Update III (2/6): Muslims apologize on behalf of their barbaric brothers.
————————————————————————————————-
Liberal editors are a lot smarter than they look. If Rolling Stone had put Kanye West posing as Muhammad on the cover, they’d be in hiding, too. Instead, they chose the safer route: West, a rapper and contributor to the cultural toilet, posing with a crown of thorns on his head.
Christ is fair game, isn’t he? Unbelievers, liberals, and other secularists make fun of him, mock him, scorn him, and curse him, yet they steer clear of doing the same with Muslims’ god. They know offended Muslims, unlike offended Christians, issue death threats.
Crash and burn, Islamofascists! It’s in your nature. Killing is all you know how to do. You are gutless and psychotic. A religion of peace, indeed. (More pics and links)
But I don’t think liberal journalists are psychotic, though.
Just gutless.
Update: Ed Driscoll nails it:
Remember all the riots, looting and torching when Dogma and The Last Temptation of Christ played at your local multiplex?
Me neither.
Well, The Da Vinci Code movie will premiere in May. Let’s storm the embassies and multiplexes (multiplexi?), brothers and sisters!
And I see the State Department of the United States has also condemned the cartoons…could someone link me to where they condemn the blasting of Christianity, the Bible, Jesus Christ, etc., that takes place daily in almost all of our newspapers? I can’t find that link. I must just be missing it. It has to be there, right?
Our government (and leftist media) condemning attacks against the Christian faith? Odds are that Christ will return before that happens.
If Norway abdicates its freedom and caves in to this nonsense, look for more of the same throughout the West. God’s judgment is upon us, people. I, for one, will go to jail or face death before I allow Islam to strip me of my freedom to practice and express my faith.
Update II (2/5): James White asks:
Are these Muslims burning an embassy merely “radicals” or is there something about the very core and heart of Islam that gives rise to this kind of behavior?
…Why not take the opportunity to demonstrate the error inherent in the pictures, if there is error? What a wasted opportunity if you represent the “one true faith.”
I think it also alludes to the basic differences of the two religions. Christianity is based on grace, mercy, forgiveness of expected persecution … turning the other cheek while standing for truth.
From what I see of Islam it is the execution of justice from a very strict legalistic and prideful text.
As for Kanye, doesn’t he claim to be a Christian? I am in no position to judge his heart but I am wondering if he is somehow trying to identify with Christ over something.
Comment by Randy — 02.04.06 @ 7:07 pm
As a fan of Fox News Watch, I was very, very disappointed by their non-coverage of the cartoon fuss.
Comment by D. C. Russell — 02.04.06 @ 7:22 pm
Easy to be brave without consequence. Any takers that by 2010, one or more ‘Old Europe’ countries will recognize Sharia as equal law? That’s about as long as it’ll take for the Islamic population to reach the tipping point.
Christians have already begun to be persecuted for being faithful to their beliefs, such as preaching against immorality. Yet, when mullahs preach violence, bureaucrats suddenly become preoccupied with other matters.
Comment by Andy — 02.04.06 @ 7:56 pm
La Shawn,
Found your site while visiting CQ.
Now that I found you, I’ll visit regularly.
I’ve always enjoyed your views.
Comment by Keemo — 02.04.06 @ 8:16 pm
You’re one of my most loyal commenters, Frank, and for that I thank you. But I don’t want to start a discussion about that subject here. - Admin
Comment by Frank Zavisca - Home — 02.04.06 @ 8:33 pm
I had to laugh at CNN and MSNBC’s comments on their sites and newscast which stated “out of respect for Islam we will not post the infamous cartoons”… and then I remembered the Kanye West picture they both plastered all over their homepages at the time it came out…
Gutless indeed.
this is one of those time where we can sit back with our bowls of popcorn and watch the media, liberals, and all those who say Islam is a religion of peace tap dance around those remarks.
Comment by Renee — 02.04.06 @ 8:44 pm
Is It Really About the Cartoon?
Is it really about the cartoons? Or are the followers of the ROP who are perpetuating these acts of violence simply full of hate, fury and destruction, and this is just one more excuse to act on those tendencies?
…
Trackback by Myopic Zeal — 02.04.06 @ 9:25 pm
As usual, you put a group in a basket and they are all the same. There’s a fine line between judgement and discernment. Not all Muslims are bad, I work in a hospital where some have been doctors for years. Not all liberal journalists are gutless. I don’t know Bob Woodruff’s or David Bloom’s leanings, but they sure weren’t gutless.
Comment by musiclover — 02.04.06 @ 9:27 pm
Well we all agree that no generalization is always true, not even this one. But, “the one that yelps is the one that got hit.”
Comment by Mark — 02.04.06 @ 9:46 pm
As a secular liberal, I can say without hesitation that I wouldn’t go out of my way to purposely insult or degrade any religion. Having said that, I think both Christians and Muslims should lighten up about their religious icons - especially Muslims. And in fact, LaShawn, when this debacle happened over Mohammed in Denmark, I was thinking to myself the very same thing as you: in the West we frequently satirize Jesus (think Monty Python’s “Life of Brian”), and Christians don’t end up burning embassies over it. (Of course when I had this thought, it did not automatically come served up with swipes at liberals).
