***This is not intended to be about the Cordoba House issue [specifically]***
Alrighty... so, the consensus in the United States would seem to be racism is bad. Common sense, right? Well... if you look at the Cordoba Initiative issue, and in general the common attitude towards Muslims, why is Islamophobia looked upon any differently then other forms of negative racially charged sentiments? Yes, a phobia is a fear of something but fear is many times a driving force in racial hatred. I'm not saying Islamophobes should be necessarily punished-as long as they express themselves peacefully, it's their right and I wouldn't dispute that-the thing is though, when a Neo Nazi group, the WBC or a KKK stages a protest, everyone is up in arms about what they're saying, when Don Imus uses racial epithets on the air he is reprimanded and yet at the same time people are not awarded a healthy amount of criticism for making Islamophobic or anti-Islam remarks? I don't see how Don Imus's remarks are too different from half the stuff you hear from Ann Coulter (minus a few more colorful bits of vocabulary here and there).
Simply put, I don't see the reasoning that goes on when any other form of racism is condemned or looked down upon but Islamophobia goes largely uncriticized... what do you guys think?
Why is christianity persecuted and made fun of nearly everywhere? Can't have your cake and eat it too.
It's also not racism, its religious descrimination.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Even if the author is silenced, the performance is stopped, the story will not end.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
Islamophobia is a plank in the platform of a mainstream political party. It's just like how homophobia was a plank over the last two decades (and before). It's tolerated because there are enough people who buy into it, and will go to the polls over it.
Well I nor any of my friends tolerate it. We don't tolerate it for the same reasons we don't tolerate racism. Publically I tend to think the groups being the most rabid about it have the backing of some corporations which have a bit to gain by keeping a section of the populace fearful and ignorant.
Other then that, Tiax is right, sad to say. Our culture seems to need a scapegoat for some people to be happy with themselves.
Legacy/Vintage GWREnchanted Eve (building) ~ BPoxy Pox
Standard WUMeow-Go~BU Infection
Casual BWAngel Doom ~ GRWWarpride ~ WGUStoic Control (ARG)
EDH BRGWUScion of the Ur-Dragon ~ BSiezan, The Perverter of Truth ~ W 8.5 Tails (needs work) All my Decks.
Why is christianity persecuted and made fun of nearly everywhere? Can't have your cake and eat it too.
It's also not racism, its religious descrimination.
I had to laugh at this because it is so true. the people that are so up in defense about anti this or anti that are the first ones to bash christianity.
I find it quite funny.
I am sure if a Christian organization had wanted to put a church or another christian symbol the ACLU would have been all over that in a heartbeat.
The same people that cry for religious tollerance i find are not that tolerant themselves more so when it comes to christianity.
Such is life i guess.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
I am sure if a Christian organization had wanted to put a church or another christian symbol the ACLU would have been all over that in a heartbeat.
Yeah, because the St. Nicholas church they're trying to rebuild literally right across the street from ground zero is getting so much flak from the ACLU.
Why is Christianophobia tolerated? Why is Antisemitism tolerated? I think with every type of tolerated intolerance you will get basically the same answer.
Also religious intolerance is not inherently racist. I think your stretching things a little by stating that.
Yeah, because the St. Nicholas church they're trying to rebuild literally right across the street from ground zero is getting so much flak from the ACLU.
But has it even been built yet. No, the city has been playing games with them for some time now and they have yet to break ground on the church.
Why is christianity persecuted and made fun of nearly everywhere? Can't have your cake and eat it too.
It's also not racism, its religious descrimination.
I should have made that distinction, thought to be fair, there was an incident with the Cordoba House protests where two Christian Arabs wanted to join the protest but were pushed out by the others because they inferred they too were Muslim based on their race...
As for being 'made fun of', there's a difference between people joking around and people blocking others from people getting all up in arms the way they are with building the Cordoba house.
Regardless though, Christianity isn't 'persecuted'. There are certainly those who push religiously fueled positions (for example, the proposed 'marriage amendment) and so they do, and rightfully so, receive criticism.
By the way, Mystery45, if you're going to try to bash the ACLU in this case-it was the ACLU who defended a student's right to express their pro-life views...
Yeah, because the St. Nicholas church they're trying to rebuild literally right across the street from ground zero is getting so much flak from the ACLU.
Little difference in rebuilding something that is already there and needs repair and then actually breaking down a building and building another one.
Regardless though, Christianity isn't 'persecuted'. There are certainly those who push religiously fueled positions (for example, the proposed 'marriage amendment) and so they do, and rightfully so, receive criticism.
please check the news again any time a christian sneezes someone brings a lawsuit thanks again though. This why we ban christian nativity scene but it is ok to bring in other religious symbols. That is why people can't put a cross on a highway because where their loved one died because it might offend someone.
By the way, Mystery45, if you're going to try to bash the ACLU in this case-it was the ACLU who defended a student's right to express their pro-life views...
pro-life =/= christian. there are plenty of non-christians that are pro-life. one is a political view the other is a religious view. there is a big difference.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
pro-life =/= christian. there are plenty of non-christians that are pro-life. one is a political view the other is a religious view. there is a big difference.
I never explicitly stated it was a Christian view and I am well aware of this, but it's pretty indisputable that a large part of the pro-life base in the US is Christian. (From wikipedia: 'Much of the pro-life movement in the United States and around the world finds support in the Roman Catholic Church, evangelical Protestant denominations, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).[8][9][10][11]')
Anyhow, my point was that the ACLU isn't going around stopping citizens from expressing their views in public, related to Christianity or otherwise.
Islamophobia is tolerated in the same way that christianphobia is tolerated. yet i don't see you wondering why that is.
I won't deny that a lot of Christian related movements tend to attract negative reactions justified or not. But think about it-how many people do you see labeling Christians as the 'enemies of America'? No large protests are organized to get people up in arms about arguably violent or otherwise 'unacceptable' passages in Christian or Jewish religious texts, and yet people are protesting Islam because of Sharia law.
The "anti-theism" concerning religion in general is a reaction against the whole of two forces:
1. Rise of the Christian right/social conservatism
-Reaganism
-Moral Majority
-A lot of 1980's and 1990's activism to "save the children" and other such things where a lot of people liked to talk and pass laws but not really do much of anything
2. Islamic Fascism
-terrorists since the 70's or so blowing stuff up
-9/11, America gets angry and goes to war
3. Convecting reactions
-Atheists and such react against the rise of religion in the sense of Bush's Christianity and Islamofacism by clinging to scientism and the enlightenment
-Christians react against Muslims
-Normal people take on the source of victimhood associated with terrorism as a sense of identity
-All Americans clinging to certain American identities "New Atheists" more toward the enlightenment, libertarians clung to classical liberalism (see Ron Paul's reaction in all this), and a clung to our history(esp. military) and philosophies
Granted this is overly simplistic, but I have to say that what I see a lot of threads coming together and reacting against globalism and the changes that capitalism places into the whole framework of the world. The regimes of the Middle East also play power politics, especially Afghanistan and Iran having played up the "Great White Satan" bull ☺☺☺☺. I know enough about the Middle East's history to know that yes America messed with the "system" there plus the Europeans really screwed with natural borders after the Ottoman Empires fall. However, at some point the leaderships of those societies must be held accountable. The turbulence from a handful of people that we never really cared about is quite astounding, but our reaction has been huge and complex.
People are "religioned out" and we're in an age of existentialism and spirituality, and moving away from doctrines. You see this with liberal Christianity where dogma is preached far less in megachurches and even in modern churches there's different masses held for different tastes. The Jewish community is also changing, especially with the economic times, trying to retain a cultural identity around the synagogue more toward a Christian model to allow Jews to act more as a free agent in their own affairs than to revolve around the classical synagogue structure. Muslims are also going this way in the state, while atheists and friends are organizing and connecting more on a more public scale.
So overall, there's more clashes incoming to define what reality is. The macronarrative for religion in general is changing as I said to existentialistic spiritualism coupled with people moving away from dogma. What seems to becoming more dogmatic is scientific rationality, but I digress. The cultural narrative against Islam is also that it is a backwater culture that blows up buildings. This is in part the fault of Islamic countries, when you scream "Great Satan" for a generation or two and then some rich guy decides its cool to blow up buildings is going to invite discrimination.
9/11 isn't an excuse, nor is it something to be ignored. However, when our American culture is about openness and I believe this is against what we stand for to deny people the right to rebuild and build up an area. The build is abandoned and can become a center for various Muslims to spread a more tolerant ideology.
I don't believe America is Islamophobic, and this term will become another term that while well meaning like "Holocaust denier" will be perverted through continual association with terms like "climate change deniers" that set up a supposition of totality within a person's ideological framework. Granted it is in part a limitation of the English language to describe "for" and "opposed" as "pro" and "anti," but these issues become inundated with stupidity like with "prolife" and "pro-choice" or "communist" and "anticommunism" and "socialist."
It is just a continuation of certain natural cycles in our society, but I'm surprised we've managed to mitigate the issues of people being anti-Arab and anti-Muslim for so long. However, I feel this is in part economic as people act more irrationally when they're pessimistic about the future.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
again pro-life =/= christianity. one is a religious view the other is political. how the ACLU acts towards one is totally different than the other.
It depends entirely on the reasoning behind the ACLU's individual defense - and in that case they were defending it because of the person's religious beliefs that supported their pro-life stance that was being ignored.
Without the religious reasoning behind it the ACLU would have had no reason to intervene on the matter.
Islamophobia is tolerated in the same way that christianphobia is tolerated. yet i don't see you wondering why that is.
I'd love to see examples of "Christianophobia" - poking fun and teasing is hardly the same as fear. Generally whomever is at the "top of the totem pole" is subject to more cases of comedy and criticism, it's a result of being a common topic not because people are afraid.
There is a difference between being afraid of Muslims and being afraid of Islamic belief. I am afraid of the latter, and I consider that quite justified.
By the way I'm also afraid of communists and national socialists. Like Muslims, they have beliefs. Like Muslims, those beliefs are, in my view, crazy.
I heard my boss today complaining that "the muslims just blew us up and now the same people are building a mosque." How exactly do you fight this when half of the country shares this sentiment?
I'm not saying Islamophobes should be necessarily punished-as long as they express themselves peacefully, it's their right and I wouldn't dispute that-the thing is though, when a Neo Nazi group, the WBC or a KKK stages a protest, everyone is up in arms about what they're saying
Here is the major difference that liberals love to brush off. What did the Jews do to the Nazis? Nothing. What did the Africans do to the KKK? Nothing. What did the Muslims do to Americans? They took 3000 lives and if the Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab plane incident shows anything, Muslims are still eager to take more American lives.
The worst part is that we know with practically 99% confidence that the next major terrorist attack on American soil will be conducted by an innocent-American-disguised Muslim. Perhaps only 0.000000001% of Muslims turn out to be extremists but we know the next attack will be from a Muslim. Shouldn't that warrant greater scrutiny?
I maintain that any doctrine identical to Islam not deemed a "religion" would have been expelled from the United States years ago. I'm tired of political correctness that defies both logic and common sense.
Ill take that bet. statistically speaking most major terrorist attacks on US soil have been perpetrated by non-muslims.
A major terrorist attack (of Islamic proportions) should include the death of at least 100 people. Let me list all the major US terrorist attacks I can think of. Then you list all the major attacks you can think of.
The point is that every "major" terrorist attack (I can think of) is associated with Islam and Muslims are constantly trying to attempt more.
Now you might start off a semantics debate regarding "major" but I believe we can both agree that a 9/11 status terrorist attacks really undermines any of those small radical Christian terrorist attacks in the past.
I think a lot of people are forgetting 2 years ago when Mitt Romney was running for President and people on both sides of the political isle were throwing him under the bus for being Mormon and attacking the religion in every way possible, even propagating the fear of Mormons. Same can be said for JFK when tons of people said the pope would be taking over America.
Now you might start off a semantics debate regarding "major" but I believe we can both agree that a 9/11 status terrorist attacks really undermines any of those small radical Christian terrorist attacks in the past.
Beltway shooter? Kansas City (or whatever it was - hazy on which ATM) bombing? Amongst others....
Not to mention looking outside to the less myopic worldview wikipedia keeps a nice list of major terrorist actions such as: 2010
Notice how many terrorist actions tend to be non-local and done by non-locals/non-local groups? Terrorists generally don't like attacking across the world beyond giving a "keep your nose out of our part of the world" message.
You know there hasn't been gems like this one here recently after all (inspired by similar fear to the generation of Islamophobia at that): Link
Oh, yeah, one more thing: demanding major attacks and defining those as attacks with more than 100 victims is very dishonest because in doing so you are discounting the significantly greater quantity of smaller-scale attacks carried out by non-foreigners.
And of course the fact that if you're going to be investing the ridiculous amount of time and energy into an attack overseas, it only makes sense to go big.
It's one thing to waste a weekend making and hiding bombs to see it not see it get the attention you think it deserves as a terrorist - it's entirely another to have an entire network of people operating for years and spending tons of money to enact a plot and see it not get the attention you think it deserves.
When you've got Hatching Plans you make sure they're noticed when they're launched.
A major terrorist attack (of Islamic proportions) should include the death of at least 100 people. Let me list all the major US terrorist attacks I can think of. Then you list all the major attacks you can think of.
The point is that every "major" terrorist attack (I can think of) is associated with Islam and Muslims are constantly trying to attempt more.
Now you might start off a semantics debate regarding "major" but I believe we can both agree that a 9/11 status terrorist attacks really undermines any of those small radical Christian terrorist attacks in the past.
Within that "homogeneous" group is a killer. Are you suggesting that we don't apply our utmost efforts to avoid a second major terrorist attack?
McVey killed the most people in Oklahoma City Bombing before 9/11 in a terrorist attack, and he was ex-military and white. Frankly,the "homogeneous" groups aren't really all homogeneous. Next to Islamofascists it's been whites that have done more terrorism in the news since the 1990's especially with the rise of militias and ecoterrorist groups.
Furthermore, white people also have a longer history of discrimination against minorities and have constructed different ideological groups that engage/engaged in small acts of terrorism such as the KKK or Neo-Nazis. Hell, the KKK is a left over of a Civil War insurgent group.
So then should we fear white people as much as Arabs? It seems that going off of past history, that whites have been the major destabilizing force in America than any amount of Arabs have historically. Also, with the rise of Jihad Jane and other such people it makes whites all that more attractive to meter out extremists against.
If you use meters of racial profiling or religious profiling, terrorists just start acting "white and Christian" while being "crypto-Islamic." Hell, they've even went out of their way to recruit Americans for their goals. And quite frankly, religion is one of the easiest things to fake like any other belief.
Furthermore, white people also have a longer history of discrimination against minorities and have constructed different ideological groups that engage/engaged in small acts of terrorism such as the KKK or Neo-Nazis. Hell, the KKK is a left over of a Civil War insurgent group.
