Mosquing the Truth: Intolerance and American Society

Posted on Aug 19 2010 - 1:00am by Harrison

Will his generation be more tolerant?

The debate concerning the Ground Zero mosque seems to be turning around one point: tolerance.  If you are for the mosque, you are tolerant but if you are against it, you are a Muslim-hater and deserve to do 40 Hail Marys then be crucified.  The trouble with the debate being framed in this manner is that it lets the Park51 Group (which is behind the project) off the hook as the “debate” becomes one about the “hosts” not the “guests.”

One of the hallmarks of American society is the White Anglo Saxon Protestant, or WASP.  It is tougher to find them nowadays though I’m sure some still lurk on Beacon Hill or Manhattan.  WASPs certainly weren’t the most easy-going or lighthearted group of people you’ll ever meet but a great many of them were fair and most of them donated large sums of money towards improving American society.  The American character may have started with the Puritans, but it was the separation between work and religion that, thanks to Protestantism, allowed this country to flourish.

Islam ain’t Protestantism but rather it is its antithesis.  Arabs used to be great scientists and they used to invent things (Christians used to steal their technology and knowledge) but that was more than a thousand years ago.  The significance of the Ground Zero mosque is sort of like the FAO Schwartz store on 5th Avenue in New York City… it will be a flagship location for Muslims around the world… a 13 plus story building costing tens of millions of dollars with everything inside its walls but tolerance and openness.  There may be some pretty pictures of children of different colors holding hands running across open fields (enough to pacify any Liberal) but make no mistake about it… the Believers will still dislike the Infidels, 12 year old girls will still expected to be married off (Mohammad married a 6 year old girl and consummated the relationship when she was 9), gays will not be welcomed, and all the other beliefs we find in Muslim nations such as stoning women for infidelity (while the men don’t meet the same punishment), depriving girls of the gift of literacy, and the hatred of the Jews will all predominate there.

Who is the intolerant group… those who oppose the mosque or those who will pray and preach there?  What an odd paradox that one of the most tolerant nations in the history of humanity would allow that most intolerant of religions to establish a Mothership base in the heart of its biggest city?

Religion is an illogical thing in and of itself.  If we were to say that instead of Jesus Christ descending from the Heavens to judge all living and dead Martians would one day land in their flying saucers to judge everybody most people would think you are crazy.  So if religion is an irrational thing how can one’s reaction to it be rational?

It can’t.

Infidels practice at night, too.

Liberals, who hold more irrational, Utopian beliefs in their heads at the same time than any other group I’ve heard of can’t seem to wrap their minds around this point.  Protestantism has reshaped humanity, reshaped Catholicism in America, and given us all the freedoms we take for granted so that all people can enjoy life as best as they can.  But Islam is, as its being practiced by a vast majority of believers, the opposite and people feel threatened.  People can’t understand how the Muslim nation of Iran can bury a woman up to her neck and throw rocks at her until she’s dead.  People can’t understand how young girls are married off to men old enough to be their grandfathers and expected to produce children by these “marriages.”  People can’t understand you can be harshly punished for owning a Bible in Saudi Arabia or why Christian churches are against the law there.

In our hearts we feel it is wrong to discriminate against someone because they believe in something or someone, we operate under the belief structure of “live and let live” and yet the Ground Zero mosque will not hold preachers who believe these things… in fact they will preach the opposite.

People are afraid that this flagship FAO Schwartz mosque will foreshadow the types of things we see in England where so many Muslims have gone to live… the creation of Sharia Law, government officials giving Democracy-hating Mulsims there a wide birth, being afraid of offending Muslims by drawing their prophet, etc.

People see this mosque as a sort of tipping point while Liberals try and ignore this by saying things like:

There are plenty of mosques in NYC and nobody has died because of it.

It is wrong to discriminate against a group of people because of their religious beliefs but it is also wrong to allow our freedoms to be chipped away by a group that has many members that does not want to assimilate and that enforces its rules on innocent members of its community.

Getting stoned… to death.

Currently there are between 5 and 6 million Muslims in America and they are vastly outnumbered by the Infidels but some Americans are alarmed by stories such as the Muslim football team that, because of their religious beliefs, practice from 11pm until 4am due to Ramadan.  William Powell, a non-Muslim member of the team, must practice during those hours too, even though normally he’d be asleep at that hour.

What is going to happen is that Infidels will do their best to tolerate, accommodate, and assist to make life “easier” for practicing Muslims until a tipping point is reached when our way of life will change forever.  This point may not occur for 50 or 100 years or may never occur at all or, as in the case of England, might happened much sooner than one imagines.

What will Liberals have to say about “intolerance” when their “celebrate diversity” mantra meets with bloodshed in their own country?  Will they, too, become “intolerant” or not?

The only “solution” to this very real problem is a huge gamble which is to retain our American character and show Muslims what being an American is all about and let the culture hopefully influence them and pray that the melting pot is still hot enough to assimilate the Dark Age tenets of their religion and that the Imans who hold sway in Islamic countries cannot take hold here.  It is a massive gamble and if it doesn’t work future generations will find life very unpleasant but it is all we’ve got and we have to take this risk because to not do it would mean we would become like the people who want to build the mosque at Ground Zero.

