in his fifties or sixties.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
I mean, since when is gay-bashing or the persecution of gays an Islamic evil only? Have you guys forgotten so quickly about the sodomy laws in Texas and numerous other states in the US?
As someone who actually lived and was an out gay in Texas during the time when the sodomy laws were in force, I can tell you that I infinitely preferred that to the life of gays in Iran.
And I think gays in Israel would be more than content to stay in their supposedly-hate-filled country than even next door in the Palestinian Authority, where gays are openly and publicly persecuted (indeed, most Palestinian gays flee to Israel).
And finally, if, as you claim, homosexuality is not a punishable offense in Egypt, you might want to tell them that.
In short, while your attempts to draw moral equivalence between how gays are treated in the United States and Israel versus the Islamic world are amusing, I think they also demonstrates to a very disquieting extent the degree to which liberal gays are dominated by anti-American, anti-Christian, and anti-Jewish bias — and how their need to act on those leads them to downplay and minimize the behaviors of others who they consider more “acceptable” in order to bash the United States, Israel, Christianity, and Judaism.
Which is an excellent demonstration of Bawer’s point.
posted by Bobby on
Richard, I think we can both agree that muslims have not been integrated well in europe, many live in gettoes, many miss the middle east and subscribe to radical islam, many are commiting hate crimes, in much larger numbers than in America or other places. You need to get to know Islam, Islam teachers that infidels must be converted or killed, Islam spread by doing just that. While Christianity and Catholicism no longer has an inquisition nor do they burn witches, Islam has not evolved. All you need to do is look at the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Wahabis in Saudi Arabia. You need to look at hte persecution of gays in Lebanon, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Oman, and virtually all countries in the middle east, including the palestine authority, except for Israel. Israel actually has illegal immigration by gay palestineans. It would be unwise to think that when muslims come to europe, they’re just gonna think “oh, this is Europe, here we’re not supposed to hate queers.”
What Europe needs to do is get rid of all those hate speech laws and let people exchange ideas without fear of government punishment. That’s the only way we can westernize the muslims. I know that makes me sound like an imperialist, but if they wanted to live under Sharia law, they could have done it in their home countries. Just like muslims demand that we don’t eat pork or drink wine in their countries, we must demand that they don’t hurt us in our countries.
Remember Richard, muslims tend to have more children than whites, if they become the majority, they could take control of the culture. Then you can kiss gay marriage, gay adoption, gay movies on TV, good bye.
posted by ColoradoPatriot on
bobby: “Remember Richard, muslims tend to have more children than whites, if they become the majority, they could take control of the culture.”
So only white people need to be afraid of these scary Muslims. Good to know.
posted by Pat on
Nico, excellent points. I agree it isn’t just extreme Muslims that are hateful and violent anti-gay bigots. If Christian South Americans start emigrating and impose their anti-gay bigotry there as well with impunity, I will be equally concerned. That hasn’t happened. It’s bad enough that there are countries (Muslim or otherwise) have 14th Century laws and attitudes in their countries. But when it’s exported to countries that already evolved and want to turn back the clock, and use violence to do so, that makes the problem worse.
And, of course, things are far from perfect here. There are still pockets of 14th Century thinking in this country (Dobson, LaBarbera, Robertson), etc., who are vicious anti-gay people. They haven’t committed violence, and more and more people are coming to realize what lying, hateful, unChristian charlatans they are.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Northdallass said "As someone who actually lived and was an out gay in Texas". [expletive deleted] . You’ve never been a gay, let alone an out one. You just make that false claim because you think it helps you bash real gays better.
posted by Nico de Lange on
NDT, I mentioned among others also South America, as well as my own country – nowhere did I emphasize either America or Israel, so please get off your high horse.
My first point was this, namely that gay-bashing, discrimination and penalizing legislation remains widespread among all cultures and societies (fortunately, the last ten to twenty years had seen a major improvement in the legal situation of gays in most Western countries).
My second point was, and remains, that we should take cultural values and norms into account whenever we discuss something like this. In order to come up with workable, and generally-acceptable compromises or solutions to any problem, one needs first and foremost to understand both the nature of the problem, AND the context within which it had arisen.
Let’s be honest, all European countries have become more and more diverse since WWII – and that is something that would be impossible to change. Nor should we want to, for it ultimately makes for a richer social fabric.
What we should do, is to seek solutions to the problems that come with that diversity. Which means we need to understand the problems, and their roots.
Seeking insight does NOT equate to acceptance or approval, but it is vital if we are to find a solution within the context of a diverse society.
posted by Vaughn Roney on
And this is the religion of peace.
The following are direct quotes from the Quran and the Hadith:
Quran 4:89: “They (infidels) desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah’s way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.”
Quran 8:12: “Instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers;”
Quran 2:191: “… kill the disbelievers wherever we find them ?”
Quran 22:19-22: “? for them (the unbelievers) garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods.”
Quran 8:12: “Your Lord inspired the angels with the message: ‘I will terrorize the unbelievers. Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.'”
Quran 8:7: “Allah wished to confirm the truth by His words: ‘Wipe the infidels out to the last.'”
Quran 8:59: “The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them. They are your enemy and Allah’s enemy.”
