Comments on: Islamofascist Mad Libs http://whiteperil.com/2006/02/04/islamofascist-mad-libs/ Wed, 01 Feb 2012 07:45:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Sean Kinsell http://whiteperil.com/2006/02/04/islamofascist-mad-libs/comment-page-1/#comment-2285 Sean Kinsell Mon, 06 Feb 2006 11:53:18 +0000 http://whiteperil.com/?p=1183#comment-2285 Yeah, I know there are different places you can reasonably draw the line (from our point of view, I mean), but I cannot for the life of me think of a way to get across that we're willing to demonstrate respect for Islam as much as any other religion but that that does not constitute an assumption of its religious obligations. It would be great if there were a way to make the point forcefully to the Islamofascists without doing anything that might offend the sensibilities of reasonable, moderate Muslims, but that doesn't seem to work. Being nice looks like capitulation and a display of weakness. That potential mix-up doesn't exist with Jews, which is why I don't mind not spelling out or pronouncing the name of the deity when I'm corresponding with one--even the most conservative Hassids I've met know the difference between respect for others' beliefs and assent to them. Yeah, I know there are different places you can reasonably draw the line (from our point of view, I mean), but I cannot for the life of me think of a way to get across that we’re willing to demonstrate respect for Islam as much as any other religion but that that does not constitute an assumption of its religious obligations. It would be great if there were a way to make the point forcefully to the Islamofascists without doing anything that might offend the sensibilities of reasonable, moderate Muslims, but that doesn’t seem to work. Being nice looks like capitulation and a display of weakness. That potential mix-up doesn’t exist with Jews, which is why I don’t mind not spelling out or pronouncing the name of the deity when I’m corresponding with one–even the most conservative Hassids I’ve met know the difference between respect for others’ beliefs and assent to them.

]]> By: Classical Values http://whiteperil.com/2006/02/04/islamofascist-mad-libs/comment-page-1/#comment-2286 Classical Values Mon, 06 Feb 2006 00:36:54 +0000 http://whiteperil.com/?p=1183#comment-2286 <strong>Doggone outrageous</strong> Amidst the huge collection of pictures taken during yesterday's "INTERNATIONAL DAY OF OUTRAGE" was this one: "Denmark dogs"? Hey, that's what the sign says. And in light of her previously announced support for Denmark, Coco's now thinking along the lines... Doggone outrageous

Amidst the huge collection of pictures taken during yesterday’s “INTERNATIONAL DAY OF OUTRAGE” was this one: “Denmark dogs”? Hey, that’s what the sign says. And in light of her previously announced support for Denmark, Coco’s now thinking along the lines…

]]> By: tanoki http://whiteperil.com/2006/02/04/islamofascist-mad-libs/comment-page-1/#comment-2284 tanoki Sun, 05 Feb 2006 07:50:04 +0000 http://whiteperil.com/?p=1183#comment-2284 Agreed, Sean. This is going to sound trite, so my apologies for the lack of creativity, but I suppose I just have a hard time respecting any religion (or for that matter, any sect of religion) that condones violence as a response to *anything*. I can understand feeling offended by someone's characterization of something dear to you (I'm sure Tom Cruise fans hated watching the "Brokeback Squandron" parody I linked to in a previous thread), but I hardly see how an offensive cartoon depiction of your God, whoever that might be, justifies taking a torch to a number of embassies. Eye for an eye? I suppose that's the behavioral standard the demonstrating Muslims were working from. I just have a very hard time understanding how they are making an effective case for improved global acceptance of them and their religion through irrational violence. I suppose I'm just too dim, or too religiously uninspired, to see their point. Agreed, Sean. This is going to sound trite, so my apologies for the lack of creativity, but I suppose I just have a hard time respecting any religion (or for that matter, any sect of religion) that condones violence as a response to *anything*. I can understand feeling offended by someone’s characterization of something dear to you (I’m sure Tom Cruise fans hated watching the “Brokeback Squandron” parody I linked to in a previous thread), but I hardly see how an offensive cartoon depiction of your God, whoever that might be, justifies taking a torch to a number of embassies. Eye for an eye? I suppose that’s the behavioral standard the demonstrating Muslims were working from. I just have a very hard time understanding how they are making an effective case for improved global acceptance of them and their religion through irrational violence. I suppose I’m just too dim, or too religiously uninspired, to see their point.

]]>