Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Are We So Scared of Offending Muslims?
Front Page Magazine ^ | August 2, 2007 | Christopher Hitchens

Posted on 08/02/2007 10:08:19 AM PDT by Ghayyour

During the greater part of last week, Slate's sister site On Faith (it is jointly produced by Newsweek and washingtonpost.com, both owned by the Washington Post Co., which also owns Slate) gave itself over to a discussion about the religion of Islam. As usual in such cases, the search for "moderate" versions of this faith was under way before the true argument had even begun. If I were a Muslim myself, I think that this search would be the most "offensive" part of the business. Why must I prove that my deepest belief is compatible with moderation?

Unless I am wrong, a sincere Muslim need only affirm that there is one god, and only one, and that the Prophet Mohammed was his messenger, bringing thereby the final words of God to humanity. Certain practices are supposed to follow this affirmation, including a commitment to pray five times a day, a promise to pay a visit to Mecca if such a trip should be possible, fasting during Ramadan, and a pious vow to give alms to the needy. The existence of djinns, or devils, is hard to disavow because it was affirmed by the prophet. An obligation of jihad is sometimes mentioned, and some quite intelligent people argue about whether "holy war" is meant to mean a personal struggle or a political one. No real Islamic authority exists to decide this question, and those for whom the personal is highly political have recently become rather notorious.

Thus, Islamic belief, however simply or modestly it may be stated, is an extreme position to begin with. No human being can possibly claim to know that there is a God at all, or that there are, or were, any other gods to be repudiated. And when these ontological claims have collided, as they must, with their logical limits, it is even further beyond the cognitive capacity of any person to claim without embarrassment that the lord of creation spoke his ultimate words to an unlettered merchant in seventh-century Arabia. Those who utter such fantastic braggings, however many times a day they do so, can by definition have no idea what they are talking about. (I hasten to add that those who boast of knowing about Moses parting the Red Sea, or about a virgin with a huge tummy, are in exactly the same position.) Finally, it turns out to be impossible to determine whether jihad means more alms-giving or yet more zealous massacre of, say, Shiite Muslims.

Why, then, should we be commanded to "respect" those who insist that they alone know something that is both unknowable and unfalsifiable? Something, furthermore, that can turn in an instant into a license for murder and rape? As one who has occasionally challenged Islamic propaganda in public and been told that I have thereby "insulted 1.5 billion Muslims," I can say what I suspect—which is that there is an unmistakable note of menace behind that claim. No, I do not think for a moment that Mohammed took a "night journey" to Jerusalem on a winged horse. And I do not care if 10 billion people intone the contrary. Nor should I have to. But the plain fact is that the believable threat of violence undergirds the Muslim demand for "respect."

Before me is a recent report that a student at Pace University in New York City has been arrested for a hate crime in consequence of an alleged dumping of the Quran. Nothing repels me more than the burning or desecration of books, and if, for example, this was a volume from a public or university library, I would hope that its mistreatment would constitute a misdemeanor at the very least. But if I choose to spit on a copy of the writings of Ayn Rand or Karl Marx or James Joyce, that is entirely my business. When I check into a hotel room and send my free and unsolicited copy of the Gideon Bible or the Book of Mormon spinning out of the window, I infringe no law, except perhaps the one concerning litter. Why do we not make this distinction in the case of the Quran? We do so simply out of fear, and because the fanatical believers in that particular holy book have proved time and again that they mean business when it comes to intimidation. Surely that should be to their discredit rather than their credit. Should not the "moderate" imams of On Faith have been asked in direct terms whether they are, or are not, negotiating with a gun on the table?

The Pace University incident becomes even more ludicrous and sinister when it is recalled that Islamists are the current leaders in the global book-burning competition. After the rumor of a Quran down the toilet in Guantanamo was irresponsibly spread, a mob in Afghanistan burned down an ancient library that (as President Hamid Karzai pointed out dryly) contained several ancient copies of the same book. Not content with igniting copies of The Satanic Verses, Islamist lynch parties demanded the burning of its author as well. Many distinguished authors, Muslim and non-Muslim, are dead or in hiding because of the words they have put on pages concerning the unbelievable claims of Islam. And it is to appease such a spirit of persecution and intolerance that a student in New York City has been arrested for an expression, however vulgar, of an opinion.

