Cemeteries, Mosques and Anti-Muslim bigotry

An ugly fact of the human condition is that the negative generalizations that we are so quick to detect and oppose when used against us we often eagerly apply to the other. Few of us completely lack this trait. Witness the ugly bigotry some people have against Muslims. There are four recent incidents which reminded me of these thought patterns. In the first case, former baseball great, born-again Christian, ESPN analyst and proud conservative Curt Schilling approvingly posted and later deleted the meme comparing Muslims to Nazis. He apologized and removed the tweet, but was briefly suspended from ESPN activities. His employer made it clear that Schilling did not speak for ESPN. Unsurprisingly the NY Post defended Schilling as telling "the truth" about Muslims. In the second case a group of apparently low information American citizens in the town of Farmersville, Texas are protesting plans for a "Muslim invasion" of their town. Well, what exactly has these people so up in arms you might ask? Is there some wealthy Arab expatriate sheik who is building a compound for his harem and is going to seize all the town's young women for his own libidinous purposes? Or maybe it's a smooth talking charlatan who is building a secret bomb making and terrorist training facility. When the time is right he'll give the secret radio signal. Every Muslim in Texas will start screaming Allah-u-Akbar and chopping off heads. Perhaps it's just a whole bunch of fiendishly clever Muslim parents who, just for s***s and giggles, intend to have massive numbers of children and so within a few generations take over the United States. The people of Farmersville apparently believe that some of that might be going on but in reality the plan that has them so upset, fearful and blurting out stupid or hateful comments is that some American Muslims, you know, fellow citizens, are planning to build a cemetery. Yes, some people in Texas are so scared of Muslims or hate them so much that even dead ones make them cry for their Mommy. 

Not to be outdone, some people in my own state, in the city of Sterling Heights, are protesting a planned mosque. Some people opposed to the mosque claim to have and may indeed have no religious or ethnic bias as a motivating factor. But many others are quite clear about their prejudices against and hatred for Muslims. When you say that "these people scare us" or "you should have homeland security investigate these people" or "I don't want to live next to people like this", you don't leave much room for misunderstanding. Finally, in Houston Texas, about thirty or so brave yahoos protested against a pre-kindergarten and kindergarten magnet language immersion school for the horrible crime of teaching Arabic. That'll show those five year old little terrorists in training! Don't mess with Texas!!!

Some Americans hold all Muslims responsible for the actions of a few. They think that Islam itself is wrong and evil. They piously point out that a small percentage of Muslims can do a great deal of harm. They feel justified in hating or distrusting all Muslims. Whether such Muslims are American citizens doesn't matter. The more historically minded among such folk or more likely those who can remember and repeat simple talking points will talk at length about past Muslim atrocities or point today to the savagery of ISIS as an example of the typical Muslim. That's all well and good for what it's worth. I have no interest in defending any form of conquest or imperialism, religiously motivated or otherwise. And if you want to be a bigot, as long as your behavior is not unduly or unlawfully influenced by your bad thoughts, I don't care as much as I used to care. The only problem I have is this. If you are living in the United States or Canada or Argentina or just about any place in the so-called New World you're standing on land which witnessed one of the greatest and most successful genocides in world history. For the past five hundred years people of European descent and primarily Christian belief conquered the word and raped, enslaved or exterminated millions of their fellow human beings. In the United States it's only really in the last fifty years or so that the idea that this might not have been such a nice thing to do has penetrated the mainstream consciousness. And it's still a very controversial concept. The New York Times, hardly a conservative or white nationalist publication, just published a fawning review of Hugh Thomas' World Without End, which is apparently one long apologia for Christian Spain's invasion and genocidal conquest of large swaths of the non-white and non-Christian areas of the planet. It's hard to imagine the NYT doing the same thing for someone who strenuously argued that, sure maybe a few people got hurt, but by and large the Islamic Caliphate's or Ottoman Turk's repeated invasions of Europe were noble attempts to spread civilization.

What's beyond the pale (pun definitely intended) is that people who were victims of all this and/or their descendants should judge all whites or all Christians the same way that others wish to judge all Muslims. So why is that? Why is it that because of 9-11 it's okay to say that Islam itself is the problem or that every single Muslim must immediately be held accountable for anything that one of the other 1,599,999,999 Muslims on the planet says or does? Is it okay for people who have suffered multiple 9-11s for centuries to say that white people are the problem? The racism which pervades the Western world is not something that can be laid at the feet of Islam or Muslims. I am less concerned about being blown up by Al-Qaeda than I am about being shot or beaten by a police officer. Nevertheless I try to judge people on an individual basis. And despite problems I think many Americans still attempt to do the same. Judging every member of a group because of something that a small subgroup did is wrong. Judge people for their own actions. Actually if Christians really want to live up to their teachings they should definitely not be judging people at all or even resisting evil. Good luck trying to get people to live up to that scripture.

Bottom line though, and this is apparently difficult for some people to accept, is that this country has no religious tests for citizenship or political office. Nor should it. And every religious freedom or exception to general law which is won by Christians can also be enjoyed by Muslims, people of other faiths or people of no faith at all. Whether it's Muslims building a cemetery, entering a gun shop, or building a house of worship, Muslim citizens enjoy all the same rights as any other citizen. And well they should. And if you wouldn't tolerate negative generalizations about Jews or Christians, blacks or whites, don't make them about Muslims. 

