Ralph Peters is concerned about Islam haters who advocate the genocide of all 1 billion muslims on the planet. The nice, Christian people at jihadwatch are pointing out that what Peters says doesn’t apply to them, and they are right. As far as I know, I'm the only person with a large vocabulary and a sense of humor to call for the genocide of all 1 billion muslims in a socially progressive and ecologically sensitive way. My Doctrine of Benign Genocide will enable us to kill a large population of religious crazies & have our society remain a decent, pleasant place to live. Indeed, our post-genocidal society can be a better place than now! The soldier will return from slaughtering thousands of muslims to lifting an earthworm from the sidewalk and throwing it in the grass so it won't be stepped on. There is no contradiction. One may be careful about butterflies but be bloodthirsty about guinea worms and bed bugs
It's true that I have Coulter syndrome and articulate my statements as extreme as possible. I know that most "muslims" aren't dangerous crazies, simply because in all religions, most people follow the religion in only the most superficial manner. Muslims are only evil when they take the step of taking their religion seriously. We shouldn't let Peters know that the whole point of Coulter syndrome is to aggravate people like him.
So here I am, the paragon of the “rotten core of American [right-wing] extremism.” Let's be clear that Peters is right in claiming I am “bent on discrediting honorable conservatism.” After all, I’m a political moderate who roots for politicians like Senators Lincoln Chafee(R-RI) and Joe Lieberman(D-CT). It’s also true that I am bent on discrediting honorable liberalism. I advocate people thinking for themselves and not following simplistic political packages. Let me be clear that I'm not trying to get people to give up on big ideas in politics like liberalism and conservatism. There is much to admire in conservatism and liberalism as political philosophies. It’s just that the contemporary baskets of unrelated ideas known now as conservative and liberal are both nonsense. Further, it's not clear what the bulk of right-wing positions in the United States have to do with conservatism and what the bulk of the left-wing positions have to do with liberalism. Because of our refusal to think, we deserve the approaches the left and right give us.
I do have to object to Peters' entirely predictable claim that “when you read between the lines, that all Muslims are evil and subhuman.” I hope that I don’t come across that way. If someway I haven’t been clear, muslims are typical humans corrupted by an evil ideology—just like Nazis and Communists are. And people acting on the influence of evil ideals do evil things like terrorize their fellow citizens as Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar did on March 6, 2006 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, as Naveed Afzal Haq did on July 28, 2006 in Seattle, Washington, as Omeed Aziz Popal did on August 29, 2006 in San Fransisco, and so forth. Despite Peters's implication otherwise, it is only a matter of time until some muslims “have strapped on bombs and walked into Wal-Mart.” To repeat myself, individual muslims not strongly influenced by their religion can be nice people. The trouble is that people may turn to their religious faith at any time in their life. For instance, I saw reference in the press to two of the three above named terrorist not being devout at some point in their life, though I’m not willing to put full faith in such news without more research. Still, you should know that the nice muslim guy you knew two years may have become a bloodthirsty terrorist since then. I wonder about the Palestinian boy I dated five years ago. The atmosphere was always tense when Islam was brought up, and this is long before I realized how Islam threatens human survival. Back then, I believed we could fuck our way to peace with the Palestinians. My orgasm was my present to mother Israel.
I’m over my silly leftism of fucking=peace now, but Peters is not over my silly leftism: “Once free of the maladies of the Middle East, Muslims thrive in America. Like the rest of us.” In fact, the Islamic terrorists have come from Westernized, middle class back ground like my ex-boyfriend with his MD/PhD. I’d be more concerned about a random muslim from the middle class of the United Kingdom being a terrorist than a muslim from any other country or economic class. Other middle class Western Europeans would be next on my list. We do not corrupt muslims as fast as Peters thinks. Hell, I’m not even sure if Palestinian boyfriend was gay. He is more likely to have been a straight man dealing with Islamic segregation of sexes like a prisoner. I always played the woman’s role not just in our sex, but even in our flirting. He would be annoyed otherwise, and I would put up with it because he had an amazing body. If we can’t even get muslim straight men who have been here over seven years to fuck girls not guys, getting muslims to act like the “rest of us” will not be a quick process.
Robert Spencer has much more to say about about why Peters is wrong at JihadWatch.Org.
I had another thought related to making arguments that the ideas above can illustrate. The right-wing often prides itself on its embrace of an "objective morality" and condemns its opponents for not having an objective morality. I think that this is wrong on many levels. Most obviously, the far left, like the far right, often has a small number of rules that they apply to every situation, and so the left's morality is every bit as objective as the right. But there is a sense in which objective morality disarms us in arguments. We lose the ability to say better or worse. Some examples:
1. Civil libertarians who can't tell the difference between keeping enemy combatants in Gitmo and police arbitrarily imprisoning American citizens
2. So-called pro-lifers who claim to be unable to tell the difference between killing an adult and killing a fetus.
3. Leftist who can't tell the difference Israel defending itself against Islamic terrorism and Islamic terrorism.
At the risk of my being boring, let's make me make some obvious moral judgments to illustrate how I think we should think about things. If I am correct that my Palestinian ex-boyfriend was straight, he would hardly be the only heterosexual muslim man to practice sodomy. Islamic societies are societies where straight boys leave the natural use of the woman, burn in their lust one toward another; men with straight men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet (Romans 1:27). I'd like to make the moral claim that it is wrong to pervert desire from it natural course for any ideological reason, though to avoid an unnecessary argument with the left here let me grant that some experimentation may be exempt from this criticism.
Thus, we should condemn Christian Right Reparative Therapy leading gay men to unnatural sex for them, Muslim misogyny leading straight men to sodomy, and the postmodern nonsense of bisexuality which leads to both bad outcomes. In regard to the last, studies of the human brain activity in young men provide the empirical evidence that there is no bisexuality, but don't expect gay rights groups to drop demands for bisexual rights anytime soon. The least bad of these three causes of perverted sex is bisexuality, because it is freely chosen and people have a easy time getting over it. The overwhelming common pattern is a person has a few encounters in their early twenties and they get over claiming to be bisexual. I have observed this in every bisexual I've known for a long time. The second least bad is Christian Right Reparative Therapy, because like bisexuality it is freely chosen and people get over it at probably the same frequency as bisexuality. The trouble with Christian Reparative Therapy is that encourages people to feel bad about themselves for being guilty while bisexuality makes people feel good about themselves for being open-minded, different, and original--just as punk rock kids feel so different and original for cutting their hair like kids did in the late seventies. Muslim misogyny leading straight men to sodomy is by far the worse of these three causes of perversion. It is a system you can't escape--more like a prison than a fashion statement. There are many people who would attempt to morally equivalence the Christian Right Reparative Therapy with Islamic misogyny which leads to sodomy or even more likely with Islamic homophobic, but we should attack back. Christian Right Reparative Therapy is one's own choice, while leading a lifestyle with prison like segregation of the sexes is not. Nor is being stoned to death for sodomy optional under sharia.
Saturday, September 09, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment