Letter to the Editor: we don't have room for bigots
Monday, September 20, 2010
To The Editor,
On September 19 you carried a notice for a Shoreline Caucus meeting featuring Shahram Hadian and Act! for America. This is indeed America, and one of our traditions I rejoice in is the vigorous exercise of freedom of expression - even if this expression is strong and offensive. Indeed, even Nazi Party marches are protected. However, just because some expression is protected does not mean it is worthy of being promoted. I would hope that the Shoreline Area News would refrain from promoting a Nazi march.
You are approaching this standard with your promotion of the Shoreline Caucus meeting. I will quote a single line from the announcement:
Their message is clear – with the election approaching, we must elect legislators who respect all individuals and faiths, but who clearly see the long-term danger posed by Islam, and who are willing to stand up to political correctness and work for the Founders’ vision of America.
This is an unacceptable example of sheer bigotry. Can you even imagine publishing this notice if the faith, "Islam," were replaced by another faith such as "Judaism," "Catholicism," or "LDS?" One thing all of these faiths have in common with Islam is their believers have at one time or another been oppressed in the United States.
We are a tolerant community in Shoreline (and parts north - I live in Edmonds). In the same issue you note approvingly how the community supports Tent City, the homeless encampment. We don't have any room for bigots here, and it is never being overly politically correct to call them by their name.
Peter Henry
Edmonds
Posts
13 comments:
Even hateful speech is protected against government suppression by the First Amendment to our Constitution. This does not mean that citizens lose their right to combat it, so thanks to Peter Henry for his contribution.
In the holy books of the three Abrahamic religions - Judaism, Christianity, Islam - one can find excellent ethical principles.
Unfortunately, also in these same books, in all of them, one can find some awful practices and preachings that most of us today would regard as barbaric and inhumane.
We can never know in advance which elements an individual draws upon as a guide to behavior. I would like to think that most Americans prefer those passages that lead to communities of shared sympathies for one another.
Islam, no more or less than any other religion, is not our enemy. Some of those who profess to be Muslims have acted not only against Americans regardless of faith, but against their own co-religionists. This is fighting for power, not for faith.
I am not blind to the fact that there are some Islamic nations, especially in the Middle East, that have governments and practices that are as far from democracy as one can get. But Islam is not the source of this, as is attested by other Muslim-majority nations that are democratic, that do not make second-class citizens of their women, that do not spread hatred.
We do not always live up to our professed principles, but we should all make that effort in the interest of preserving the best in ourselves and our society. We profess inclusiveness - let's act on it.
Thank you Peter and Elaine for your comments.
As a Muslim, naturally, I am offended by the language used in this announcement. But I also know that Shoreline is a welcoming, inclusive place. So I imagine that the event in question will be rather small.
Act for America is notorious for the anti-Muslim rhetoric and contradictory biographical statements of its founder, Brigitte Gabriel. She has claimed in the past that her family was victimized by Hezbollah -- when in fact that organization didn't exist until the early 1980s. She also claims to have spent 7 years in a bomb shelter although her neighbors say it was a few days. She also has said that Arabs have no souls, that terrorist groups use sex as a form of jihad, and other equally bizarre statements.
I enjoy Shoreline Area News very much but this makes me wonder what the editorial policy is for passing on announcements. I don't expect them to know all the facts about every organization in the area, but I would think that the language used in the announcement would be a red flag.
I somehow missed this when it was first published. Thank you Mr. Henry for calling it out.
I cannot believe that this was promoted on this blog this way. Is this really how the editors want to present this publication?
Did anyone actually attend this? I am curious to know how the caucus played out.
As the author of the comments being discussed, I feel I should respond. First, there was no intent to offend, and I apologize to any who took offense - it is possible I mis-communicated the message tonight's speaker will be delivering. But second, readers need to be alert at all times to the degree to which political correctness influences public debate.
Peter Henry expresses the righteous indignation of one who finds every opportunity to take offense, and we see plenty of that in the public debate. Elain Phelps takes a gentler and many would say more appropriate tack, pointing out the fact that every faith has been guilty of excess, and urging all to focus on the best each faith has to offer.
But we must not let political correctness, or the genuine desire not to offend, prevent us from recognizing and responding to reality. The reality is that the tenets of the Muslim faith include a political component that is not present in the other major faiths - Islam is an all-encompassing faith which directs not only religious practice, but social and political practice as well. It further has the goal of extending the Caliphate (Muslim rule) to the entire world, by force if necessary. These are fundamental tenets of the faith, so it would be wrong to say that they are held only by radical islamists. Sharia law has already been allowed to co-exist with civil law in parts of Europe, and there are calls for it to be implemented here in the United States as well.
It is not bigotry or hate speech to recognize reality, and it is folly to ignore active threats which are working to fundamentally transform the society Americans have worked to build over the past 200 years. Bigotry only comes into play in how we choose to respond to the threats, and I contend that there is nothing negative whatsoever in working through the political process to preserve the form of society our founders risked everything to create.
But make up your own mind - come tonight to hear the speakers (one of whom was born in Iran), get the information, and form your own opinion.
Innis Arden Clubhouse
1430 NW 188th St
Shoreline, WA 98177
6:30 PM - Refreshments
7:00 PM - Program
Jeff-
Your statements are at best based on a false premise and are at worst ridiculous. Islam directs social and political practice no more than many mainstream American religions, including LDS and orthodox Judaism.
