Gov. Phil Bredesen issued a statement this week urging tolerance and respect for religious freedom in the wake of arson at an Islamic center under construction in Murfreesboro. That should be a welcome reminder to Tennesseans of our core constitutional rights and values. The governor’s words would have been more timely, however, if he had delivered them earlier this summer, when 600 Murfreesboro residents turned out at a planning meeting to protest the proposed construction of the center, igniting what has become a continuing movement.
Anti-Muslim sentiment in the town has been rising since then. What began with vandals defacing a sign that announced construction of the Islamic center — which will house a mosque, school and a swimming pool for women — rose to protests and then became a political football for a congressional candidate. Murfreesboro’s Lou Ann Zelenik, a 6th Congressional District candidate in the Republican primary, termed the center “an Islamic training center” in her campaigning. Fortunately, she lost.
Demagogues lead the gang
Given the way Fox News’ demagogic talking heads and political reactionaries like Newt Gingrich have been lambasting plans for a proposed mosque two blocks from ground zero in Lower Manhattan, however, Zelenik’s rhetoric is no longer surprising. It just confirms the contagion of bigotry.
Inflammatory words matter. Hatred of others apart from the majority is contagious once it is unleashed by political demagogues and hyped by media and mass communication. In the age of the Internet, its viral nature has become even more pervasive.
Such baseless and hateful demagoguery is abhorrent in any case. But it’s especially reckless and incendiary in current circumstances. American troops are bogged down in two predominantly Muslim countries in wars that hinge on the fear of extremists and terrorists, who themselves distort the tenets of Islam to recruit new terrorist cohorts.
The way American politicians are willing to play tag-team hatred with terrorists abroad who misrepresent Islam and American military goals is nothing short of appalling. That it has taken hold with so many rank-and-file Americans makes matters that much worse.
There are rays of hope in what is happening in Murfreesboro, however. Federal agents are vigorously investigating the apparent arson of construction equipment, and more than 160 residents have banded together in a group called Middle Tennesseans for Religious Freedom, or MT4RF. The group, formed earlier this year to support religious freedom and construction of the Islamic center, held a candlelight march Monday in a symbolic protest of the fire.
One of the group, John Green, an attorney and fifth-generation resident of Murfreesboro, said he has been appalled by the protests, the vandalism and the fire, all of which have drawn national media attention. “Our community is unfortunately being subjected to not only local, but regional and national negative press for the actions apparently of just a few. That’s not who we are, and that’s not what we stand for, and that’s not how we choose to live here.”
A courageous stand
In the face of unthinking hatred, it takes courage to make such a stand. It’s also an ongoing challenge. An opponent of the Murfreesboro Islamic Center, Kevin Fisher, has announced that opponents will hold a protest rally before a Sept. 16 meeting of the Rutherford County Commission at the county courthouse. He said he would give the commission a petition against construction of the center signed by 20,000 people.
Though such numbers would magnify the challenge of confronting blind religious bigotry in Murfreesboro, the core of the matter is crystal clear. First, our Constitution guarantees religious freedom. Secondly, it is manifestly wrong, irrational and illogical — a matter of blind prejudice and uninformed minds — to think that all terrorists are Muslims, and all Muslims are terrorists.
Christians’ terrorist taint
Christians produce terrorists, too. Think Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber; Eric Robert Rudolph, one of many abortion clinic bombers; and a range of radical white supremacy groups. In India, China and Sri Lanka, fringe extremists of other cultures’ religious roots — Hindu and Buddhist — are at work, often against their own cultures. Similarly, al Qaida and related terrorist cells routinely slaughter ordinary Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan for rejecting terrorism and refusing to aid terrorists.
All provide ample proof that terrorism may not be conflated with authentic, mainstream religious beliefs.
The world’s 1.57 billion Muslims constitute nearly one out of four people around the globe. Of this vast number, only a minute fraction become terrorists. As with extremists of other faiths, they do so not because of their religion, but despite its peaceful tenets. Aiming bigotry at innocent Muslims — in Murfreesboro, New York or any other American city — only compounds the damage, and diminishes us all. It’s not supposed to be the American way.
Want to eliminate Christian terrorism? Then prosecute preachers who foment racism and mob action and Imams who preach violent jihad. Quit letting Christians invade the schools and inculcate young people with their prejudice and racism. This is a classic case of "tyranny of the majority". "Christian schools" are just American madrassas.
"Public" education should mandate the teaching of comparative religion classes that demonstrate the diversity of thought, including atheism, and teach students to respect ALL viewpoints. The current course is creating the very problem we all decry. As you correctly point out, the miniscule minority of extremist Muslims are no worse than extremists from any other sect.
There is no innate propensity for any two human beings to hate each other - such a sad result is created by some external influence. Religion is the most common one since it places people in a stance of "what I believe is true and what you believe is false". Pride and prejudice create conflict where none would have otherwise existed.
We have largely matured beyond "I hate you because you are black" (or white or red or yellow) but it is still true - unless humanity matures beyond tribal religions, there can be no assurance it will have the opportunity to mature at all.