Free Speech, Mona Eltahawy, Pamela Geller and Censorship

As we've discussed before there are people who make money, get media attention, and have fun baiting Arabs and Muslims with speech that is either deliberately insulting or could be inferred to be insulting. This is wrong BUT it is something which they have every right to do. There are plenty of things to be critical of in the Arab or Muslim world. Some critics want to see a form of modernity and rationality emerge in some areas to improve people's lives. Other critics just like irritating people. And thin-skinned people of any creed are usually irresistible targets for trolls, whether it be online or elsewhere. If I know that you're going to go berserk every time I say the word "Rosebud" I just might, were I so inclined, amuse myself by saying that word and watching the world burn.

Sometimes though, criticism originates from a place of hatred and racial/religious superiority rather than love, from a place of contempt rather than attempted understanding. The criticism may be stated in blunt ugly antagonistic terms. This is usually the case with the noted conservative racist birther blogger Pamela Geller, who has built her career in part by saying nasty things about Muslims, Arabs and occasionally blacks or President Obama as well. Evidently, Geller has paid for ads to run in NYC (and other) subway systems which read "In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad"

Obviously I don't agree with the ad's implication that anyone who is opposed to the current Israeli government's policies is a "savage" or in support of jihad. And it is ironic beyond words that Geller, who was vehemently opposed to Muslim Americans building a mosque in New York City that she felt was "too close" to ground zero, and sought to limit other people's property rights and rights to practice their religion has wrapped herself in the same First Amendment that she seeks to ban for others.

But that we are all hypocrites to one extent or another doesn't change that fact that in America, we ALL have the right to free speech. The government can't tell you what to think, what to believe, prevent you from expressing your opinion, or send you to jail or fine you for expressing your opinion. It also means that other people can't (either individually or as part of a mob) prevent your speech from being heard in the public arena. This second part is a little trickier because of course your right to free speech ends where someone else's ownership rights begin. You have a right not to be put in jail for speech. You have no right to a blog post or comment, to be published, to have your ad accepted. So while I can appreciate journalist and occasioal MSNB contributor Mona Eltahawy's passion and righteous indignation at seeing that message, I can't agree that attempting to deface and censor the message is really "free speech". The proper response should have been to organize and get her own message out there. Geller has every right to put her message in the public square. It is, perhaps worth pointing out, if you are not familiar with Eltahawy, that she is not a fundamentalist but a liberal who advocates for women's rights. She has been scathingly critical of several aspects of the Arab world's politics and traditions. In Egypt she's been arrested and assaulted for her activism and reporting.

Of course I haven't recently strolled by an ad implying that millions of my countrymen and co-religionists are savages so it's easy for me to take a somewhat detached look. Defacing ads is small potatoes in free speech wars. People have done it in other situations but that doesn't make it right. It is important to confront "racist speech" but the way you do that is by more speech, not by trying to censor. That's what I believe. Geller has every right to imply that some people are savages. That right must be defended. Free speech is not negotiable.  Again, though this particular "speech" didn't quite trip my outrage wires the same way that this cartoon might have so I think we all have limits. Bottom line is that as I don't want you deciding what I can read, think or say you probably wouldn't want me determining your correct thoughts or statements. Watch the video as Eltahawy defaces the ad and Pamela Hall, president of Stop the Islamization of America, another Geller group, tries to stop her.

What do you think? 

Is the ad free speech?

Should there be a hate speech exemption to the First Amendment?

Is Eltahawy's response appropriate?

NJ Gov. Chris Christie: Enough with the Sharia Law Crap Already!!! (VIDEO)

In this country of ours, we have this document known as the Constitution.  You might have heard of it.  It guarantees that, in this country, we will always have a republican form of government where the people - and not monarchs, religious rulers, or even religion itself - are in control of what happens here.  This is spelled out quite plainly in Article IV of our Constitution for anybody who cares to read it.  But who are we kidding - Americans don't read the Constitution!!!  Especially the staunch conservative Bible-belt Americans who love to drone on about how Muslims are plotting to take over our country by using "Sharia Law."  Republican Presidential Candidate Herman Cain has even gone so far as to say he would absolutely not appoint a Muslim judge to any court because he is afraid they will attempt to implement Sharia Law in America.

The Republican Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, apparently fed up with hearing about this Sharia Law propaganda from within his own party, hit back recently in response to his decision to appoint a Muslim judge to the bench:

Per yahoo news:

"Sharia law has nothing to do with this at all. It's crazy. It's crazy," Christie said at a press conference Wednesday. "The guy's an American citizen who has been an admitted lawyer to practice in the state of New Jersey, swearing an oath to uphold the laws of New Jersey, the constitution of the state of New Jersey, and the Constitution of the United States of America . . . .This Sharia law business is crap. It's just crazy. And I'm tired of dealing with the crazies."

QUESTIONS:
What are your thoughts on what Christie said?
What are your thoughts on the Sharia Law debate in general?