Quran 8:60: “Prepare against them whatever arms and cavalry you can muster that you may strike terror in the enemies of Allah, and others besides them not known to you.”
Quran 9.29″ “Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.”
Quran 47:4: “Strike off the heads of the disbelievers” and, after making a “wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives.”
Hadith Sahih Muslim (41:6985): “Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: ‘The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.'”
Quran 9:5: “When the sacred forbidden months for fighting are past, fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”
Sura 3:151: “Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers for that they joined companions with Allah for which He had sent no authority: their abode will be the fire; and evil is the home of the wrong-doers!”
Sura 8:60: “Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power including steeds of war to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides whom ye may not know but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah shall be repaid unto you and ye shall not be treated unjustly.”
Tabari IX:113: “Allah permits you to shut them (women) in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Quran.”
Tabari I:280: “Allah said, ‘It is My obligation to make Eve bleed once every month as she made this tree bleed. I must also make Eve stupid, although I created her intelligent.’ Because Allah afflicted Eve, all of the women of this world menstruate and are stupid.”
Ishaq:327: “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.'”
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Vaughn, using the Koran in that fashion is roughly equivalent to Fred Phelps’s use of the Bible.
Islam by itself is not the problem. Its fanatical adherents who are willing to use it as a justification for violence and killing are.
posted by Bobby on
So, does anyone have any solutions for the islamic fundamentalist problem in Europe? What do you propose? Mass deportations? Cultural re-education? Long prison sentences for gay bashers? Immigration control?
posted by Brian Miller on
The “Islam problem” in Europe should be solved the way we solved it here in the USA. By having a society that allows self-defense and that is *truly* open.
For all the prattling in Europe about “multiculturalism” and “tolerance,” there’s very little of it to go around. I should know, I lived there for five years.
Europe is hidebound by class, race, and religion strictures that prevent people from achieving positive change in their careers and their lives. Government institutions in Europe conspire with powerful elites to “keep people in their places.”
Thus, a self-made multimillionaire like Sir Alan Sugar of Amstrad is considered “working class” — and is often looked down upon by middle class people living in an apartment — simply because he’s from Essex (a less glamorous part of greater London).
This spreads over to Muslims as well. Many Islamic Britons, Norwegians, Frenchmen, etc. are the native-born children of immigrants who came over seeking a better life for themselves and their families — education, jobs, etc.
What they often found was a socialist system that considered them outsiders, a cultural system that considered them “unfit for real work” because of the color of their skin and other class/race issues, and that herded them into dismal flat blocks to live on welfare — all the while condemning them for not working.
There was a story I read a while back (I believe Mr. Bawer was the author) about a Norwegian engineering student of Muslim origin who graduated with a great grade-point average. Every single one of his classmates found employment, but he was unable to even get an interview. Finally, in exhaustion, he changed his name to a “Norwegian-sounding” one and suddenly the offers poured in.
Multiculturalism as pursued by European governments, where a cadre of “technocrats” are the designated experts on the issues (and hold a monopoly on describing “how people are”) is to blame for this. It encourages individuals to stop taking responsibility for broadening their horizons and outsource integration to the government — to which they can always point to as evidence of their enlightenment when their own prejudices are challenged.
In America, where class is a much-less-important and much-more-fluid thing, people have to learn to get along as individuals. Radical religious nuts starve to death if they advocate violence and separation, since the government doesn’t bail them out or fund them as “community representatives.” And people intermingle in our cities to a degree that’s downright shocking to the average Londoner or Parisian or Frankfurter.
Thus, devout Muslims buy from Hindus and Jews and Catholics and atheists, have gay bosses, and have their insular worldviews challenged everyday by actual experience. Since American society accepts them for their capabilities and the result of their labor/intellect, rather than their “class,” the old resentments never build to fever pitch inside dismal socialist flat blocks.
This is arguably our country’s greatest strength — its cultural renown for the power of the individual and its embrace of individualism. Europeans often comment on how “selfish” and “isolating” our heritage is in this regard, but the reality is that it allows us to be a thriving, integrated community to a degree not seen in most places in the Old World.
posted by KamatariSeta on
“”Europeans often comment on how “selfish” and “isolating” our heritage is in this regard, but the reality is that it allows us to be a thriving, integrated community to a degree not seen in most places in the Old World.””
I don’t get this. I’ve seen that sentiment, and I see many on the left say how our individualistic nature and “consumer culture” create this same “isolation” and such, but I just don’t see it. I don’t see all these lonely, miserable, isolated people that our soceity supposedly creates. Sure, things aren’t perfect, and there are people who are lonely and so forth, but this tends to be a result of other things.
Most everyone is friendly and willing to associate with you, at least it seems that way to me. Yeah, we have racism and classism, but ours, at least to me, seems more blunt, more out in the open, and therefore easier to oppose when it becomes a problem. The european classism described here, and I’ve heard these descriptions elsewhere, seems much more subtle, ingrained, and “sophisticated”, in a sense, making it harder to tackle it.
posted by Richard on
Israel does have an impressive human rights record on LGBT issues. Outpacing the region and even the USA.
Homosexuality is not a crime in Egypt per se. The mass arrests that arose in the late 1990s, were part of a desire by the government to distract the public and to quash efforts that had been building for AIDS education being the stagging ground for an Egyptian gay rights movement.
