Brian Ross wrote on Nov 12
th, 2024 at 6:28pm:
Oh, dearie, dearie, me, Soren do you really need to be told about attitude? Your criticisms are invariably written in a nasty way. If you changed your attitude and asked for information before you voiced your criticisms and accepted Muslim explanations you'd wouldn't be considered an Islamophobe automatically. Yes, Islam can be criticised and deserves to be criticised but needs to be criticised from a position of knowledge, not Islamophobic hatred. Tsk, tsk, tsk...
People Who Talk Are Bad, People Who Shoot Misunderstood
But if Hirsi Ali, who has called for an Islamic reformation, is tantamount to a terrorist, then what does that make the Orlando shooter or the San Bernardino attackers? We’ve reached a point of absurdity in our national conversation on Islam, where religious terrorists are just misunderstood or mentally ill, but activists working against the persistent problem of violence in Islam are terrorists.
The Left shies away from terms like “Islamic terrorist,” and “Muslim extremist,” opting instead for the uber-sensitive and inchoate “violent extremism,” as though one could be an extremist about nothing in particular. That’s because they reject any association between Muslims and violence, no matter how many terrorist attacks are carried out in the name of Allah. Because groups like the SPLC refuse to acknowledge this relationship, even in its weakest form, they consequently view any mention of it as anti-Muslim.
This of course doesn’t mean that all Muslims are terrorists. (That should go without saying, but given the new standard for “extremism,” one can never be too careful.) Yet that’s the view the SPLC wants you to think these intellectuals are advocating. It’s in the best interest of Islamists, and those defending them, to pretend there’s one monolithic “Islam,” and people like Hirsi Ali are nothing but Islamophobes.
By doing this, they can make legitimate criticism of the practices of some, or even many, Muslims into a blanketed attack on the entire religion. From there, they can call those critics “anti-Muslim,” detracting from any meaningful conversation about the threat of a legitimate strain of Islam—namely Islamism.
The Real Bigotry Is Making Excuses for Muslims The 15 people on the SPLC list are accused of inspiring violence, a vague but ominous crime. This same argument has often been used to defend censoring images of Mohammed, especially critical ones. Leftists, and many Muslims around the world, consider any criticism of Islam the same as inspiring violence, and they use this to shut down speech. But fear of violence, or fear of being called a provoker of such violence, shouldn’t deter what and whom we criticize. Especially not in America, where freedom of expression has been enshrined in our Constitution.
The SPLC holds a double standard for Muslims.
https://thefederalist.com/2016/11/02/leftist-group-saying-islam-problems-makes-t...And so do you, Bbwiyawn.
Forum
Pages: 1
9 (Read 1679 times)