Longer than what and where? My point isn't that whtie people haven't done it, but your tone implies that white people do it significantly more often than other colours given the same circumstances -- I'm contesting that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Alrighty... so, the consensus in the United States would seem to be racism is bad. Common sense, right? Well... if you look at the Cordoba Initiative issue, and in general the common attitude towards Muslims, why is Islamophobia looked upon any differently then other forms of negative racially charged sentiments? Yes, a phobia is a fear of something but fear is many times a driving force in racial hatred. I'm not saying Islamophobes should be necessarily punished-as long as they express themselves peacefully, it's their right and I wouldn't dispute that-the thing is though, when a Neo Nazi group, the WBC or a KKK stages a protest, everyone is up in arms about what they're saying, when Don Imus uses racial epithets on the air he is reprimanded and yet at the same time people are not awarded a healthy amount of criticism for making Islamophobic or anti-Islam remarks? I don't see how Don Imus's remarks are too different from half the stuff you hear from Ann Coulter (minus a few more colorful bits of vocabulary here and there).
Simply put, I don't see the reasoning that goes on when any other form of racism is condemned or looked down upon but Islamophobia goes largely uncriticized... what do you guys think?
DECKS
:symw::symb: Life Gain :symb::symw:
Building (eventually)...
:symb::symr::symg: Dragon-Ramp :symg::symr::symb:
It's also not racism, its religious descrimination.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
Other then that, Tiax is right, sad to say. Our culture seems to need a scapegoat for some people to be happy with themselves.
Flavour-Deckbuilder of the Flittering Clique
The [Pack] My Trade List
Cardshark IS AWESOME!
Trade me Crusaders?
GWREnchanted Eve (building) ~ BPoxy Pox
Standard
WUMeow-Go~BU Infection
Casual
BWAngel Doom ~ GRWWarpride ~ WGUStoic Control (ARG)
EDH
BRGWUScion of the Ur-Dragon ~ BSiezan, The Perverter of Truth ~ W 8.5 Tails (needs work)
All my Decks.
I had to laugh at this because it is so true. the people that are so up in defense about anti this or anti that are the first ones to bash christianity.
I find it quite funny.
I am sure if a Christian organization had wanted to put a church or another christian symbol the ACLU would have been all over that in a heartbeat.
The same people that cry for religious tollerance i find are not that tolerant themselves more so when it comes to christianity.
Such is life i guess.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Yeah, because the St. Nicholas church they're trying to rebuild literally right across the street from ground zero is getting so much flak from the ACLU.
Also religious intolerance is not inherently racist. I think your stretching things a little by stating that.
But has it even been built yet. No, the city has been playing games with them for some time now and they have yet to break ground on the church.
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
What does that have to do with the ACLU?
I should have made that distinction, thought to be fair, there was an incident with the Cordoba House protests where two Christian Arabs wanted to join the protest but were pushed out by the others because they inferred they too were Muslim based on their race...
As for being 'made fun of', there's a difference between people joking around and people blocking others from people getting all up in arms the way they are with building the Cordoba house.
Regardless though, Christianity isn't 'persecuted'. There are certainly those who push religiously fueled positions (for example, the proposed 'marriage amendment) and so they do, and rightfully so, receive criticism.
By the way, Mystery45, if you're going to try to bash the ACLU in this case-it was the ACLU who defended a student's right to express their pro-life views...
DECKS
:symw::symb: Life Gain :symb::symw:
Building (eventually)...
:symb::symr::symg: Dragon-Ramp :symg::symr::symb:
Little difference in rebuilding something that is already there and needs repair and then actually breaking down a building and building another one.
please check the news again any time a christian sneezes someone brings a lawsuit thanks again though. This why we ban christian nativity scene but it is ok to bring in other religious symbols. That is why people can't put a cross on a highway because where their loved one died because it might offend someone.
pro-life =/= christian. there are plenty of non-christians that are pro-life. one is a political view the other is a religious view. there is a big difference.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
I never explicitly stated it was a Christian view and I am well aware of this, but it's pretty indisputable that a large part of the pro-life base in the US is Christian. (From wikipedia: 'Much of the pro-life movement in the United States and around the world finds support in the Roman Catholic Church, evangelical Protestant denominations, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).[8][9][10][11]')
Anyhow, my point was that the ACLU isn't going around stopping citizens from expressing their views in public, related to Christianity or otherwise.
DECKS
:symw::symb: Life Gain :symb::symw:
Building (eventually)...
:symb::symr::symg: Dragon-Ramp :symg::symr::symb:
again pro-life =/= christianity. one is a religious view the other is political. how the ACLU acts towards one is totally different than the other.
Islamophobia is tolerated in the same way that christianphobia is tolerated. yet i don't see you wondering why that is.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
I won't deny that a lot of Christian related movements tend to attract negative reactions justified or not. But think about it-how many people do you see labeling Christians as the 'enemies of America'? No large protests are organized to get people up in arms about arguably violent or otherwise 'unacceptable' passages in Christian or Jewish religious texts, and yet people are protesting Islam because of Sharia law.
DECKS
:symw::symb: Life Gain :symb::symw:
Building (eventually)...
:symb::symr::symg: Dragon-Ramp :symg::symr::symb:
1. Rise of the Christian right/social conservatism
-Reaganism
-Moral Majority
-A lot of 1980's and 1990's activism to "save the children" and other such things where a lot of people liked to talk and pass laws but not really do much of anything
2. Islamic Fascism
-terrorists since the 70's or so blowing stuff up
-9/11, America gets angry and goes to war
3. Convecting reactions
-Atheists and such react against the rise of religion in the sense of Bush's Christianity and Islamofacism by clinging to scientism and the enlightenment
-Christians react against Muslims
-Normal people take on the source of victimhood associated with terrorism as a sense of identity
-All Americans clinging to certain American identities "New Atheists" more toward the enlightenment, libertarians clung to classical liberalism (see Ron Paul's reaction in all this), and a clung to our history(esp. military) and philosophies
Granted this is overly simplistic, but I have to say that what I see a lot of threads coming together and reacting against globalism and the changes that capitalism places into the whole framework of the world. The regimes of the Middle East also play power politics, especially Afghanistan and Iran having played up the "Great White Satan" bull ☺☺☺☺. I know enough about the Middle East's history to know that yes America messed with the "system" there plus the Europeans really screwed with natural borders after the Ottoman Empires fall. However, at some point the leaderships of those societies must be held accountable. The turbulence from a handful of people that we never really cared about is quite astounding, but our reaction has been huge and complex.
People are "religioned out" and we're in an age of existentialism and spirituality, and moving away from doctrines. You see this with liberal Christianity where dogma is preached far less in megachurches and even in modern churches there's different masses held for different tastes. The Jewish community is also changing, especially with the economic times, trying to retain a cultural identity around the synagogue more toward a Christian model to allow Jews to act more as a free agent in their own affairs than to revolve around the classical synagogue structure. Muslims are also going this way in the state, while atheists and friends are organizing and connecting more on a more public scale.
So overall, there's more clashes incoming to define what reality is. The macronarrative for religion in general is changing as I said to existentialistic spiritualism coupled with people moving away from dogma. What seems to becoming more dogmatic is scientific rationality, but I digress. The cultural narrative against Islam is also that it is a backwater culture that blows up buildings. This is in part the fault of Islamic countries, when you scream "Great Satan" for a generation or two and then some rich guy decides its cool to blow up buildings is going to invite discrimination.
9/11 isn't an excuse, nor is it something to be ignored. However, when our American culture is about openness and I believe this is against what we stand for to deny people the right to rebuild and build up an area. The build is abandoned and can become a center for various Muslims to spread a more tolerant ideology.
I don't believe America is Islamophobic, and this term will become another term that while well meaning like "Holocaust denier" will be perverted through continual association with terms like "climate change deniers" that set up a supposition of totality within a person's ideological framework. Granted it is in part a limitation of the English language to describe "for" and "opposed" as "pro" and "anti," but these issues become inundated with stupidity like with "prolife" and "pro-choice" or "communist" and "anticommunism" and "socialist."
It is just a continuation of certain natural cycles in our society, but I'm surprised we've managed to mitigate the issues of people being anti-Arab and anti-Muslim for so long. However, I feel this is in part economic as people act more irrationally when they're pessimistic about the future.