Here is a shocking interview with Lawrence O’Donnell, Jr.,  MSNBC’s Senior Political Analyst regarding being “tolerant” of Islam which nicely illustrates the problems cited in this article (interviewed by Hugh Hewitt):

HH: Would you say the same things about Mohammed as you just said about Joseph Smith?

LO’D: Oh, well, I’m afraid of what the…that’s where I’m really afraid. I would like to criticize Islam much more than I do publicly, but I’m afraid for my life if I do.

HH: Well, that’s candid.

LO’D: Mormons are the nicest people in the world. They’re not going to ever…

HH: So you can be bigoted towards Mormons, because they’ll just send you a strudel.

LO’D: They’ll never take a shot at me. Those other people, I’m not going to say a word about them.

HH: They’ll send you a strudel. The Mormons will bake you a cake and be nice to you.

LO’D: I agree.

HH: Lawrence O’Donnell, I appreciate your candor.

20 Comments so far. Feel free to join this conversation.

  1. LD Jackson August 19, 2010 at 3:55 AM -

    Great article, Harrison. You have really laid it out well and there isn’t much else to say, except that I do hope the American melting pot is hot enough. If it isn’t, our country is in for a time of very bad troubles.
    LD Jackson recently posted..Interview with Mary Fallin

  2. marie August 19, 2010 at 7:03 AM -

    Please watch this short video and “think.”

    The only thing we should be debating is ‘when’ do we start enforcing immigration restrictions on those coming from Islamoterror countries, and how do we handle the ones already here? We watch them very closely, deport, prosecute, and/or kill.

    War, on our soil, has been declared. We don’t sit and wait for the inevitiable, that’s a very bad war plan, General. Nip it in the bud ‘before’ it’s too late.

    Finally, any Muslims still left in America, who survived the above mentioned tactics, did so only because they were truly moderates of some reformed version of Islam. It would be these Muslims that we could come to fully embrace, not out of some desperate hope, but rather out of the reality that we learned we could. And for good measure, we could do post check ups on them, kind of how they do for for cancer patients recovering.. screenings every 6 months, then every year, every 5 years. You don’t want the cancer to come back, ya know. And they should be happy to oblige, as the cancer attacks moderate Muslims too.

    As for responding rationally, it is most rational for us to want to survive the war that has been declared on our heads, so-much-so that we fight to win. Rather than sit, hope, and wait. That’s irrational.

    • Harrison August 19, 2010 at 8:16 AM -

      Little tough to read but very interesting thank you.

      • marie August 19, 2010 at 8:47 AM -

        I know, but I fear that our only other choice is to tolerate such evil, which translates to condoning it. Even ‘tolerance’ has it’s limits. The liberal-view of tolerance crosses the line into irrational thinking (or wishful thinking) resulting in bad choices made, including what I will call ‘suicide-by-tolerance.’ This is a little different than what we are more familiar hearing of, suicide-by-cop. Either way, it’s just pathetic.

        • Harrison August 19, 2010 at 10:10 AM -

          In the end, everything devolves into violence.

    • Dean August 19, 2010 at 9:49 AM -

      I’m waiting for the great Islamic reformation that, of course, needs to be led by Islamic reformers.

      I agree that we need to re-write our immigration laws: only the best and brightest (and non-extremist) need apply.

  3. jd August 19, 2010 at 9:03 AM -

    just remember, it is tolerant to insult any nonviolent religeon.

  4. Dean August 19, 2010 at 9:46 AM -

    The left went from lecturing America about intolerance to wanting mosque opponents investigated and then pining for George W. Bush’s thoughts on the matter because he, the neo-con Cowboy, understood things of this matter mush better than our cool, calm and collected closet Muslim.

    You just can’t make up this stuff.

    This has been about as bizarre a socio-cultural dust-up as I can ever remember.

    Build the mosque… and then build the gay bar right next door!

    • Harrison August 19, 2010 at 10:09 AM -

      Yes Pelosi calling for investigations? Will she investigate Harry Reid?

  5. Matthew August 19, 2010 at 1:05 PM -

    There has rarely been so stupid a movement in recent American history as the one supporting the mosque.
    Matthew recently posted..Who Wants to Follow North Korea on Twitter

  6. marie August 19, 2010 at 1:21 PM -

    Sometimes peace needs to be fought for, just like sometimes you have to stand up to the bully to spare the others that the bully will come to target after you (like our kids and grandkids in this case).

    As of now, I see too many of our leaders in government (and even some of our non-Islamic religious leaders) defending the bully, while becomming bullies themselves and/or going against the best interests of “we the people.” I think it’s harder to prevent violence from taking place on our own soil when there is no unity on something so important, our will to survive as a country. It seemed we were united after 9-11, but that unity did not last long enough.

  7. USAWatchmen August 19, 2010 at 2:54 PM -

    Great article Harrison, was done very professionally.

  8. Matt August 19, 2010 at 8:58 PM -

    This is a great post Harrison. I think we have to take Islam at it’s word. I think much of the criticism we on the right take on this issue is due to what Muslims say and do. We point that out, and that does not match the narrative.

  9. marie August 20, 2010 at 9:57 AM -

    Harrison, the author in that article you referenced is very wrong because she wrote this regarding opposition to the mosque..

    “.. it’s time Americans stopped expecting sensitivity — and stopped talking as if not having their feelings hurt is practically a constitutional right.”

    Tell me exactly “when”, as the author suggests, did American’s lose the right to value the sacredness of human life? What took place on 9-11 did not revolve around the thousands of our fellow Americans who had their “feelings hurt.”
    This is about the direct survivors (which is to mean ALL AMERICANS) of the 9-11 attack, this includes (whether the author likes this fact or not) those of us who oppose this mosque. She is very wrong, and also very cunning, for attempting
    to remove us from the picture by suggesting we are somehow going against the constitution and being Un-American for our views in regards to what it is that this mosque represents. Yes, of course it is true that we have strong feelings about the mosque, but little does she know, we are primarily operating this opposition from our brains/intelligence, and our “feelings” just happen to be the result of us using our God-given brains. So what’s next?- will they be telling us, not only is it considered unconstitutional to have feelings, but also, it’s now considered unconstitutional to “think.”

    Well, before they go ahead and outlaw thinking, I think I shall share my thoughts on the matter:

    We oppose this mosque because of the utter disrespect of life– and in this case, also the reality– of our fellow country men and women who were murdered one day, this being the same day when America was attacked and had war declared against her, and her people. We are protesting against those who, through the stealth jihad, continue to attack our country. And make no mistake, this mosque is the mascot of a stealth jihad. Also, this mosque just happens to be a barometer indicating who amongst the American people really “gets it”- amongst those who really understand, and those who do not. Perhaps, this too, the idea of it being a barometer, was also intentional.. and stealth. But my main point here is, that the author of the above quote should ask herself the following:

    Was there ever such a time when we would be “constitutionally allowed” to have “hurt feelings”– and if so, perhaps such “feelings” were allowed, in the case of 9-11, ONLY WHEN the blood was still fresh and flowing? Because, for those of us paying attention to the stealth jihad creeping upon our country, the blood spilled on 9-11 will always be fresh. Our goal, for those protesting against this mosque, is not to whine like a child who just had his candy taken away from him, our goal is only to make sure that those who died on 9-11 did not die in vain. We will fight for our country, and also for those innocent civilians who were murdered on behalf of our country. This is not only a constitutional right, it is also a constitutional DUTY. And we will not submit to the laws of Islam, no thank you– we already have our own laws and constitution. And yes, under our laws and constitution, we can even cry if we want to! And get this, we can even be blunt about our views, if we want to. So, with that being said, you can “kiss off” and take Islam with you if you do not agree. Because, it is high-time that we tell you, for both the American Muslims and non-Muslims alike,.. “if you are not with us, you ARE in fact against us.”

    Btw, it is a shame that George Bush did not live up to those words, and his failure to-do-so is just another reason we are even having this discussion today. But you know what, those of us who “get it” have really had enough with trying to explain to our fellow Americans what they need to know.. and do. You can step aside now and just watch, because we don’t need your help, we never did. But just know, that our decision to give up on you is nothing personal, after all, we are not that sensitive where we would need to go and make it personal. And, no, we really are not ‘expecting’ such ‘sensitivity’ from you, in return.

    “.. it’s time Americans stopped expecting sensitivity — and stopped talking as if not having their feelings hurt is practically a constitutional right.”

    Ps- Our hurt feelings are only a result of us using our God-given brains, she must have us confused with the ‘touchy-feely, hopey, changey group. And no, my leg does not have a tingle running up it, either.

    • Harrison August 20, 2010 at 11:50 AM -

      I took it to mean it is he who should not cry about having his feelings hurt by saying “no” to the GZM.

      • marie August 20, 2010 at 3:16 PM -

        I must have gotten confused because it is not he who is crying over it, and I do not believe he ever shed a tear over 9-11 either.. I forget who it was, I’m pretty sure it was the former NYC Mayor Guilianni, who recently said that he has talked with some 9-11 family members who lost their close ones about this mosque, and that some of them were “literally” crying. So whatever the author really meant, it still makes no sense, regardless.

  10. marie August 20, 2010 at 3:19 PM -

    One last thing, and he should be offered to build the CULT-ural mosque, in Mecca.

    Enough said.

  11. Jeff August 21, 2010 at 5:03 PM -

    The main reason I am against the mosque isn’t to do with Islam–I heard a Muslim who know speak about the fact that the mosque at Ground Zero plan is a deliberate plan by Extremists to rub salt in the wound of America, not experience “religious freedom”. He knows from the inside. He said they are laughing at us.