Cultural relativism and the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’

Douglas Murray may not have blogged for The Daily Telegraph recently but that doesn’t stop him from doing the rounds, spreading his poison as he goes. He appears to have taken up residency at The Daily Mail…he should feel right at home there and he’s in good company. What with Mad Mel and Peter Hatchetman Hitchens, he won’t want to leave. The readership will also welcome him with open arms; there is nothing they like more at the Mail than a good, wholesome scare-story.

The so-called ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ story has brought out all the lunatics, doom-sayers and demagogues. Our own Buck Turgidson has been making sure that his voice is heard above those who call for tolerance and reason. Because as far as he is concerned, no one does reason and tolerance like Christians. Of course, that is to ignore the centuries of persecutions against minority movements like the Bogomils or the Cathars and the pogroms against the Jews in Eastern and Central Europe. This also ignores the fact that slavery was excused by using filleted passages from the New Testament to justify bondage. The Crusades were nothing less than the Christian equivalent of Islam’s jihads.

It is incredible how simply some people view the world and those who inhabit it.

This blogger, while appearing to call for tolerance appears to have got his lines mixed up as this reply to my first comment shows,

It wasn’t only Christians who died in the twin towers, but it was only Muslims who perpetrated the atrocity.

Here’s your evidence that the Imam responsible continues to refuse to associate Islamic organizations with terror and continues to place the blame for even atrocities such as 9/11 on the victims:

Westboro Baptist Church claims to speak for Christianity, but many others who claim to speak for Christianity rise to condemn them. To compare with Islam, there are many more radical Muslims who resort to terrorism – Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Hezbollah, Hamas, The Tamil Tigers….the list goes on and on, but many Muslims, even mainstream American Muslims, refuse to condemn Hamas and Hezbollah, and sometimes even the other organizations, for their terror.

The Tamil Tigers are Muslim? That’s news to me! Note here the lie about American Muslims “refusing to condemn” terrorism.  But what really stands out is his inference that America’s Muslims have to shoulder the responsibility for the atrocities of 11 September 2001. In other words, all Muslims have been pronounced guilty by ‘association’.

I think we need to respect property rights and freedom of religion (as long as they’re properly respecting the liberties of everyone around them. Such as those of gays)

Right, so here he appears to be suggesting that Muslims are uniquely anti-gay. Of course he ignores the vast numbers of Christians who think it is unbiblical to be gay and will try to ‘cure’ them. He forgets the tensions within the Anglican community whose many members are threatening to leave the communion if a gay man is elected bishop – it has already happened in the US but in Britain, the idea was rejected. But it’s the way that he chucks in the word ‘freedom’ as though it was part of an assortment of herbs that are used for cooking dinner. This is someone who claims to ‘respect’ the religious rights of others as long as they conform to his and his majoritarian idea of religious practice.

When I pointed out to him that tolerance wasn’t unique to the west, this is what I got back.

Tolerance isn’t unique to Western Civilization, but it was Western Civilization that first articulated most of what we consider tolerance today: Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion, and also it is those nations considered western that have been the leaders in enshrining those liberties as fundamental to their law.

Oh? How did you work that one out? While the US Constitution may have made provision for freedom of religious worship, the reality was somewhat different: Jews and Catholics found themselves subjected to bigotry by ‘Protestants’.  To date, only one Catholic has ever been elected President. But what this blogger also appears to be suggesting is that the entire western hemisphere is some beacon of liberty. But did he ever take the time to look at the dictatorships of South and Central America? All of them were propped up with US support; the same US that, er, enshrines ‘freedom’.

After presenting him with a series of counterarguments, he then began replying with the usual twisting and stonewalling that I have seen so many people use when they have lost the argument. To him, I am now “excusing Muslims”.

Arguing with people like this is pointless because they aren’t interested in reasoned debate; they want to win the argument at any cost – even if it means deluding oneself in order to avoid the truth. Freedom of religion means exactly that. But to tar all Muslims with the same brush because a handful of nutjobs flew a plane into the Twin Towers is patently illogical and absurd. No one blames all Christians for the bombing of abortion clinics in the US when only a handful of cranks are involved.

This is the most telling part of his blog

Liberals. Natural, perfect Dhimmis.

For this blogger it’s a conservative/liberal issue (black/white); it’s an ideal opportunity to engage in smears. Where does that put the mayor of NYC? He’s a Republican or is he what they call a RINO (Republican In Name Only)?

Double standards? These guys have them by the truckload.



Filed under Islamophobia, Society & culture

3 responses to “Cultural relativism and the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’

  1. ‘Religious’ tolerance?

    The privileges of being classed as religion should be withdrawn from Islam.

    If Hitler had claimed that ‘Mein Kampf’ was dictated by God, would we be forced to tolerate the Nazi Party as a religion? Islam is first and foremost a mind-destroying, totalitarian political ideology that spreads through the Body Politic like a virus.

    Winston Churchill gave the correct diagnosis over a century ago, when he compared Islam to a contagious virus or meme – ‘as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog’

    Consequently, Islam should be reclassified from ‘RELIGION’ to ‘PUBLIC MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEM’ – a virulent contagious mental illness. It could then be contained by the methods used to prevent the spread of typhoid and other lethal epidemics: enforced exclusion and quarantime of carriers, eradication of foci of infection, immunization of the susceptible population etc.

    • Oh dear, where do I begin with this one? The Nazi Party wasn’t a religion and any comparison that you make with Islam is entirely fallacious. Have you read Mein Kampf?

      You make the same culturally relativist remarks that I have seen from other people What gives you the right to ‘withdraw’ the status of religion from any group? Isn’t Scientology classed as a ‘religion’ in the US even though it has been proved to be a brainwashing cult?

      Winston Churchill also advocated the bombing of the Kurds and gassing of the Arabs in Mesopotamia (now Iraq). In his words he wanted to “produce a lively terror”.

      I don’t take much of what Churchill said seriously, given the fact that he crossed the floor of the House of Commons more than any other MP in history with the possible exception of the fascist, Oswald Moseley.

      You know something, the views that you have expressed in the last paragraph are no different to the attitude the Nazis took towards Jews and Romanies.

  2. I have it on good authority that “Trencherbone” has links to the BNP and NF.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s