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
It depends entirely on the reasoning behind the ACLU's individual defense - and in that case they were defending it because of the person's religious beliefs that supported their pro-life stance that was being ignored.
Without the religious reasoning behind it the ACLU would have had no reason to intervene on the matter.
I'd love to see examples of "Christianophobia" - poking fun and teasing is hardly the same as fear. Generally whomever is at the "top of the totem pole" is subject to more cases of comedy and criticism, it's a result of being a common topic not because people are afraid.
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
By the way I'm also afraid of communists and national socialists. Like Muslims, they have beliefs. Like Muslims, those beliefs are, in my view, crazy.
I heard my boss today complaining that "the muslims just blew us up and now the same people are building a mosque." How exactly do you fight this when half of the country shares this sentiment?
The worst part is that we know with practically 99% confidence that the next major terrorist attack on American soil will be conducted by an innocent-American-disguised Muslim. Perhaps only 0.000000001% of Muslims turn out to be extremists but we know the next attack will be from a Muslim. Shouldn't that warrant greater scrutiny?
I maintain that any doctrine identical to Islam not deemed a "religion" would have been expelled from the United States years ago. I'm tired of political correctness that defies both logic and common sense.
Its not anti political correctness, its ignorance.
1) 9/11: 3000 lives
2) Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab plane incident: attempted
The point is that every "major" terrorist attack (I can think of) is associated with Islam and Muslims are constantly trying to attempt more.
Now you might start off a semantics debate regarding "major" but I believe we can both agree that a 9/11 status terrorist attacks really undermines any of those small radical Christian terrorist attacks in the past.
Within that "homogeneous" group is a killer. Are you suggesting that we don't apply our utmost efforts to avoid a second major terrorist attack?
Beltway shooter? Kansas City (or whatever it was - hazy on which ATM) bombing? Amongst others....
Not to mention looking outside to the less myopic worldview wikipedia keeps a nice list of major terrorist actions such as: 2010
Notice how many terrorist actions tend to be non-local and done by non-locals/non-local groups? Terrorists generally don't like attacking across the world beyond giving a "keep your nose out of our part of the world" message.
You know there hasn't been gems like this one here recently after all (inspired by similar fear to the generation of Islamophobia at that): Link
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
And of course the fact that if you're going to be investing the ridiculous amount of time and energy into an attack overseas, it only makes sense to go big.
It's one thing to waste a weekend making and hiding bombs to see it not see it get the attention you think it deserves as a terrorist - it's entirely another to have an entire network of people operating for years and spending tons of money to enact a plot and see it not get the attention you think it deserves.
When you've got Hatching Plans you make sure they're noticed when they're launched.
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
McVey killed the most people in Oklahoma City Bombing before 9/11 in a terrorist attack, and he was ex-military and white. Frankly,the "homogeneous" groups aren't really all homogeneous. Next to Islamofascists it's been whites that have done more terrorism in the news since the 1990's especially with the rise of militias and ecoterrorist groups.
Furthermore, white people also have a longer history of discrimination against minorities and have constructed different ideological groups that engage/engaged in small acts of terrorism such as the KKK or Neo-Nazis. Hell, the KKK is a left over of a Civil War insurgent group.
So then should we fear white people as much as Arabs? It seems that going off of past history, that whites have been the major destabilizing force in America than any amount of Arabs have historically. Also, with the rise of Jihad Jane and other such people it makes whites all that more attractive to meter out extremists against.
If you use meters of racial profiling or religious profiling, terrorists just start acting "white and Christian" while being "crypto-Islamic." Hell, they've even went out of their way to recruit Americans for their goals. And quite frankly, religion is one of the easiest things to fake like any other belief.
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
Longer than what and where? My point isn't that whtie people haven't done it, but your tone implies that white people do it significantly more often than other colours given the same circumstances -- I'm contesting that.