Personally, I think we’d all live in a better world if we weren’t so religious.
As Jonathan Swift said, “We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love, one another.”
Comment by Aaron — 02.04.06 @ 9:48 pm
The Great Cartoon Crisis Of 2006 Gets Hotter
Glenn Reynolds writes that the Danish Embassy in Syria was torched. Given the cause of the fire, one of Mark Steyn’s best observations still holds very much true:These days, whenever something goofy turns up on the news, chances are it…
Trackback by Ed Driscoll.com — 02.04.06 @ 9:48 pm
I don’t hear the “sensitive” MSM talking about the insensitivity of the Muslims burning Danish Flags that have the Christian cross on it either..
Comment by greenmiler — 02.04.06 @ 9:58 pm
La Shawn, The correct response to being offended by the cartoons would have been to write letters to the editor, not boycott the whole nation who does not control the papers and then burn the embassies. I just don’t understand the kind of infantile logic it takes to think burning embasssies and threatening suicide bombings is appropriate. They are like men who beat their wives.
Comment by RepJ — 02.04.06 @ 10:10 pm
How would you even visually represent Muhammad (especially to a predominately white american audience)? There’s really not the same iconography that follows Islam as there is with Christianity. To convey Muhammad would be ineffective cover where this cover works because every american with a basic cultural literacy will be able to recognize what a crown of thorns means.
The cover works for Kanye because he had a hit single called “Jesus walks.” If he did not make that song, then the rolling stone would never have conceived this cover idea. You gotta reach to construe this as some fear to talk about Islam.
I don’t really see it as a pot shot at christianity; I feel like more people in my generation can relate to Kanye when he talks about his faith than any other figure in popular culture. He’s got the older conservatives mad at him but young black people regardless of political affiliation relate to him.
Comment by rob — 02.04.06 @ 10:24 pm
Ah the Cartoons .. some people need to grow up
Comment by mynewsbot — 02.04.06 @ 10:37 pm
rob,
when you reference jesus walks (the so called hit song by Kanye), make sure put little j since we are talking about the jesus in Kanye’s mirror and not of the bible
just a thought
Comment by Renee — 02.04.06 @ 11:22 pm
renee,
That’s really the most poignant and affective part of the song though. Kanye is saying that everyone can have a personal relationship with Jesus no matter what their what their past or personal background is.
“To the hustlers, killers, murderers, drug dealers even the strippers.
(Jesus walks with them)
To the victims of welfare feel we living in hell here, hell yea.
(Jesus walks with them)”
Does Kanye have an over inflated ego? definitely. By any stretch he’s self important. But at the same time, he’s one few performers who is willing to speak honestly about what he believes. The song and the subsequent videos that he’s made show a serious reflection on having faith in this day and age.
If you haven’t already, I’d suggest checking out the video.
http://youtube.com/w/Kanye-West—Jesus-Walks-%28Version-1%29?v=H_5mKW_2xDM&search=jesus%20walks
Comment by rob — 02.05.06 @ 12:25 am
This idea is difficult to express, at least for me. Comment #1 on this thread gets to the heart of it.
The reason, it seems, that some people feel free to offend Christians by trashing the symbols of our religion is, in a very back hand way, they believe in our goodness. The Christian bashers and offenders KNOW that Christians are not going to take to the streets and call for their heads–and certainly will not cut off their heads.
However, they know Muslims have no such scruples. Then suddenly, like children that know mommy and daddy have reached the limits of tolerance, shut up and go away to play quietly.
If Christian bashers did not believe in the goodness of Christians and Christianity, they would not feel so free to bash and offend Christianity and Christians.
Comment by Impacted Wisdom Truth — 02.05.06 @ 1:57 am
on another note I don’t think its fair that assess an entire group’s beliefs just on the actions of actions of its most extreme partisans.
Let us not pretend that America has never had a problem with Christian terrorists. “Strange fruit” and bombed abortion clinics should be more than enough evidence that in the even in the 20th century US, terrorism knows no religious boundaries.
Comment by rob — 02.05.06 @ 2:17 am
rob,
It’s different when the extreme partisans are the ones with the money, influence and power. Compare and contrast the actions and statements from political and/or religious leaders of the west with those of the middle east. To be sure, a portion of Iranians does not want Israel to be exterminated, but what does it say about their society when their president says it in no uncertain terms? When Muslim clerics issue such statements as “We will not accept less than severing the heads of those responsible” and “We will not be satisfied with protests. The solution is the slaughter of those who harmed Islam and the Prophet” Salman Rushdie experienced how the hysteria and hate of the masses can be sown, nurtured and ultimately leveraged as power by a few.
This sentiment is neatly expressed in an article by Hjörtur Gudmundsson in the Brussels Journal:
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/747
“It is important, however, to stress again that there are Muslims of great courage. While it is risky to publish the Muhammad cartoons in Europe, it is even riskier to do so in the Middle East. Yet the Jordanian independent tabloid al-Shihan published three of the twelve Muhammad cartoons yesterday. The editor of al-Shihan, Jihad al-Momani, said he decided to publish the cartoons to show what the issue was all about. In an editorial under the headline “Muslims of the world, be reasonable†he pointed out that Jyllands-Posten had apologized for offending Muslims. He deplored that few in the Islamic world seem to be willing to listen to this.
…
The spokesman of the Jordanian government, however, said that the editor had done a great mistake by publishing the cartoons and announced that the government is considering suing the newspaper. Before the day was over the paper’s owners had sacked Mr Momani.
Comment by model_1066 — 02.05.06 @ 4:15 am
And it wouldn’t surprise me if Mr. Momani is now in hiding, protective custody, or a shallow grave.
Comment by model_1066 — 02.05.06 @ 4:26 am
I certainly agree that many in the Western liberal sphere of influence are doing the calculations with regard to their insurance coverage as it relates to their free speech. And I think Christians should point out the double standard.
But at the same time, Christians should also condemn the publications of the cartoons, just as they condemned anti-Christian art in this country. I support the right of the Danish newspapers to print what they want, though I think they should not have done it.
As a US Army General once stated with regard to using overwhelming fire power in heavily populated areas of Iraq, “Just because we can does not mean we should.”
Comment by Grumpy — 02.05.06 @ 6:20 am
La Shawn.
I’ve thoroughly appreciated your site and await the opportunity to comment on the article(s) for which you currently have feedback turned off.
Many commenters seem to question why we are seeing all this anger and violence. There are, I believe, two primary reasons:
1. Psychological reinforcement. If angry demonstrations and violence result in a response that is desirable from the fanatics’ viewpoint, then that behavior will continue. Sadly, governments don’t seem to appreciate this fact and prefer to believe that acceding to “demands” will make the bad people go away and be nice. Wrong. Caving in will ensure exactly the opposite.
2. What we “see” is what the media chooses to show us (news is what the news media defines it to be), and fanatics play the media like a cheap guitar, thus making the media itself complicit in continuance of the behavior. If reporters and editors stopped treating deliberate propaganda efforts as “News,” or relegated coverage to the editorial pages, or just clearly labeled it for what it is, the tactics would fail. In the words of a famous sage, “Fat chance.”
Comment by Auld Pharte — 02.05.06 @ 8:24 am
http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn05.html
Interesting commentary on the fallacy of “sensitivity” (aka PC) and the craziness we now see
Comment by Renee — 02.05.06 @ 9:06 am
The fact is, Kanye West is on the cover of Rolling Stone because of the lyrics of his hit songs. Had he rapped about Muhammed instead of Jesus and Rolling Stone did not put him on the cover depicted as Muhammed, then calling them gutless would be more appropriate.
Comment by Leon — 02.05.06 @ 10:49 am
Hey La Shawn, I thought you weren’t going to waste any more keystrokes on Kanye?
Comment by Leon — 02.05.06 @ 11:08 am
The battle lines in this war are ancient. They are as old as the world itself. I’ll try to be brief. Abraham had two sons. His first, Ishmael, was born to his Egyptian maidservant, Hagar. God promised Abraham a son, but his wife Sarah was barren. Abraham decided, with the coercion of his wife, to work God’s promise of a son on his terms – thus Ishmael. Some years later, the promised son, Isaac, was born to Sarah and Abraham. Realizing the error of his ways, Abraham sent Ishmael and his mother away. God fulfilled his covenant and made the promised son the patriarch of the Hebrews. Ishmael became the father of the Arab race. Biblical teaching is that the promised son, Isaac (the Jews), inherited the Promised Land, which includes Jerusalem the sight of the Temple Mount. The Koran teaches that Ishmael (the Arabs) is the promised son of Abraham and rightful inheritor of the Promised Land. You cannot understand this conflict unless you look at it through history, which includes the ancient religious history, and understand how deeply it’s rooted.
Comment by Sons of Abraham — 02.05.06 @ 11:47 am
model_1066,
In the situations of Jordan and Iran, I don’t think you can make an informed decision of the entire societies based on the leadership. While the comments the Iranian president made about Israel are definitely out of line, its pretty well documented that their government has been anti-US. anti US foreign policy for a while now.
From a foreign policy perspective, the comment was less a “i ran on the anti israel” ticket but more a “hey USA, you invaded the wrong country and now we’re developing nuclear weapons with the intention of destabalizing the region and starting WWIII. Right now they’re trying to call our bluff and question our ability to fight another war in another country.
Comment by rob — 02.05.06 @ 12:10 pm
If some of the rhetoric I am seeing from the Middle East is carried out, this really could be it. The final show down of the believers and the infidels. Once again, in case we haven’t noticed it before, they are making it clear that we cannot co-exist.
Comment by Kathy — 02.05.06 @ 12:32 pm
La Shawn says, “I, for one, will go to jail or face death before I allow Islam to strip me of my freedom to practice and express my faith.”
Amen and amen.
Comment by RepJ — 02.05.06 @ 12:33 pm
One difference lies in the area of what the different belief systems are asking of their followers, and the amount they lend themselves to be used for temporal power and gain. Islam puts an aggressive interest in extending itself at the expense of other beliefs. You can find passages in the Koran speaking of the importance of conquering yourself but does not seem to be the main thrust. Power and expansion are directly spoken to.
Christ’s sermon on the mount does not ask for violence against others but instructs us in the tools needed to learn to control ourselves. A person heeding his teachings becomes a more capable individual even as we learn to forgo certain types of behavior. Either set of beliefs can be perverted to be used as something it was not designed to be. Therein lies the crux, what it is designed to be.
Those who claim to accept Christ as a great moral teacher but not as the Son of G-d get the worst of both worlds. Taking his own statements, we are forced to reject him completely, or follow him as the light and the life of the world. It is something reason cannot explain in and of itself, though once faith is admitted as a possiblity reason becomes a useful tool.
Comment by Ted Moore — 02.05.06 @ 2:07 pm
I thank God I was born in the U.S. I thank God I was raised Christian. I thank God for being with me and with my brothers and sisters in Christ now. He will never let us down. We will face giants, and we will have to fight them, but He will destroy them all, every one.
Comment by dianne — 02.05.06 @ 2:44 pm
Muslim Excesses
Clearly she is being sarcastic, because Christians know that that Christ would not approve of violence. But I would not mind seeing a boycott.
Trackback by Don Singleton — 02.05.06 @ 4:11 pm
But I don’t think liberal journalists are psychotic, though.
Just gutless.
I’m not sure I agree with you completely on this one, La Shawn. True, many journalists are gutless. But for years many in the MSM were ga-ga over the Soviet Union, Fidel Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot (until the body count became too large and obvious to cover up), and, for a time, at least, Chairman Mao. Brazenness, while not exactly courage, is not exactly cowardice either.
In the eyes of the MSM, nothing will ever replace Communism. That was their one True Love, if they ever loved anything besides themselves.
But if Communism was Romeo to the MSM’s Juliet, the current alliance between Islamofascism and western journalism feels like a shotgum marriage. What do they have in common? Homosexuality - no agreement there. Equality of women - nope. Islamofascists want the mosque to control the state; the MSM wants the state to eliminate religion. With a Democrat in the White House the MSM would probably be Islamofascism’s blood-sworn enemy.
But the Republicans are in power. Thus the strange MSM-Islamofascism alliance. If love won’t keep them together, then hatred of Bush, democracy and Christianity will.
Still, it’s strange to see the MSM reduced to being Islamofascism’s pooper-scooper. It’s not a wonderful life.
Comment by Mwalimu Daudi — 02.05.06 @ 4:22 pm
A people who sing and dance in the street when civilians are brutally murdered are not likely to speak out now or EVER…so much for the “moderates” eh?..sigh
Comment by Angel — 02.05.06 @ 5:06 pm
ThreE QuestionS
My first question is this:
The Muzlim women, if thats what you can call these particular ones in Qum, (the second most sacred city in Iran) need a serious geography lesson.
Due to “sketches”, which were viewed as anti-Izlamic, women in Qum gathered…
Trackback by Woman Honor Thyself — 02.05.06 @ 5:10 pm
Now, as I said earlier, I think Muslims have gotten way too touchy about this Mohammed thing. I don’t think the cartoons were in good taste, but that in no way excuses attacking embassies. A simple apology by the offending newspaper should have sufficed. I think Islamic fundamentalists are blowing this way out of proportion for their own political gain.
However, before self-congratulatory Christians get to patting themsleves on the back and start crowing about how this sorry episodes demonstrates the superiority of Christianity, or that it reveals the “core of Islam”, I would hasten to point out the very violent history of Christianity.
Before we say things like “crash and burn you Islamofascists -it’s in your nature. Killing is all you know how to do”… we should remember that Christians mobs burned down the library of Alexandria, resulting in the loss of nearly the entire written knowledge of the ancient world. They dragged the head librarian, Hypatia, out into the street and tore her limbs off. Christians instituted the Holy Inquisition that tortured, terrorized, and burned at the stake hundreds of thousands of people. Christians spearheaded the conquest, enslavement, and forced conversion of the native peoples of the America’s, resulting in the deaths of millions and the destruction of entire civilizations in Latin America. And more than a few southerners used passages from the Bible to justify slavery (and luckily, more than a few abolitionists enlisted scripture to support their point of view).
Yes, Christians have done a lot of good in the world, but they also have more than their fair share of blood on their hands. For most of their history Christians have been the persecutors, rather than the persecuted.
So before Christians congratulate themselves too much for their good behavior, it would be good to keep this historical perspective in mind.
This is not meant to put down Christianity in favor Islam. Not at all. Truth be told, I don’t really like any religion, and think such episodes as this demonstrate that it is dangerous to let religion have too much influence over society. The problem here is not Christianity or Islam - rather, it is religious zealotry of any kind.
Comment by Aaron — 02.05.06 @ 6:51 pm
The Religious Jokes Were OK Till They Made Fun of Yours
It is interesting to watch Islamic Radicals riot over some cartoons. I’ve seen Blacks riot over a claim that a Black person died because of racism. (While they do little when a Black kills another Black.) I’ve seen Blacks riot when the K…
Trackback by Independent Conservative — 02.05.06 @ 7:18 pm
Rob, and to anyone else that likes to compare Islamic terror to abortion clinic bombings, and tie the bombing to Christianity…
I’d wager that Islamic terror has claimed more lives in a single year than the last 30 years of abortion clinic related violence.
Eric Rudolph, the poster child of clinic bombings, isn’t even a Christian.