Obviously some socalled knowledgeable people and journalists do not know what Christianity is. "Christians produce terrorists too." That is the most ridiculous thing I have seen in a long time. Anything that is of terror nature can claim to be whatever it desires. Its claim does not make it so. That which is terrorism IS NEVER ANY PHASE of true Christianity. NO legitimate church nor anyone who sincerely claims to follow Jesus Christ would accept McVeigh, Rudolph, abortion bombers nor any others who do ungodly acts. It is neither part of the writings of Christianity nor the teachings of Jesus. Terrorism is evil and needs to be dealt with according to righteous laws. As for those who claim the Christian faith and do hideous acts, they are condemned by truly faithful Christians. As for the mosque arson in middle Tennessee. It is a disgrace. But you have no right to place everyone who may oppose such a mosque in the same category as the ones who committed arson. That is far contrary to the American way. In the future, please try to refrain from misrepresenting Christianity and acting as if it and Islam are the same. They are not. Yet in both movements there are ones who just do not get the fact that we can live together in harmony while disagreeing. I do hope that our Muslim friends will remember this as they continue on the move to be among those of us who truly try to be Christian in the United States of America. We may disapprove of where they have mosques. We may see differently from many of their customs. But we will never engage in violence, intimidation nor endanger others to prove a point. I hope those who are reasonable will do likewise and condemn elements of their religion who believe their mission from Allah is to kill others.That is terrorism in its ugliest form.
This is the reality going on around America these days:
Single-gender classes challenged Bill Bumpas 9/1/2010
"A school board in Louisiana is fighting the American Civil Liberties Union over the right to have single-gender classes at a middle school. Last September the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Vermilion Parish School Board, claiming the single-gender classes at the Rene A. Rost Middle School in Kaplan were discriminatory and violated students' rights to an equal education. A federal district judge ruled in April that the all-boys and all-girls classes could continue under court-mandated conditions. Officials say the board has complied with guidelines -- but with the ACLU appealing, the case is not over.
Gene Mills with the Louisiana Family Forum has researched the single-gender program. He explains that parents are allowed to opt their children out of the program in favor of a co-ed class. Plus, he notes, grades in the single-gender classes are up, discipline problems are down, and both parents and students are pleased.
"You might say that in an era and in a system where very little innovation occurs, this administrator has introduced a very innovative idea -- and it's gotten results," Mills shares.
"Maybe the results are what bother the ACLU, but I certainly would celebrate a parent's right to make a decision in the midst of the choices that have been spelled out -- a male only class, a female only class, and a co-ed class -- and I certainly would celebrate the results: they obviously speak for themselves."
The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is set to hear oral arguments in the case in early October".
These are the moderate Muslims they said we don’t need to worry about Date: 9/1/2010 by Bryan Fischer
"Ahmed Mohamed Nasser al Soofi was the poster child of a “moderate” Muslim. He just came to America, according to friends and relatives, for a better life and to take care of his family. Character references were in abundant supply, as we were told how honest he was and how harmless he was. Why, he worked at a convenience store in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. How dangerous could he be? He wouldn’t hurt a fly, we were told.
In other words, he is the poster child of the Muslims we’re told represent most Muslims in America, the ones that are on the side of freedom and pose no threat to our national security.
The Associated Press, by the way, never gets around to mentioning his religious affiliation at all. And in their original story, the AP didn’t even give the names of the two suspects involved until the fifth or sixth paragraph, likely because their names are clearly Arabic. Nope, no bias in the out-of-the-mainstream media here that I can detect at all.
Well, all was fine with al Soofi until he boarded a plane in Birmingham, Alabama with luggage that contained a cell phone taped to a Pepto-Bismol bottle, multiple cell phones and watches taped together, and a knife and box cutter.
Inexplicably, the people who are supposed to keep us safe in the air, the TSA, spotted the stuff in his suitcase, examined it, and decided there was nothing to worry about here, move along. He was allowed to board the plane and continue his journey.
It wasn’t until he sent his bag on ahead to Washington, D.C. while he changed his itinerary at the last minute and got on a plane for Amsterdam that officials got concerned. They had to call the plane with his bag on it back to the gate. In other words, they were perfectly willing to let the plane take off with this suspicious luggage as long as he was on board, as if suicide bombers don’t exist and the Christmas Day bomber who tried to blow up his underwear and 270 passengers was just a figment of our collective imagination.
Now if I or any member of my family was on that plane from Birmingham to Chicago, and I found out that they let al Soofi and his luggage on board knowing it contained a cell phone taped to a bottle of liquid and a knife and a box cutter, I’d be absolutely furious right about now.
Our vigilant protectors at Homeland Security have already decided this wasn’t a dry run for a terrorist attack, as if everybody tapes cell phones to bottles of liquid when they fly.
The president’s spokesman confessed that the two men arrested in Amsterdam - al Soofi and another man by the name of Hezam al Murisi - are not on anybody’s watch list, which is up to about 20,000 names by now. Al Murisi only changed his destination to a different continent at the very last minute - which people do every day, of course - and so naturally did nothing that should arouse anyone’s suspicion.
And security officials assure us that they apparently are not a part of any terror network, as if the presence of rogue jihadists among us such as these two shouldn’t alarm anybody.