This has to stop, and it has to stop right now. There can be no concession to sharia in the United States. When will we see someone detained, or even cautioned, for advocating the burning of books in the name of God? If the police are honestly interested in this sort of "hate crime," I can help them identify those who spent much of last year uttering physical threats against the republication in this country of some Danish cartoons. In default of impartial prosecution, we have to insist that Muslims take their chance of being upset, just as we who do not subscribe to their arrogant certainties are revolted every day by the hideous behavior of the parties of God.

It is often said that resistance to jihadism only increases the recruitment to it. For all I know, this commonplace observation could be true. But, if so, it must cut both ways. How about reminding the Islamists that, by their mad policy in Kashmir and elsewhere, they have made deadly enemies of a billion Indian Hindus? Is there no danger that the massacre of Iraqi and Lebanese Christians, or the threatened murder of all Jews, will cause an equal and opposite response? Most important of all, what will be said and done by those of us who take no side in filthy religious wars? The enemies of intolerance cannot be tolerant, or neutral, without inviting their own suicide. And the advocates and apologists of bigotry and censorship and suicide-assassination cannot be permitted to take shelter any longer under the umbrella of a pluralism that they openly seek to destroy.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; US: Washington; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: beheadings; christopherhitchens; crushislam; hitchens; islam; islamisasislamdoes; muslim; muslims; terror; terrorism; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: Ghayyour

Personally I don’t give a ROP’s ass if they’re offended


21 posted on 08/02/2007 10:29:15 AM PDT by Horatio Gates (8/7/07 - It's salmon week on the Horatio Gates channel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour
And the advocates and apologists of bigotry and censorship and suicide-assassination cannot be permitted to take shelter any longer under the umbrella of a pluralism that they openly seek to destroy.

Although it is at the very end, at last he finally got around to describing the media and the Democrat Party.

22 posted on 08/02/2007 10:33:45 AM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done, needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pacelvi

23 posted on 08/02/2007 10:34:22 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists, FairTaxers and goldbugs so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour

the Maoists and stalinists who killed hundreds of millions of people were atheists but that doesn’t exactly fit Hitchen’s story. instead, he’d have us believe that the sweet little church lady has something in common with osama.

Look, there are evil people in this world. Some will use their religion as justification. Some will use some other ideology. Some will just kill people without any reason simply because they think it’s fun. In all cases the evil comes first and everything else is just an excuse.


24 posted on 08/02/2007 10:39:04 AM PDT by ari-freedom (Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour
Not me!


25 posted on 08/02/2007 10:42:18 AM PDT by Uncle Miltie (Confidence in Congress has hit an all-time low of 14%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie

Whats name of this dangerous man?


26 posted on 08/02/2007 10:44:33 AM PDT by Ghayyour
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour
‘Cause they kill people and blow things up when they’re offended.

That said, I think we should offend ‘em more, kill the Muslims in mass quantities when they violent about being offended, and lynch their lawyers when they sue.

27 posted on 08/02/2007 10:45:26 AM PDT by Little Ray (Rudy Guiliani: If his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour
‘Cause they kill people and blow things up when they’re offended.

That said, I think we should offend ‘em more, kill the Muslims in mass quantities when they violent about being offended, and lynch their lawyers when they sue.

28 posted on 08/02/2007 10:45:37 AM PDT by Little Ray (Rudy Guiliani: If his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EndWelfareToday
I really don't give a rat's rear how many or which Muslims I offend.

Please believe me I'm more supportive than you might know of your disdain for the sensibilities of Muslims. But in my case, I hold that disdain not because of something intrinsic in the character of Muslims (although I would agree the a bunch of them as a group are pretty egregiously nasty lot-but when it comes to killing souls by the tens of millions they cannot hold a patch to, for example, Communists) but because I treasure our right to offend.