Further, mainstream Christianity deplore and denounce such violence, where much of Islam’s clerics fan the flames by encouraging and/or praising attacks made in Allah’s name.
There have been far more eco-terror attacks in the US than Christians attacking abortion clinics (or anything else for that matter).
Heck, even the infamous Spanish Inquisition (Torquemada’s, not Cardinal Biggles’) only killed 4,000 people in its 350 year history.
That sounds like a slow year for the Jihadis.
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 02.05.06 @ 9:15 pm
Why liberals don’t see the irony in all of this is, well, ironic. If Islam is the only religion worthy of respect and protection, the ultimate course is that all women will be veiled and the precious separation of state and religion will be a distant memory. And emphasis is on the “memory” part here, because all vestiges of Judaism and Christianity will be burned, bombed and otherwise eradicated.
Comment by Barbie — 02.05.06 @ 9:53 pm
Brit Hume who works for Fox News had this to say about the cartoon issue: (at least Fox has the guts to bring the double standard while CNN attempts to Blame Western Culture for everything that goes wrong):
What is striking about this is what offends these Muslims who are protesting and these imams. Does the slaughter of innocent people in many parts of the world in the name of Allah offend them? Is that a sacrilege worthy of protest? No, not in the least. No, cartoons published five months ago in a -what- for people who live in Gaza and Damascus is an unknown and unheard-of newspaper–that’s what’s offending them. Not to mention, of course, the kinds of slurs against Christians and against the Jewish faith that are regularly spread abroad in the Arab world by the mass media and by these imams.
This is really a disgrace. And it is a disgrace not least because of the obvious, howling double standard involved here. The really great sins are ignored. And this trivia is protested.
Comment by Fernando Caballero — 02.06.06 @ 12:07 am
Putting the cartoon controversy….
….in perspective.Liberal editors are a lot smarter than they look. If Rolling Stone had put Kanye West posing as Muhammad on the cover, they’d be …
Trackback by Media Lies — 02.06.06 @ 1:46 am
From Neal Boortz website:
“Muslim outrage huh. OK … let’s do a little historical review. Just some lowlights:
Muslims fly commercial airliners into buildings in New York City. No Muslim outrage.
Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia. A Christian school. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt. No Muslim outrage.
A Muslim attacks a missionary children’s school in India. Kills six. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia. Muslims shoot children in the back. No Muslim outrage.
Let’s go way back. Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses. Over 700 are injured. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali. No Muslim outrage.
Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons. No Muslim outrage
Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge. No Muslim outrage.
Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed. Muslims are outraged.”
Sounds right to me?
Comment by James Newman — 02.06.06 @ 6:00 am
Off-topic. You may resubmit this comment under the appropriate post, and exclude the profanity. - Admin
Comment by Obure peter — 02.06.06 @ 7:10 am
Although many non-Muslims, like myself, including our State Department, find that publishing the Mohammed cartoons in the Jyllands-Posten and republishing the cartoons in other European papers is certainly in poor taste, the extreme overreaction of those offended could make their response bigger news than the original offense, and thus, causing a shift of sympathies. They should register their protest and calm down.
Comment by Curt Dalaba — 02.06.06 @ 7:39 am
First off (and I direct this at anyone who was offended by the RS cover, not just La Shawn), did you read the article in RS or just look at the picture and instantly judge it, assuming that the purpose was to scorn Jesus? Second, if it was done simply to scorn Jesus’ name, why not use it as a tool for spreading your Christian message (i.e. “Let me tell you about the Jesus I know” rather than “How dare you scorn Jesus”).
Second, if you want to generalize I could easily come to the conclusion that all Christians are crazy homeless people who stand in the streets and yell at everyone that they’re going to hell. Other than my family, that’s the only face of Christianity that I see, so that makes sense right? Of course not, and neither does the conclusion that all Muslims and/or Arabs are nothing more than hate-filled killing machines. Just because the only face of that group that you see comes from news reports on the war, doesn’t mean everyone is like that.
Comment by Thomas — 02.06.06 @ 9:19 am
I am not, in any way, a religious person. That means I do not find it offensive to mock religious icons of any flavour. As a Canadian, we are told, constantly, to be “tolerant” of religious beliefs. I just can’t be tolerant of Islam. I don’t care HOW it is to be practiced, I only know how INTOLERANT most proponents of it are. Most religions have a degree of the ridiculous about them, Christianity is no exception. But to me Islam ranks alongside Scientology (if the latter can even be considered a religion).
Comment by Steve — 02.06.06 @ 11:44 am
my earlier point wasn’t to illustrate how abortion bombings and Islamic terrorism were equal (I like how my lynching example was completely dropped out though). My point was that violence used harass and intimidate people, no matter how many people are killed or injured, is terrorism, and subsequently should be admonished. Once you start comparing (and primarily using) gross statistics to figure out what form of terrorism is worse, you’re already missing the point. It’s deeper than group x killed more people than group y so group x is the more evil group. At the point that your actions strike terror in the group you are trying to intimidate, you’ve accomplished your goal.
I would argue that right here in the united states, the fact that a black wwii veteran could return to the south after the war, be publicly lynched in uniform for trying to vote, and still have his killers acquitted in front of an all white jury. An event such as this has as much (if not much more) of a pschological effect than killing multiple people.
We’ve come a long way through the efforts of the civil rights movement, hate crime legislation, and more stringent federal monitering of state activities, but we as a society must still be cognizant of our own failings in the past.
Comment by rob — 02.06.06 @ 12:04 pm
True, insane people have done evil and disgusting things in the name of Christ. But I would argue that the men who did these things ARE NOT TRULY CHRISTIANS. They are fooling themselves and others into thinking that they are doing God’s will.
“Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”
–Jesus, Matthew 7:21-23, KJV
Here is a quotation from thereligionofpeace.com:
“More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.”
Visit http://www.thereligionofpeace.com. Read the stuff. ALL of it. Look at the list of terrorist attacks. Then say that Islam and Christianity are equal. Here’s a bit of Islam’s teaching:
“Fight and slay the Unbelievers wherever ye find them. Seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war.”
Qur’an, Sura 9:5
The difference is and should be obvious. As Ronald Reagan said while he was the Governor of California, America could easily have conquered the world at the end of WWII. We had an undamaged industrial system, we had an enormous population, and we had the only atomic bomb. The rest of the world was war-weary. Can you honestly say that if the Soviet Union had been in that position, with that Bomb, that the world would not have been taken over?
(Simply switch out “Soviet Union” with the name of any Muslim nation and the result is the same: world sharia law.)
Comment by Price — 02.06.06 @ 1:28 pm
#46: “…I could easily come to the conclusion that all Christians are crazy homeless people who stand in the streets and yell at everyone that they’re going to hell. Other than my family, that’s the only face of Christianity that I see, so that makes sense right?”
If that’s the only face of Christianity you see, you need to get out of the house more often and open your eyes. If 50,000 homeless people attacked foreign embassies located in Washington, D.C. while screaming quotations from the Sermon on the Mount, you might have a point.
Comment by Kevin — 02.06.06 @ 1:37 pm
Price -
You write: ““More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.â€
This is a very misleading tidbit. What exactly is meant by people killed by “Islamists” here? Is it the total number of people who are killed in Islamic countries each year? In other words, does this include normal crime rate stats of homicides in Islamic countries? Does that include the number of people killed by the insurgency in Iraq War? If you are including crime stats and war casualties, that’s very misleading. If you do that, you’d have to compare it to the total homicides in the US and the total number of people killed by US forces in Iraq. I think the only proper comparison is if you look at killings committed by Islamic terrorists, excluding homicide crime stats and war dead.
I checked the link to the site you cited - http://www.thereligionofpeace.com - from which you draw that quote. That site lists as its source of the quote the following document: http://www.crisismagazine.com/october2003/madden.htm
It is an interesting article from a Catholic perspective on the Inquisition. Hpowever, no where in the document does it say that “More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.” In fact, the document makes no mention of Islamists at all. However, the document does make the following statement:
“In its 350-year lifespan only about 4,000 people were put to the stake. Compare that with the witch-hunts that raged across the rest of Catholic and Protestant Europe, in which 60,000 people, mostly women, were roasted.”
So here we have it: the inquisition killed about 4,000 people, and Christian witch hunts killed another 60,000. Now, according to the Center for International Security and Cooperation, “…In 2003, a total of 625 people–including 35 Americans–were killed in international terrorist incidents worldwide.” Link: http://cisac.stanford.edu/news/383/
So, even if we assume that all 625 of the people who died by terrorists in 2003 were killed by Muslims, that is a far cry below the 4,000 killed in the 350 year history of the Inquisition, and the 60,000 killed in witch-hunts.
So, the quote you posted that “More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined,” is demonstrably false.
You admonished us to read ALL of that website. Well, in response, I would encourage you to not believe everything you read on shrill websites! Do your own investigation and your own thinking.
Comment by Aaron — 02.06.06 @ 3:06 pm
#49: In response to your 2nd sentence.. it works both ways. I would suggest those who support the violence going on aren’t true Muslims.
As for the quote on Islam’s teaching, did it cross your mind to research that rather than just copy/paste? If you look at the link below and read the FULL quote and the context of it then you get an entirely different message. The way you posted (copied) it, it appears to direct Muslims to kill us today for no apparent reason. That’s not the message at all and it’s extremely irresponsible to post something without researching it first.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/009.qmt.html
Comment by Thomas — 02.06.06 @ 4:09 pm
You are right. The qur’an does not say to kill unbelievers. It says to kill them once the holy months have passed if they do not convert. In other words: convert or die.
Comment by Price — 02.06.06 @ 5:40 pm
P.S. The Religion of Peace started in a very peaceful way. As soon as Mohamed had enough followers, he returned to Mecca and slaughtered all men, women and children who did not convert to Islam. To be fair, at first Muslims were supposed to give Christians and Jews a third choice: convert, die, or pay a small tax, because they were “people of the Book” and worshiped the same God. What ever happened to that?
Comment by Price — 02.06.06 @ 5:48 pm
I would agree with several posters that the jury is out on whether Islam properly practiced is bad. But if you look at the fundamental tenets of Communism, Socialism, and Marxism, the same is true. If all people in a nation were perfect and nobody had any desire for power, then those systems would actually work better than Capitalism. Unfortunately, they aren’t perfect and they do want power, so it doesn’t work. By the way, great blog, Lashawn.
Comment by Price — 02.06.06 @ 6:08 pm
Aaron, you do realize that going from #49’s quote of ‘More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined’ to your statistics on ‘terrorists’ is a bit misleading, right?
And where does the poster even mention the witch hunts?
Comment by Alex — 02.06.06 @ 6:40 pm
In response to #54
Price -
You write, “…he returned to Mecca and slaughtered all men, women and children who did not convert to Islam. To be fair, at first Muslims were supposed to give Christians and Jews a third choice: convert, die, or pay a small tax…”
Well, that is precisely the same thing that the Christians did when they reconquered Spain at the end of the 15th century. The Spanish Church, backed up by the monarchy, proclaimed that all Muslims, Jews, or Gypsys living in Spain must either convert to Christianity, flee, or die.
In your next post, Price, you write: “I would agree with several posters that the jury is out on whether Islam properly practiced is bad. But if you look at the fundamental tenets of Communism, Socialism, and Marxism, the same is true.” So actually Price, when you really think about it, it is not any particualr religious belief or political philosophy that is inherently violent, but rather extremismist interpretations of any kind that leads to violence. Can we agree on that?
And in regards to extremism leading to violent acts, Christianity and Islam are far from being alone. For exmaple, radical extremist Hindus in India have in recent years carried out truly barbarous, mob-led atrocities against Muslims. So it seems that in all of these cases of insane brutality, the common denominator is humanity. We as a species like to attach ourselves to certain religious and political outlooks, and then perpetrate violence on those who believe otherwise. This I think is the true enemy of humankind. We must be on guard against it at all times, no matter what religion we hold sacred.
Comment by Aaron — 02.06.06 @ 6:49 pm
This may seem a bit nitpicky, but the Crusades were under the purview of the Roman Catholic Church, which represented “Christianity†at the time. I’m not certain but doubtful that the Orthodox church, closer in doctrine to Reformation-era Christians, supported the Crusades.
Either way…I recommend you read about the Crusades in these articles written by a Crusade scholar, The Real History of the Crusades:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/118/52.0.html
Onward PC Soldiers:
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/madden200505270751.asp
The Real Inquisition:
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/madden200406181026.asp
Comment by La Shawn — 02.06.06 @ 7:18 pm
Alex,
Well, that’s what I’m trying get clarification on in Price’s statement “More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined” - what exactly does “killed by Islamists” include? I assume that it must refer to people killed by Islamic terrorists. If it is to include criminals who also happen to be Muslim who commit murder in the course of robbing someone (ie, homicide crime stats) , well, then those stats would not really be instructive. In the US, for example, 25,000 people are killed each year due to homicide - are we then supposed to make the statement “25,000 people are killed by Christians each year” because the US is a predominantly Christian country? I am just trying to get at what was actually being included in the stat quote he listed. Hopefully Price can shed some light on that.
You go on to say:“And where does the poster even mention the witch hunts?” The quote listed by the poster made reference to the Inquisition. The poster then linked to the website where he got the quote - the document that is listed as the source of the quote on that website talks about both the Christian led witch hunts and the Inquisition. So, it was the website he told us to read that brought up the witch-hunts, not I. In any case, since the topic is the history of violence of Christians vs Muslims, the witch hunts are relevant.
When all is said and done, I believe these stats are correct:
- Number of people killed in 2003 (an above average year) by terrorists of all kinds, including Islamic: 625
- Number of people estimated by Price’s website to have been killed by the Inquisition in its 350-year history: 4,000
- Number of people estimated to have been kiled by Christian led witch hunts during the same period: 60,000
Draw your own conclusions, but I believe these stats are accurate (unless Price wants to refute the very source he himself listed).
Comment by Aaron — 02.06.06 @ 7:22 pm
Goodnight all - thanks for a very interesting discussion!
Comment by Aaron — 02.06.06 @ 7:35 pm
#57
Absolutely. Humanity, not any of the major religions, is the main problem. Unfortunately, some religions are more prone to violence, just as some people are.
Comment by Price — 02.06.06 @ 7:49 pm
Islamofascists torch the Danish and Norwegian em..
And in doing so, they show why nobody should have to recognize them as legitimate. Michelle Malkin’s got a video recording of the massacre in Syria against the Danish and Norwegian embassies.
Trackback by Tel-Chai Nation — 02.07.06 @ 12:49 am
Aaron,
Please don’t forget the 3000 US civilians killed by the Islamists on 9/11. And the 220 killed in the 1998 Kenyan embassy bombing (and the 4000 wounded). Also the 241 US servicemen killed in Beirute in 1983. And the list goes on. I’m pretty sure you can find more than 4000 in a far shorter span of time than 350 years.
However, I don’t believe that the inquisition or the witch hunt is really comparable to the Islamist terrorists of today. Just because these were essentially within what was considered the Christian community. These were not instances of Christians going to Muslim countries to try to kill as many civilians as possible. If you really want to do comparisons perhaps you should look at the frictions between the Sunnis and Shia, perhaps including the incident where imam Ali got killed. Or perhaps all those Kurds who got gassed, or the Shias who filled Saddam’s graves.
