Curmudgeonalia
I see I taste I write Links What?
July 11, 2007

Catch – 22, addendum

Read t’other first if you haven’t. Rather than expand that recent epistle I favor an addition.

Children today are not being taught how to think, but what to think, which results in losing the ability to think. This is brought on by the ruinous attitudes of the 60’s which invaded our culture in the hippie era. At the heart of this is the marginalization of the founding faith of our fathers and the source of our fundamental values. With it the sense of national identity or purpose has been consumed, including individualism, responsibility, obligations to our fellow citizens, and our collective love of liberty.

Diversity is diversifying Judeo-Christianity out of society and “notions” of propriety out of the West . . . which calamity fundamentally emasculates everything we formerly believed in and defended. Now all attitudes and beliefs are equal and we apologize for being insufficiently sensitive; especially for not accepting that all cultures are equal. We alone are responsible for slavery, annihilation of indigenous peoples, etc. No one on the planet ever did it before, don'tcha know. We are no longer teaching what’s good about the West, only its mistakes. Youth aren’t taught that we corrected, and still correct our mistakes, unlike most every other culture on the planet. Why? Because the secular intelligentsia doesn't believe it. They hate the West that much! Strange how they tolerate barbarity, isn't it?

As Christianity is “ushered out” there is a hiatus wherein other faiths—and no faith—can be ushered in. Islam, by contrast, doesn’t see established religion as anachronistic, and uses our dethroning of Western religion as a helpful advantage in the subjugation of the West. Freedom of religion for Muslims is the freedom to propagate their religion in every possible way and without interference from or challenge by our primary culture. Culturally they believe. Culturally we believe in nothing of substance.

There are secular Muslims who deplore these “Islamic” attitudes but a troubling number of them subscribe to all of them, and a majority subscribe to some. It therefore becomes necessary to be a Clintonesque parser. Since we are discussing moderation, define moderate, please. If discussing, as they often do, the fact that the Koran forbids attacks on the innocent, define innocent, if you will. Define tolerance while you're at it.

Most of the moderates condemn atrocities while simultaneously denying that Islam has anything to do with them, often denying that they are even perpetrated by Muslims.

A prominent Imam, along with far too many liberal multiculturalists, insists that “it is the legitimate right of people to resist invasion and occupation, by force if necessary.” O.K., how about us? We are being invaded and occupied by a foreign force at odds with our culture. Have we no right to resist? With force? Since when is their claim the only legitimate one? Oh, yea, I forgot. They are a minority and therefore subject to discrimination, which by definition the majority cannot be. Right!

It is true that support of the radicals by the liberal left is demoralizing to those moderate Muslims who might come forth, but I’d still like the moderates to stand up, define moderation, state their case and join the rest of us “non-intellectuals” in the fight against radical Islam, if that be what it is, Koranic interpretation notwithstanding. Don’t just cower . . . do something constructive, and quit excusing the radicals.

Posted by respeto at July 11, 2007 1:02 PM