Posted on 02/04/2016 12:46:11 PM PST by Kaslin
Many of the president's ideas about 'tolerance' are antithetical to the American experience, not something to celebrate.
For eight years now, the president has reprimanded the American people for their attitudes about Islam. And Barack Obama's big speech to the Islamic Society of Baltimore -- granted, filled with many harmless platitudes -- was no different, leaving little room for any honest dialogue about ideology or faith. Many of the president's ideas about "tolerance," in fact, are antithetical to the American experience, not something to celebrate.
Acceptance of outsiders is an American virtue, yes. Do we have to embrace all ideas, as well? Obama has conflated tolerance of individuals and groups with tolerance of a select belief system -- one that he demands be immune from criticism.
We certainly don't want people attacking peaceful Muslims, but it's irresponsible and intellectually obtuse to act as if the pervasive violence, misogyny, homophobia, child abuse, tyranny, anti-Semitism, bigotry against Christians, etc. that exists in large parts of Islamic society abroad has absolutely nothing to do with faith.
Yesterday, Obama spoke about the evils of Islamophobia to a group that featured women covered, subordinated, and segregated from men. I'm happy he's open-minded about that sort of thing. Americans are free to practice their faith in any way they choose. But I'm not sure why all of us should feel obligated to celebrate this kind of narrow-mindedness as well. You will remember how offended liberals get when presidential candidates visit Bob Jones University or Mormons fund campaigns they find objectionable. Why is this different?
We don't need the president gratuitously attacking an entire religion. But most liberals, as you know, won't even allow that terrorism and extremism have something to do with Islam. Obama hits this note quite often, but this week John Kerry, the Imam of Beacon Hill, said this about ISIS: "And they are also above all apostates, people who have hijacked a great religion and lie about its real meaning and lie about its purpose and deceive people in order to fight for their purposes."
Kerry has no more theological authority to brand someone an apostate of Islam than King Salman of Saudi Arabia has to consecrate the Eucharist. Not even moderate Sunni clerics make this claim. Yet, over and over, leftists try and detach the branches of Islam they dislike from the trunk so they can call you a bigot for attacking their idealized conception of Islam.
Yesterday, the president explained that an "attack on one faith is an attack on all our faiths." Christian communities, often older than Islam itself, have been decimated by Islamic groups and left unprotected by moderate Muslim governments for decades. These attacks are aimed Christians. We have done nothing to help them. It is then completely rational for Christians to be apprehensive about Islam. We can see Europe's assimilation problems -- which the Muslim community here has largely avoided -- and wonder how this theology and culture will adapt to secularism. It's not narrow-minded to do so. It would be reckless not to.
"We have to respect the fact that we have freedom of religion," claimed a president who believes forcing nuns (and everyone) to buy birth control comports with American values. There is no law in this country that inhibits the freedom of Muslim Americans to practice their religion freely. Not one.
I'm unsure if the president understands that hearing things you don't like does not constitute an attack on freedom. People say ugly things all the time. No crime is acceptable, but Muslims have experienced far fewer hate crimes than blacks, Jews, or gays. Any way you want to parse the numbers there is no epidemic of Islamophobia.
But Obama likes to create the impression that some great injustice is occurring here.
Take this CNN headline: "Obama rebuts anti-Muslim rhetoric in first U.S. mosque visit." What does it mean? In the piece, we learn that the president reacted to "young Muslim parents whose children are worried about being removed from the country." I know of no Republican candidate -- or anyone of note on the Right; or anywhere else for that matter -- who has ever suggested any policy resembling this. Not even Donald Trump.
A president who wanted to bring people together would have dismissed this as a preposterous idea. He would have explained that no one in American politicians is plotting to kick Muslims out of the country. He could have pointed out that in the United States, these children will enjoy more religious freedom than any Islamic nation offers; free of virtually any religious or factional violence. But that in this country, people still have the freedom to be critical of each other's beliefs and even denounce them. A freedom that's a lot more useful than dangerous notions about "tolerance."
Brainwash the young; disregard/discredit the old; wait patiently until the frog is cooked; no opposition whatsoever.
In the UAE it is illegal for a citizen to convert from Islam to Christianity. That is the law. Non-citizens are allowed to practice other religions, but they are segregated.
The enemy of America currently resides in the White House.
0bama himself is a dangerous fantasy. Pretty crappy for us we got hooked up into it.
I know exactly there this place is - next to the Triple Bridges on the beltway!
And it shouldn’t besmirch Catonsville - more accurate is to ID it as Woodlawn. Which would be more in keeping with the demographic most likely to “convert”.
Maryland ping.
Ooops - MD ping.
He was among his only true friends. He showed them how much he loves them, and mistrusts us.
“He would have explained that no one in American politicians is plotting to kick Muslims out of the country”
Now that you mention it ...
It was insanity and it filled me with dread for the future.
Bump!
Memo to President Obama: The Jihad That Led to the Crusades
Pamela Geller Atlas Srugs ^ | FEBRUARY 3, 2015 | Pamela Geller
http://pamelageller.com/2015/02/memo-to-president-obama-the-jihad-that-lead-to-the-crusades.html/
History repeats itself…
Those who depict Islam as a religion of peace are ignoring History, and as Spanish philosopher, George Santayana said: Those who do not learn from history are damned to repeat it.
And that is factual
The entirety of the Left is a “Dangerous Fantasy”.
Well liberals are totally clueless about the crusades and that includes the arrogant pos occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave
The religion of Islam, were it only a religion, would not attract a moment’s notice among the vast majority of Ameircans.
But Islam is not “merely” a religion, is it a whole ideology, with a legal concept that is completely incongruous with the law code now in use in the United States, based on the Ten Commandments, English common law, the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. There is total disrespect among Muslims for the rights of ANY kind for the entire female gender, or for anyone who is not Muslim, or even if the Muslim is not the “right kind” of Muslim. A “slave/master” psychology runs through just about every aspect of their daily lives - if you are not the master, then you are, by definition, the slave of the one who asserts that HE is the master. If once a degree of superiority is achieved over a subordinate, it is not merely a matter of ordering the other about, but complete SUBMISSION to the will of the master, and this can involve anything from the kissing of feet to the bowing of the head forward preparatory to decapitation. So obviously, the master is closer to the will and favor of Allah, than the subordinated slave.
Doesn’t seem to be much opportunity for personal advancement, short of killing the supposed “master” and taking over his slot in the hierarchy.
Surprising how often that happens. Honor killings and all, you know.
Obviously
That is factual
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.