It is hard for some one who has not lived and worked in the Middle East to talk about being gay in Iran or Saudi Arabia or Egypt.
The experiences of LGBT Middle Easterners depends on many factors; their ethnicty, class, sex and politics.
In many ways, being gay in certain ME nations is similar to being gay in the USA of Canada, circa 1950s.
It is interesting that LGBT Muslims or Arabs are often sidelined in the discussion about gay rights in the region.
Being critical of religious fundamentalism is not an attack on religion.
I suspect that much of the problem here is that the right-wing refuse to take responsibility for many of these human rights problems.
posted by Richard on
What can be done? Well, here are a couple of things;
(1) People who commit violent acts should be punished. People who endorse violence or the threat of it should be sanctioned.
(2) European nations need to have a civil rights movement, not too much unlike our own. Dealing with issues like equal opportunity, discrimination, intolerance, poverty.
posted by Bobby on
” European nations need to have a civil rights movement, not too much unlike our own. Dealing with issues like equal opportunity, discrimination, intolerance, poverty.”
—Affirmative action is not going to work in Europe. That will only create more resentment. England for example is flooded by legal aliens from all over the EU who are willing to work for next to nothing, giving the local population a hard time finding jobs. Imagine if not only you had to compete against people willing to work for less, but people of a different race or religion. It’s simply not fair, and unfairness leads to social discontent, which leads to racism, violence, and all kinds of social ills.
“I suspect that much of the problem here is that the right-wing refuse to take responsibility for many of these human rights problems.”
—Typical left-wing bias, blame it on the right. Who opened the borders? The left. Who created hate speech laws that penalize free speech? The left. Who’s afraid to tell homophobic muslims to shut up? The left. Who’s afraid to tell the muslims not to wake up entire villages by having mosques broadcast prayers with loudspeakers at 6:00 a.m. in the morning? The left.
It’s the left that created this monster, if the blame belongs to anyone, it’s to them.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Northdallass said “Vaughn, using the Koran in that fashion is roughly equivalent to Fred Phelps’s use of the Bible.
Islam by itself is not the problem. Its fanatical adherents who are willing to use it as a justification for violence and killing are.”.
Nonsense. Islam and Christianity are the problem. Both the Koran and the bible contain loads of hate speech calling for the death of non-believers and gays. You’re in no position to claim they are not the problem when you fail to demand that such hate speech be removed from both. Both PROVIDE justification to fanantical extremists like Phelps and suicide bombers. You can’t claim they aren’t a problem and then happily distribute such books calling for the death of innocents.
posted by Bobby on
Hold on, Randi, don’t confuse free speech with violence. If I want to read The Turner Diaries it’s my goddamm right in a free society. The same if I want to join a militia, a communist underground organization, or any group I want as long as they don’t commit actual violence. I have no problem with muslims reading crazy stuff and hearing crazy speakers as long as they understand that wanting your enemies dead and actually killing them are very different things. And yes, if I want to hang a nooze in my car as a protest against political correctness (the idea that a nooze is the same as a hate crime) then I should be able to do that, and so do the muslims. The left may think that by controlling speech they control the people. But when speech is controlled, it only festers from within, and then it comes out in violence.
posted by Nico de Lange on
Richard, thank you for your 11:27am post. I have to agree wholeheartedly on the point you made about gay Arabs or Muslims being sidelined in the discourse on homosexuality.
This is unfortunately too often the case, as we also saw with France’s idiotic decision to ban the veil in schools & official spaces – the French just implemented the ban without ever consulting Muslim women themselves, to find out what their attitudes towards, & experiences of, the veil were. And instead of a more integrated, harmonious society & greater freedom and equality for Muslim women in France (which were the stated goals of the ban), French society is still as deeply divided today as ever, while there has been no significant rush by Muslim women to ‘westernize’.
But the French approach was to be expected, I suppose. Brian Miller hit the nail right on the head with his post about the rigidity of European societies. It is a hold-over from the social evolutionist movement of the nineteenth century, which claimed that ‘European’ (Western), Christian civilization was at the pinnacle of a supposed evolutionary path of human society, and that European therefore were obligated to lead non-Europeans to their own ‘level’ of civilization. The implication being of course that Europeans always have better insight into other people’s cultures & societies than they themselves do.
That is why I feel so strongly about actually learning firsthand how certain socio-cultural attitudes, norms & values had come into existence.
posted by Nico de Lange on
Brian, one major difference between America & Europe is their different approaches to diversity.
Most Europeans that I know or have had contact with do not understand the difference between ‘integration’ & ‘assimilation’. They think of themselves as THE great champions of diversity; yet the truth is that their version of diversity and social integration is seriously self-deceptive. On the one hand they show great willingness to let people retain their languages, religious beliefs, socio-cultural norms & practices, but on the other hand they refrain from granting their minorities equal access to resources, opportunities or the organs of power. But even those who adopt the language, faith and culture of their host country are always viewed with suspicion, and treated the same way.
In other words, they force people into impoverished ghettos, that breed discontent, antisocial behaviour & violent outbursts – and when this happens, their flimsy tolerance quickly enough disappears, to be replaced by dismay at the ‘foreigners’ ingratitude and savagery.