And extending Muslim rule to the rest of the world is no more a tenet of Islam then spreading the gospel of Jesus is to Christianity.
You can hide behind complaining about political correctness, just like the KKK does, but you are no different. And I am about as likely to want to hear someone from Act! for America speak as I am to hear someone from the KKK.
Have fun at your hate-fest. But I hope that most of the Shoreline community uses this time to build bridges to the many wonderful Muslim members of our community (including my neighbors, my son's teacher, and one of my daughter's teammates).
And please always remember that Jesus spread the gospel of NO FEAR. Why fear Islam? Now if it's fundamentalism, whether it's fundamentalist Islam, Christianity, or whatever, I can see your point.
And, always remember the dangers of dividing our county or world via hate and fear. That is what Hitler and other dictators with extremely hateful goals encouraged within their countries in order to weaken it enough to be susceptible to horrible outcomes.
A number of posters have labeled yesterday evening's forum a "hate-fest", but I suspect none were actually there to hear the message.
Talk is cheap, and uninformed talk is the cheapest of all. It would be interesting to see a post from anyone who was there, to get their informed perspective on the forum's content.
Jeff-
When your forum is espousing the hate-filled talk from a grouo with a leader like Brigitte Gabriel, I'm not sure why you would expect anyone to listen.
The fact is that most Shoreline residents will reject statements such as "(the Arabic world) has no soul!" or that America possesses "superior.. culture and values."
There is a reason that people find this organization ridiculous. If you are, in fact, concerned about the future security of the US (as we all should be), you may want to distance yourself from them. And if the Shoreline Area News wants to be a respected source of information in this community (including the many Muslims), I would recommend not advertising events with statements such as "we must elect legislators ... who clearly see the long-term danger posed by Islam..."
Last week, the Seattle Weekly announced that Molly Norris, its editorial cartoonist, had "gone ghost." Put another way, she went into hiding. The FBI told her she had to because otherwise it couldn't protect her against death threats from Muslims she'd angered. Earlier this year, Norris started "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" to protest radical Muslims' violently stifling freedom of speech and conscience. Incredibly, her plight has drawn precious little media attention, even though it is infinitely more newsworthy than, say, a fundamentalist preacher in Florida threatening to burn Qurans.
So it looks liked the government will not protect our first amendment rights here in the PNW.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Examiner-Editorial-Government-and-journalists-cower-at-threats-to-cartoonist.html#ixzz10Mn2WFVy
Anonymous posted a comment on 9/22, and included a redacted quote from our meeting invitation: "we must elect legislators ... who clearly see the long-term danger posed by Islam..."
However, all of the negative commenters have ignored or omitted the actual quote: "we must elect legislators who respect all individuals and faiths, but who clearly see the long-term danger posed by Islam, and who are willing to stand up to political correctness and work for the Founders’ vision of America." They conveniently leave out the fact that the message began with a declaration of respect for all individuals and faiths, and the call to work to preserve the American society we've all worked for and cherish - through the established political process.
Why would the critics leave these points out? Two reasons, I suspect - these points don't fit the critics' narrative, and including the full quote would dilute the critics' agenda-based message.
It is apparent that the critics have "drunk the cool-aid" and subscribe entirely to political correctness. Political correctness prevents adherents from even being willing to see issues which run counter to "correct thinking", and requires adherents to use PC enforcement tools (primarily name calling, such as "bigot" or "hate-monger") to try to bring violators into line.
The critics aren't evil, they're simply subscribing to the prevailing wisdom of the day. However, they're succumbing to the same influences that allowed the church to persecute Gallelio for asserting that the earth revolves around the sun.
We need to be able to identify those areas in which political correctness would prevent us from seeing and acting on real issues, and have the individual courage to resist the brickbats thrown by the politically-correct as they unthinkingly the rest of us from doing the right thing.
There is a danger intrinsic to Islam and any knowledgable individual can understand it with a bit of self-education. And, unfortunately, a dangerously large percentage of Moslems (some estimate as much as 10%, or 160 million) actively subscribe to those tenets of their faith.
The message of the meeting this week was not hatred, but rather 1) become educated on the facts, easily verified from multiple reputable sources, 2) recognize that under Islamic rule, Sharia law brooks no choice, no religious or social freedom, 3) Americans have worked hard for their freedom and it's worth preserving, and 4) we have the means to do this through our established political process.
People who wish to ignore these issues are free to do so, but in criticizing those who value the society we're trying to preserve, they reveal their own shortcomings.
Jeff and Lady Liberty: Why did you not start this type of campaign against people who supposedly make death threats, sooner. Far right extreme Republican shills and fear mongers have been doing this for decades to Dem elected officials. Where were you all this time?
Jeff-
Well, someone has certainly drunk some kool-aid. Stop for a moment and think about leaders throughout history who thought that one religion or culture was morally superior to another. Now, think about their followers. Is that really a group you want to be a part of?
The United States has been waging war in Muslim countries for most of the last 20 years. So, clearly we have many Muslim enemies. But that doesn't make the religion intrinsically flawed.
Other countries and culture have waged war against the Jewish people on and off for a millennia (and against Israel for as long as it has been an independent state). Do you believe that Judaism is also inherently flawed?
Your on a different track than I. I don't get your point. And your last question was answered in one of my previous comments here. I can clarify it by adding the word- extreme to the previous wording "fundamentalist".
Post a Comment