All that means is that we have no way of knowing which Muslim is going to be the source of the next terrorist threat.
What officials don’t realize is the fact al Soofi apparently acted on his own makes the case against the theory that there are any truly moderate Muslims in America crumble like a cheap Bedouin tent in a mild breeze.
In other words, al Soofi was a classic moderate Muslim, someone we’re told is not a threat to anyone, not a part of any terrorist cell, is a follower of the religion of peace and a man who only wants to contribute to America and realize the American dream.
Now it looks like he was trying to figure out a way to blow 300 of us to kingdom come.
The bottom line is this: if we can’t even trust “moderate” Muslims, which members of the Islamic persuasion can we trust? If a convenience store clerk in Tuscaloosa can go jihadi on us with no warning, how many other Muslims like him do we have to worry about?
The constant, constant danger is that a “moderate” Muslim may suddenly begin to take his religion seriously and get about the business of blasting some of us infidels to our final reward as his god and his religion teaches him to do. If a guy like al Soofi can’t be trusted, then no “moderate” Muslim in America can be trusted. We have to be cautious with them all".
Yet another example of hate, bigotry and "forcing one's beliefs, i.e.: Atheism, via the ACLU, down the throats of others..
Uprooting crosses, one by one Robert Knight 9/1/2010
"While the furor over the proposed mosque at Ground Zero has New York Gov. David Paterson offering public land as a peace offering, a more familiar symbol -- the cross -- is systematically being uprooted around the country. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit ruled August 18 that placing crosses where Utah state troopers died violates the Establishment Clause.
The 14 crosses, 12 feet tall and bearing a trooper's name, have been erected by the privately funded Utah Highway Patrol Association since 1968. Robert Kirby, a Salt Lake Tribune columnist and former cop, initiated it. He told Newsweek, "We wanted something instantly recognizable at 75 miles per hour, something that would say, 'This is hallowed ground.'"
Not to a mirror-worshipping group, which sued in 2005. It lost in U.S. district court, which ruled in American Atheists Inc. v. Duncan that the cross is a symbol of "death and burial." The atheists appealed and persuaded the 10th Circuit to reverse. But a further appeal to the Supreme Court would bode well, given that swing vote Justice Anthony Kennedy, in Salazar v. Buono (2009) wrote: "The goal of avoiding governmental endorsement does not require eradication of all religious symbols in the public realm. A cross by the side of a public highway marking, for instance, the place where a state trooper perished need not be taken as a statement of governmental support for sectarian beliefs." Did the 10th's judges not read this majority opinion?
Anyway, let's move on to the Buono case. In California's Mojave National Preserve, the site of a seven-foot, metal-pipe cross first erected 75 years ago by World War I veterans is bare.
In 2001, the American Civil Liberties Union sued on behalf of Frank Buono, an ACLU member, atheist and former National Park Service employee living in Oregon. Mr. Buono said the cross offended him when he returned for visits. Congress authorized a transfer of the property to the Veterans of Foreign Wars. The case reached the Supreme Court, which reversed an appellate court's order and kicked it back to the lower court on April 28. Writing for the court majority (and the vast majority of Americans), Justice Kennedy said: "Here, one Latin cross in the desert evokes far more than religion. It evokes thousands of small crosses in foreign fields marking the graves of Americans who fell in battles, battles whose tragedies are compounded if the fallen are forgotten."
Ten days later, someone cut down the cross, which had been covered by a plywood box lest Mr. Buono see it and start melting.
When another cross appeared a few days later, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.'s Justice Department ordered the Park Service to remove it.
Over in Monterey, California, someone in September 2009 tore down a 40-year-old cross on Del Monte Beach that commemorated the city's 200th birthday where Spanish explorer Don Gaspar de Portola and Father Juan Crespi landed. City officials voted to allow private funders to replace it, but the ACLU objected. After a year of legal threats, the cross will be rebuilt instead at the Diocese of Monterey's San Carlos Cemetery.
"In truth, it is no defeat for Christianity," the Monterey Herald smirked in a March 2 editorial. "It is a victory for those twin freedoms -- freedom of religion and freedom from religion." Right. Dispatching a historic cross to a cemetery is nobody's defeat. Someone should tell the ACLU folks before they pop more champagne.
The paper did admit that the vandal who cut down the cross won "a minor victory." What would a major victory look like? A torched church?
"It is frustrating to realize that some Christians will truly feel that their faith is under attack even though that simply is not the case," the Herald insisted. "It is a defeat for no one and a victory for people who want to be allowed to believe as they wish."
If that editorial writer were to have a colleague of similar ilk reporting on, say, a 16-1 pounding the Dodgers delivered to the San Francisco Giants, we might read: "It is frustrating to realize that some Giants fans will truly feel that their team lost. It is a defeat for no one. They should believe they were all winners."
Okay, "why can't we all just get along?" Nothing of any real importance or concern is going on in this country.
Nothing at all.
And where the big bird comes from they have a rally and
burn the CROSS !!
I suspect the concept of "getting along" is completely foreign to canary, who accepts only one way of thinking.
canaryinthecopyandpastemine
Or login with:
New Account