I do not know nearly as many Americans as Europeans, but what I do know is that even those immigrants who choose to retain their own cultural identities become easily integrated in American society, as long as they are willing to help themselves, to work hard and to adhere to the values of the wider society. And with time, such people in fact become assimilated fully – exchanging their language for English, and their socio-cultural heritage for the American way of doing things. Yet nary a whisper of discontent or protest do we hear at their ‘Americanization’.
Of course, I’m generalizing a bit, but I do think that these are valid summaries of two very different discourses on multiculturalism.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Bobby, the bible and the Koran are an incitement to violence which is against the law in most civilized countries. The only reason publishers of both aren’t prosecuted is the legal system refuses to follow its own clear cut laws on incitement and do so. If I as a citizen published demands that others be killed I’d be thrown in jail in the blink of an eye. Because Christians and muslims have undue influence they’ve been excepted from the law that applies to everyone else. The bible and the Koran contain hate speech and are in violzation of many western nations’ laws but prosecutors don’t have the guts to do the right thing and prosecute.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Isn’t it good to know that Randi Schimnosky has the endorsement and support of LGBT people — and especially LGBT Christians like Hank and ColoradoPatriot?
Thanks Randi, and good luck. I can’t do battle with the troll – but I’m glad you and Colorado and so many others here do that.
Or:
The reason this is important is that I take my Christian faith seriously……And if you’re not, then please come out and say so, so that at least good folks like Randi won’t associate you with my faith.
People should know that LGBT people, including self-professed LGBT “Christians”, fully support and endorse indicting and prosecuting Christians and Muslims simply for publishing the Bible and the Koran.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Northdallass, you don’t speak for Hank or Coloradopatriot. They’ve never claimed to support everything I state – you’re a liar.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Ah yes, the screaming LGBT who wants Christians and Muslims indicted, prosecuted, and thrown in jail for merely publishing their books is trying to accuse other people.
Take ownership, Randi. You know all other LGBTs support you and your words. Not a single one of them has criticized you — only people like me and Bobby, who you insist aren’t gay.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
No, I want them thrown in jail for publishing incitement to murder. They’re welcome to publish whatever they want of their crap that doesn’t do that.
Northdallass said “Take ownership, Randi. You know all other LGBTs support you and your words.”. I take ownership of my words, however unlike you I don’t claim to take ownership of other people’s thoughts. And I never said Bobby wasn’t gay.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Northdallass is obviously no christian either. He brags about how much money he’s got when Jesus said you should give all your riches away to the poor. Any true believer would have done this, Northdallass is clearly not a true believer.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Funny, Randi, you don’t demand that Hank, ColoradoPatriot, “Bishop” Gene Robinson, “Bishop” Katherine Jefferts-Schori, and all other Christians give away everything they have to the poor.
You must be admitting that all LGBTs and anyone who supports LGBTs who claims to be a Christian is a fake — because we know you would NEVER be so hypocritical as to demand things of others that you don’t demand of fellow LGBTs and LGBT supporters.
Or would you?
Listen to the silence. It should be obvious that LGBTs support you and your demands to have Christians and Muslims indicted, prosecuted, and thrown in prison for merely publishing their books — and that doesn’t include Hank and ColoradoPatriot’s support and encouragement of you, saying you’re “good folk” and that they’re “glad” you’re “do)ing) battle”.
posted by Bobby on
Randi, I know conservatives like me are often accused of fascism and yet you want people to be put in jail for what they publish? Sounds a little Hitler to me.
Incitement to violence doesn’t apply when it comes to books, it only applies to actual speeches where you actually say “Kill the ____.”
And if you think the Hitler analogy is wrong, look at this from Jonah Goldberg,
“Contrary to what most people think, the Nazis were ardent socialists (hence the term ?National socialism?). They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs. They confiscated inherited wealth and spent vast sums on public education. They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life. The Nazis declared war on smoking, supported abortion, euthanasia, and gun control. They loathed the free market, provided generous pensions for the elderly, and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities?where campus speech codes were all the rage. The Nazis led the world in organic farming and alternative medicine. Hitler was a strict vegetarian, and Himmler was an animal rights activist.”
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385511841/igcu-20/
Oh, and they also burned books. Perhaps you’d like to burn the bible and the koran?
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Well, I’m not sure I believe you about the laws of the U.S. but in Canada hate speech is against the law and if prosecutors were following the law anyone who publishes a bible or Koran calling for the death of others would be in breach of it.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
And Bobby, the bible actually does say “kill the gays”:
Leviticus 20:13
“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” and as Vaughn Roney pointed out the Koran actually does call for the killing of non-believers (as does the bible).
posted by Brian Miller on
A request to the sysops of the Indegayforum — could you please add a “twit filter?”
I was enjoying Nico’s and Richard’s excellent discourse on the topic matter, only to have that remarkable train of reasoned analysis interrupted by a typical squirt of “North Dallas Thirty’s” textual diarrhea. A twit filter would allow such trolls to vent their psychosis at thinking participants, without those participants having their train of thought interrupted by the trolling.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
I always love when a “libertarian” comes to defend and support those who want to indict, prosecute, and put in jail Christians and Muslims for publishing books — and condemns a far more nuanced view as “textual diarrhea”.
posted by Hank on
Amen Brian. That’s happened again and again around here. You’ll present a libertarian view, Bobby will give the conservative side, Ashpenaz will chime in with his charmingly esoteric views, Colorado will come up with something, and then the troll will pop up with his wild accusations and illogical attacks. Kinda ruins the experience after awhile.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
And again, Hank, given your support as “good folk” and thanks for “battling” for those who want to indict, prosecute, and put in jail Christians and Muslims for publishing books, as well as your support of people like ColoradoPatriot who tell others to commit suicide, it seems odd that you accuse others of “wild accusations and illogical attacks”, especially given their view.
Your attempt to attack me is merely a desperate and transparent attempt to shift attention away from the people and beliefs you support.
posted by Hank on
Hey Randi, you know I love you, but you said “in Canada hate speech is against the law.”
That’s one area that I think Canada has taken too far. I think that a government which attempts to control speech only makes the speaker seem more sympathetic. One reason that the tide in America is shifting toward better rights for gay people is that more straights are becoming aware of Fred Phelps. His hate speech has done far more for the cause of gay rights than anything I could ever say. When people are confronted with the depth of hate from people like him, they recoil.
So I hope that we never get to the point where we try to ban hateful speech in the states.
And ND30, as my daughter would say – “whatever…”
posted by Pat on
I am loathe to prohibit publishing of the Bible and Koran. And even if I was, it’s not ever going to happen. I don’t believe that passages in which the Bible authors claiming that God said to kill people is inciting violence. And although I don’t support banning books, is there a point where we should? Like what about a book that instructs how to make dirty bombs, or how to murder, or how to sexually exploit children without getting caught. In fact, wasn’t the latter a matter of recent litigation?
posted by ColoradoPatriot on
ND30: “…people like ColoradoPatriot who tell others to commit suicide…”
That isn’t entirely true ND30 (par for the course). I didn’t tell others to commit suicide, I told YOU ND30 the pernicious troll to commit suicide (and then retracted that tongue-in-cheek statement). I know you have the thread where our incident occurred so, tell me, what prompted my statement? It wouldn’t have been a particularly nasty lie from you…would it?
posted by Bobby on
“Like what about a book that instructs how to make dirty bombs, or how to murder, or how to sexually exploit children without getting caught. In fact, wasn’t the latter a matter of recent litigation?”
— Anyone who majors in chemistry probably knows enough on how to make a dirty bomb. As for the child thing, you’d have to start banning the book Lolita, which does tell you how a man gets to a little girl. As for murder, you’d have to ban the teaching of martial arts, which tell you how to instantly kill a man among other things.
It’s all free free speech. If I want to read the Marquis de Sade, The Turner Diaries, a book about nazi medical experimentation, why should I be stopped? Since when is intellectual curiosity a bad thing? There are books sold in security stores that tell you how to do criminal acts, how to change your identity, how to get revenge, but have a disclaimer telling you that the advise is for information only.
There are video games where you can kill hundreds of people, in gruesome ways. Isn’t that better than hurting real people? Must we not have outlets for our negative feelings?
Reading about evil doesn’t make you evil.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Bobby said “As for murder, you’d have to ban the teaching of martial arts, which tell you how to instantly kill a man among other things.”.
Wrong. There are times when its valid to kill someone, in self defense for instance. Teaching someone martial arts killing techniques is far from advocating murder of innocents. Its pretty ironic that you equate oposition to incitement to murder with Naziism and not the incitment to murder innocents itself. Calling for the murder of innocents is much closer to Naziism than opposing it is. Hitler was a Christian after all.
Bobby said “There are books sold in security stores that tell you how to do criminal acts, how to change your identity, how to get revenge, but have a disclaimer telling you that the advise is for information only.”.
If the disclaimer makes it okay then where’s the disclaimer on the bible or Koran?!
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Hank, I love you too, but I have to disagree with you when you say “One reason that the tide in America is shifting toward better rights for gay people is that more straights are becoming aware of Fred Phelps. His hate speech has done far more for the cause of gay rights than anything I could ever say.”.
If hate speech furthered the cause of gay rights then in Canada where such speech is banned we wouldn’t have the full equality for gays that we do and in the U.S. you’d have full equality which you don’t.
I recall now that the Canadian hate speech law does include an exemption for religious speech. In other words if someone said “those evil despicable black people should be killed” (which I obviously don’t agree with) they’d be breaking the the law whereas if someone said “the bible says those evil despicable gays should be killed” they wouldn’t be breaking the law – a serious shortcoming in the law, just because incitement to murder is in the bible or Koran doesn’t make it okay.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
I recall now that the Canadian hate speech law does include an exemption for religious speech.
No, it doesn’t.
Google “Stephen Boissoin” and there’s more. Even better, google “Hugh Owen” or “Scott Brockie”.
So you were right in the first place, Randi; Canadian law demands indictment, prosecution, and punishment of Christians and Muslims merely for reproducing words from the Bible or the Koran or for publishing either — and it’s obvious, as you claimed, that prosecutors “don’t have the guts” and are “not following the law” because of religious peoples’ “undue influence”.
Next up:
I didn’t tell others to commit suicide, I told YOU ND30 the pernicious troll to commit suicide (and then retracted that tongue-in-cheek statement). I know you have the thread where our incident occurred so, tell me, what prompted my statement? It wouldn’t have been a particularly nasty lie from you…would it?
Indeed I do.
So point out the alleged “nasty lie”, and also where you apologized for your remarks and stated that it was wrong for you to have said that.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
And although I don’t support banning books, is there a point where we should? Like what about a book that instructs how to make dirty bombs, or how to murder, or how to sexually exploit children without getting caught. In fact, wasn’t the latter a matter of recent litigation?
What you may be thinking of with the last is this particular civil case.
The most logical reason for banning books would be if they invariably incited or caused violence. However, as we see, in the vast majority of cases, they do not. If the perpetrator of violence is an adult of normal mental faculties, the argument that a book “made” them do something is extremely weak.
The only case in which banning or removing books or information sources makes some degree of sense is in regards to those who have been determined to be mentally imbalanced or not capable of fully understanding the consequences of their decisions and are under the guardianship of someone else, i.e. children. Even then, a blanket ban may not be as good or wise as simply controlled access.
posted by Hank on
As usual you make a good point Randi. I just would suggest that there are other things in play here. Canada has quite a few cultural differences – different history, different people settling there, lack of slavery, etc. (Trust me I know I’m grasping at straws here…) But I think the difference in cultures and values between our two countries may be the reason that a Fred Phelps didn’t get traction there. (Of course he doesn’t really have traction here either – members of his church are primarily his family members…)
posted by Bobby on
“Wrong. There are times when its valid to kill someone, in self defense for instance.”
—I agree with that, although I’m shocked you do.
“Teaching someone martial arts killing techniques is far from advocating murder of innocents.”
—My point is that there’s no difference between reading how to make a dirty bomb and taking a karate class and learning lethal moves.
“Its pretty ironic that you equate oposition to incitement to murder with Naziism and not the incitment to murder innocents itself.”
—My argument is that the moment you oppose free speech, you become a nazi. The argument “we cannot tolerate intolerance” is an oxymoron. If you can’t tolerate intolerance, then your are intolerant, which means you are a fascist.
“Hitler was a Christian after all.”
—Hitler depised Christianity, he replaced crosses with pictures of himself in public high schools, he event sent some priests to concentration camps, and if it wasn’t for the Vatican’s neutrality, he would have invaded them.
“If the disclaimer makes it okay then where’s the disclaimer on the bible or Koran?!”
—They don’t need a disclaimer, it’s literature, it’s art, Stephen King books don’t come with a disclaimer, the code of hammurabi doesn’t come with a disclaimer. Your hatred of religion is clouding your judgement. I don’t care what christians or muslims do, I don’t care if they want to wear a veil or watch The Passion of the Christ. As long as I can enjoy my craiglist, my horror books, my porn and all my other secular pleasures, it doesn’t matter.
And the way to fight against radical Islam is not by banning veils or telling them not to build a mosques or by prosecuting free speech. No, let them do that. But if they commit a gay bashing, put them in jail for a long time, and if they’re foreign-born or illegal aliens, deport them. And tell gay couples not to hold hands in public without pepper spray, tasers, or whatever you can legally carry in Europe.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
I pointed out that the Canadian Hate speech law has an excemption for religious hate speech.
Northdallass erroneoulsy replied “No, it doesn’t.”.
Perhaps you should check the actual law itself before rushing in and making foolish proclaimations:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_hat6.htm
Bill C-250:
The bill was given royal assent by the Queen’s representative in Canada on 2004-APR-29. It took immediate effect. It is now part of the legal code of Canada. Some propaganda directing hatred against persons of any sexual orientation, heterosexuals, homosexuals and/or bisexuals, is now a crime in Canada. Sexual orientation has now joined four other groups protected against hate speech on the basis of their “color, race, religion or ethnic origin.” 1 However, a “not withstanding” type clause allows hate speech if it is religiously motivated. In essence, the law states that the freedomof one person to express religiously-motivated hatred is given higher priority that the freedom of another person to be free of hatred expressed against them.
A person could not be convicted if:
The hate speech was expressed during a private conversation.
If the person can establish that the statements made are true.
If, “in good faith, he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject.” This would give clergypersons immunity from conviction for a hate-based sermon, for example.
If the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, and if, on reasonable grounds, the person believed them to be true. This would give additional protection for the clergy.
If he described material that might generate feelings of hatred for an identifiable group “for the purpose of removal” of that hatred.
If the provincial Attorney General refused to give permission. The Attorney General’s consent is required before charges can be laid.. 1
Bill C250 does not represent a threat to any clergy: priest, minister, pastor or other clergy delivering anti-gay sermons. Anyone delivering an anti-gay speech based on the famous six “clobber” passages in the Bible or similar passages from the holy texts of other religions is immune from prosecution. This immunity would also apply to lay members of any religion.
Liberal Member of Parliament Derek Lee proposed an amendment to C-250 which was adopted. “It creates a defense from prosecution for opinions expressed ‘in good faith’ or based on a belief in a religious text” like the Bible. This appears to be a redundant alteration to section 319 of the criminal code. Section 319 already allows immunity from prosecution “if, in good faith, he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject.”
It seems ironic that religious institutions are the only groups in the country who want an exemption from hate speech and propaganda laws, apparently so that they can feel free to denigrate groups of individuals without any risk of being charged with a crime.
And as far as Hugh Owen goes anti-gay religionists have made much hay out of this but like the dishonest group they are they talk about his arrest for publishing biblical passages but dishonestly fail to inform people that that ruling was overturned by Saskatchewan’s highest court:
Justice Bob Richards wrote the decision for the majority, saying that the ad was: “bluntly presented and doubtlessly upsetting to many.” 13 However, it did not violate the code. Richards also stated that Owens had the constitutional right to express publicly what the court determined were his sincerely held religious beliefs — most notable of which appears to be that sexually active gays should be arrested and executed, according to Leviticus 20.13.
Clearly a travesty of justice but apparently within the law as it was written.If its a crime to incite murder for one person it is a crime to incite murder for a religious person as well.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Bobby said “My argument is that the moment you oppose free speech, you become a nazi.”.
LOL Bobby, a rational person would say that the minute you advocate killing innocent people because of their religion you become a Nazi. Opposing the advocation of the murder of innocents is about as far from a Nazi as you can get.
Bobby said “The argument “we cannot tolerate intolerance” is an oxymoron. If you can’t tolerate intolerance, then your are intolerant, which means you are a fascist.”.
By your logic then we have to tolerate murderers, rapists, thieves, and child molestors. To prosecute them would make us fascists. Obviously we can’t allow intolerance to run unchecked in society if we are to have a society.
Bobby said “—Hitler depised Christianity, he replaced crosses with pictures of himself in public high schools, he event sent some priests to concentration camps, and if it wasn’t for the Vatican’s neutrality, he would have invaded them.”.
LOL, an absurd lie and easily dispelled. Hitler most certainly was a Christian and he proclaimed it loudly and often:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm
My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice…. And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people…. When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited.
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech in Munich on 12 April 1922
And far from sending priests to concentration camps (unless they opposed him) or the vatican being neutral the opposite is true.
Note the pictures in this link:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm
See the picture of Hitler with Archbishop Orsenigo celebrating Hitler’s birthday, the picture of Hitler leaving church and greating a Catholic Cardinal, the picture of the Vatican signing the Concordat with the Nazis, the pictures of Hitler and the Nazis in front of the “church of Our lady” showing the church as foundation of the party, the picture of Hitler praying and signing an autograph for a nun, the pictures of priests and Bishops giving the nazi salute in honour of Hitler, Hitler’s brown army at mass, and a Cardinal marching with the Nazis. Hitler and the Catholic church were very tight throughout his reign and the church NEVER exocommunicated him or any Nazi.
And far from removing Crosses Nazi medals and memorabilia featured the Christian cross front and centre:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/mementoes.htm
Note in particular the Nazi “Gott mitt uns” (god with us) belt buckle, the prominent display of the swastica juxtaposed with the Christian cross, the carvings in the churches of Nazi soldiers and Jesus.
You shouldn’t lie about Hitler like that Bobby, its breaking one of the ten commandments you claim to follow.
Bobby previously noted that you can buy a book telling you how to commit criminal acts and that they just come with a disclaimer, when I asked him where’s the disclaimer for the bible or the koran he said “They don’t need a disclaimer, it’s literature, it’s art, Stephen King books don’t come with a disclaimer, the code of hammurabi doesn’t come with a disclaimer.”.
If the book telling you how to commit criminal acts needs a disclaimer saying its for informational purposes only so does the incitements to murder in the Bible and Koran. Stephen king is fiction, he doesn’t demand that people go out and kill minorities in his books and as far as I know neither does the code of Hammurabi although if it does the same precautions would be in order.
Bobby said “I don’t care what christians or muslims do”. That’s rather foolish of you and contradicts your earlier wailing about Muslims bashing gays. I don’t care what Christians or Muslims do either with the one exception that they not hurt anyone. Maybe you don’t care about Muslims in Iran using the Koran to justify the execution of gays but I do and so do all moral people. There’s something seriously wrong with your concept of morality when you think there’s nothing wrong with calling for the murder of innocent people and you think there’s something wrong with opposing that. Give your head a shake Bobby and start thinking about this again from square one.
posted by Bobby on
Your quotes from nobelief.org have as much credibility as NAMBLA’s views on childcare. I won’t even discuss it. You obviously don’t watch The History Channel, if you did, you’d see that Hitler was into paganism.
“By your logic then we have to tolerate murderers, rapists, thieves, and child molestors.”
—No, you’re the one who can’t seem to tell a different between being called a pervert by some nut in the media and being bashed in the head with a baseball bat. Liberals are too insecure, they can’t fight with words so they choose to ban words instead.
“Obviously we can’t allow intolerance to run unchecked in society if we are to have a society.”
—In America it runs uncheck, nobody gets prosecuted for having a neo-nazi website, posting something hateful online, buying a racist video, and the country isn’t falling apart. It’s when the liberals try to force tolerance on the rest of us that tensions starts. Some of those diversity trainings end up creating more hate, more discrimination, and more bigotry than not raising the issue.
“If the book telling you how to commit criminal acts needs a disclaimer saying its for informational purposes only so does the incitements to murder in the Bible and Koran.”
—Nobody reads the disclaimers, they just put them there in case anyone gets sued. Believe me, I work in advertising, I deal with disclaimers everyday. I get annoyed when account people make a big deal about them.
“Maybe you don’t care about Muslims in Iran using the Koran to justify the execution of gays but I do and so do all moral people.”
—Why should I care about the koran? If there was no koran, they would use another excuse. Gays used to be tortured in China and the USSR with electroshock therapy in the name of science. Alan Turing was forced to take hormones to “cure” his homosexuality in the name of science. Maybe science should come to a disclaimer. I care about actions, not words, not thoughts, not books.
I am a freedom fighter, not you. You only want freedom for yourself and your own kind.
Here’s some things about Hitler you don’t know.
”
Contrary to what most people think, the Nazis were ardent socialists (hence the term ?National socialism?). They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs. They confiscated inherited wealth and spent vast sums on public education. They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life. The Nazis declared war on smoking, supported abortion, euthanasia, and gun control. They loathed the free market, provided generous pensions for the elderly, and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities?where campus speech codes were all the rage. The Nazis led the world in organic farming and alternative medicine. Hitler was a strict vegetarian, and Himmler was an animal rights activist.”
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385511841/igcu-20/
posted by ETJB on
Bobby;
I did not suggest that European nations adopt any affirmative action policy.
Basic equal opportunity/treatment legislation either does not exist or is much newer to the nation’s legal scene.
Basic questions about citizenship and dealing with social services, mobility and opportunity.
The rise of xenophobia/racism/bigotry in Europe can be tied, in many cases, to the 1970s and was largely led by the European and Islamic right-wing.
Who opened the boarders? Well, no nation has an ‘open boarder’ policy. Most European nations have pretty strict rules on immigration, even stricter on citizenship.
You complain about right-wing Islamics who engage in hate speech, but then turn around to oppose ‘hate speech’ codes.
The limits of individual speech or expression are set by each nation’s constitution or law.
Several of groups and individuals who have been reporting on homophobia among Arab and Muslim people (and the LGBT Muslim community) have been a part of the political left.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Bobby, all the the stuff on Nobeleifs demonstrating Hitler’s Chrisitianity is well documented history. You on the other hand have nothing to suggest they are not. Like an angry child you rant “I won’t discuss it” because you know you can’t refute it.
Bobby said “—Why should I care about the koran?”. Obviously if you cared about gays being executed in Iran based on the Koran you would care about it. You only care about yourself so you don’t give a damn what happens to gays in Islamic countries, or the hate speech in the Koran and bible that leads to such atrocities.
Bobby said “I am a freedom fighter, not you. You only want freedom for yourself and your own kind.”.
Bullshit. I want freedome for all, its you who said you don’t give a damn about the Koran being used to justify killing gays in Iran. You’re like the Nazis, perfectly content with incitement to murder innocent people.
Bobby said ” I care about actions, not words, not thoughts, not books.”.
That’s the problem with you, you don’t want to recognize history so you’re doomed to repeat it. Words, books and thoughts lead to actions. The Nazis started demonizing and advocating the death of the Jews in words, books and film before they got to actually executing them, just like your bible and the Koran do.
Bobby said “Here’s some things about Hitler you don’t know….They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality”.
That’s a lie and is clearly demonstrated to be one in the links I provided. Hitler was a devoute Christian as were all Nazis. The catholic Church was in bed with the Nazis from the word go and never excommunicated a single Nazi let alone Hitler. You’re afraid to look at the truth, to look at the pictures of the priests and bishops giving the Nazi salute in honour of Hitler, the Nazis signing the Concordat with the Vatican, Hitler and his army in church, the Christian cross thorougly embedded thoughout Naziism becase to look at that truth would destroy the fiction you’ve built up in your mind. You can’t handle the truth. You claim to be a Christian, to follow the 10 commandments and here you are lying through your teeth to try and hide from the well documented fact that Hitler and the Nazi’s were the Catholic church’s kind of Christians.
posted by Bobby on
I’m not a Christian, Randi, I’m jewish, although I don’t really practice. I know what it’s like to be censored, because it’s been done to me many times in my life. That is why I don’t want to censor anyone, or put anyone in jail for anything they say or write.
Criticism is different. Condemnation is different. If I want to make a painting of Mohammed having sex with a goat, that’s my right in a free society. And if a muslim wants to make a painting of gays having sex with Satan, that’s also his freedom. And if whites want to hang noozes and blacks want call whites “blue eyed devils” and if Indians want to call us “cow killers,” then fine, bring it on. Bring it all on.
And by the way, in Turkey they also have the Koran yet they don’t execute gays there. In Cuba they don’t have the Korean, but they used to sent gays to prisons in the island. That is why I don’t blame books, I blame behaviors. The nazis had more than books, words and films, they had the government on their side, they censored all opposing books, newspapers, movies, even swing music. It’s very easy to be right when there’s nobody else to tell you how wrong you are.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Bobby obviously some people take the bible and Koran less seriously than others. The problem is when people do take them seriously we end up with the Fred Phelps and Iranian dictators of the world calling for the death of none believers and gays. Paintings of Mohammed having sex with a goat or gays having sex with satan are not even remotely in the same league as calling for the death of innocents and proclaiming that that is sanctioned by the ultimate supernatural authority. You want to defend people inciting such crimes and you’re just like the Christian Nazis.