At any rate I don’t really see this point in saying that Christians have done horrible stuffs in the past. While Islam is younger than Christianity the history of Arabs are just as long as any other peoples and they should be judged as anyone else is — according to the standards of this age.
Comment by fuzz — 02.07.06 @ 1:00 am
fuzz -
Of course. I am not letting Islam off the hook here at all. Far from it. I think this kind of violence being perpetrated by some Muslims over these stupid cartoons published months ago is both appalling and ridiculous. And obviously, many Muslims are being manipulated for political gain by religious extremists. No matter how offensive some Muslims may have found the cratoons, we in the West cannot give in to such violence. We need to stand firm on the principles of free expression in a democratic society. If some Islamists are offended, well too bad.
And it goes without saying that the terrorist attacks you mention were reprehensible.
All I am saying is that Islam does not have a monopoly on violent extremism. Christians should not see themselves as being without blemish when it comes to violent and reprehensible acts, as their history well shows.
It is easy to condemn a particular race or religion as being “inherently” violent. But truth be told, this potential for violence is within all of us, and can be expressed in all religions or political philosophies under the proper conditions. I believe it is dangerous to see ourselves as being innately above such “uncivilized” acts. The German people in 1933 probably viewed themselves in this same virtuous light, only to find themselves shaking their heads in horror a little over a decade later, wondering how they could have let this happen (and quite a few Christian Germans were sure that God was on their side in WWII).
This is not to say that we cannot discern between right and wrong, or good and evil. We should not shy away from condemning evil acts whenever and whereever they occur. But if in so doing we confer upon ourselves an innate moral superiority, then we are headed down a dangerous path.
Comment by Aaron — 02.07.06 @ 3:33 am
Truth in Cartoons
I am sympathetic towards Muslims who feel that any visual representation of Mohammad is considered an abomination. I also understand how offensive it can be when mainstream media marginalizes or even mocks the significance of a religious figure - …
Trackback by Right Wing Religious Wacko (RWRW) — 02.07.06 @ 8:04 am
Kanye West As mohammed*??
Well, now that’s a real cutting-edge (heh - pun intended) image idea! There’s no risk in defaming Christ or Christians. If Kanye wants to show how “bad” he is, he should pose as mohammed.
Remember a couple of weeks ago, when I…
Trackback by euphoricreality.net — 02.07.06 @ 9:43 am
La Shawn,
Here’s some reading from a Catholic perspective, around the Roman/Byzantium schism and the politics of the Crusades
http://www.catholicleague.org/research/battle_over_the_crusades.htm
Comment by SCSIwuzzy — 02.07.06 @ 11:42 am
First, LaShawn (after saying you’re doing great, still), please see Belmont Club where it’s reported the 12 cartoons were already published in an Egyptian paper in October, 2005.
Without the fake/ super-offensive 3 (pedophile, pig, dog rape) that the Danish Imam added to increase the outrage.
Second, the double standard of the MSM is horrible. Rule of Law means all religions are treated the same. I didn’t like piss Christ or Virgin Mary in dung, nor Last Temptation of Christ. MSM has no problem supporting these offensive acts. Now they are “sensitive” to avoid offense.
Please consider leading a boycott of NBC and the upcoming Grace and Will pro-gay “Cruci-fixin’s”. Such a boycott should give the anti-Christians a space to call “censorship” and Christians time reply “hypocrite — you failed to print the 12 cartoons.”
Free speech means freedom to object, peacefully. Christians can, perhaps, show Muslims how to do that. If a Modern, tolerant Muslim movement can evolve, ending the terrorist violence — the Modern, tolerant Christians will be allies against the Secular Fundamentalists. Like many Muslims at UN meetings, who are pro-life.
(Why doesn’t Tom Grey in Slovakia do this, with his 4 kids and home-consulting job? It’s not in the cards. Plus, YOU are a better face! Pretty smile, a woman, black; and leading a boycott can get you interviews to laugh at the NBC / NYT hypocrisy! I will also suggest this to Michelle Malkin — did you see her fantastic video, And then they came for the Embassies ? )
Comment by Tom Grey - Liberty Dad — 02.08.06 @ 6:05 pm
Hahaha…
I saw this and laughed. You are right on with this one Lashawn…
Kanye West is ridiculous and so lost. Especially how he talks about Jesus and how he wants to meet him. And then to dress up and pretend to be Christ?
But in his videos, he has all kinds of women, mostly black women, gyrating and grinding half naked……Which is pretty much all that rap, hip hop and suprisingly country is these days.
How does Kanye think he will meet Christ while promoting that kind of garbarge?
So messed up..
Remember how he said “George Bush doesnt care about black people!”
Well, “Kanye West doesnt care about black women!”
Comment by lukeNC — 02.09.06 @ 10:17 am
LaShawn, here is a link to an article telling us that in the Muslim religion it says nowhere in their book that it is forbidden to draw pictures of Mohammad. It does say that prohibiting the pictures is a political move, not a religious one. Here’s the link; http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007934
Thanks again for the good read, TKTPLZ!
Comment by ticketplease — 02.09.06 @ 11:41 am
mohammed is depicted in a bas-relief sculpture on the U.S supreme court building ( along with moses and other figures). are muslims going burn down the u.s. supreme court building?
Comment by indigo710 — 02.10.06 @ 12:29 pm