So I wonder is your disdain for Muslim sensibilities peculiar to Muslims or would you support offensiveness to African Americans, Jews, high church Episcopalians, Scientologists or undocumented Latino immigrants as I would? Early this morning European time a post came along in which it described the suspension of a teacher because she characterized an African-American child's hair as, "nappy." Here is what I posted this morning:

It is noteworthy that are beleaguered teacher pled not justification in her defense, but ignorance. It is noteworthy because it reveals how far into the swamps of subjectivism that political correctness has led us. This is a major concession. It says that it matters not what the plain meaning of the English language is but what matters is only the subjective reaction of a favored class. The teacher did not say, "I stand here upon my rights and be damned" she said in effect, "I have no rights, I am too unworthy to have rights, I can only plead ignorance."

I recall vaguely that a city official of Washington, DC was forced out of a position of responsibility because the African-American "community" was ignorant of the plain meaning of the English-language word, "niggardly." Now we see the same kangaroo court applied for the use of the word, "nappy."

Subjectivism is a deadly disease made more virolent by political correctness when it invests in favored groups the power arbitrarily to exercise mind control over groups (like whites) who are unfavored because they do not qualify as victims. Maybe we need a little bit of the fairness doctrine in real life.

So should we offend Muslims because they are unworthy or because it is vital to a healthy democracy that we be permitted to exercise our rights to free speech, or both if you like? Even Hitchens in his article took pains to demonstrate that Muslims are unworthy of our solicitude. I agree. Muslims seek to it achieve mind control through intimidation and minority groups in America pursue the same goal by claiming victim status.

I thought Hitchens was I pub crawling, brawling, polemicist. Why does he find it necessary to tell us that Muslims have it coming?


29 posted on 08/02/2007 10:46:42 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("I like to legislate. I feel I've done a lot of good." Sen. Robert Byrd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour

BTTT!


30 posted on 08/02/2007 10:48:39 AM PDT by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour
mohamet (may rivers of pi** be upon his rotten pedophile soul...)

L

31 posted on 08/02/2007 10:48:45 AM PDT by Lurker (Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing small pox to ebola.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour
Why Are We So Scared of Offending Muslims?

Speak for yourself.

I never miss a chance to offend them.

32 posted on 08/02/2007 10:49:42 AM PDT by OldSmaj (Death to islam. I am now and will always be, a sworn enemy of all things muslim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour
The enemies of intolerance cannot be tolerant, or neutral, without inviting their own suicide.

Hello Democrats.

33 posted on 08/02/2007 10:49:57 AM PDT by Doomonyou (Let them eat lead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

I’m not afraid to offend moslems.

Piss on islam and it’s prophet(may pig shit be upon his head).


34 posted on 08/02/2007 10:50:05 AM PDT by chadwimc (Proud to be an infidel ! Allah fubar !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
So should we offend Muslims because they are unworthy...?

Yes, most definitely.

In fact, give me any reason to do so.

35 posted on 08/02/2007 10:51:54 AM PDT by OldSmaj (Death to islam. I am now and will always be, a sworn enemy of all things muslim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

We should take the varmint hunting approach. Do something to get them to stick their heads out of their hole and then put a bullet through it.

Works for me


36 posted on 08/02/2007 10:55:48 AM PDT by stm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour

It’s unclear to me how an atheist is qualified to address the subject of belief.


37 posted on 08/02/2007 10:56:21 AM PDT by prairiebreeze (PUT AMERICA AHEAD! VOTE FOR FRED!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour
I think Hitchens is taking precisely the correct approach, i.e., confront Muslims point-black with the question about their religion: Prove it, or shut up. If that same question can also be applied to any other religion, so be it.

This question puts Muslims on the defensive because they are so unaccustomed to anyone asking them that question. They are used to pandering and apologies and deference and cowardice, and straight-talk might be just what they - and we - need.
38 posted on 08/02/2007 11:01:21 AM PDT by Steve_Seattle ("Above all, shake your bum at Burton.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nnn0jeh

ping


39 posted on 08/02/2007 11:02:34 AM PDT by kalee (The offenses we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we write in marble. JHuett)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ghayyour

I’m not afraid of offending evil.


40 posted on 08/02/2007 11:06:11 AM PDT by MeekMom (Present your bodies a living sacrifice unto God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson