Skip to main content

The Pope was right.

The insult of Pope Benedict to Muhammad and to Islam is nothing to the insult of Muslims themselves.

It's as though they're trying to prove every statement against them 100% correct.

I wish the Pope had not given even his non-apology. I wish he'd just out and out said, "But you're proving that what I quoted is true." and then let them choke on it.

I'm *appalled* that other churches or church leaders have apologized *for* him. It's like apologizing to the Mafia for suggesting that they are breaking kneecaps in hopes that they won't break your kneecaps. Doesn't truth matter? Or does only safety matter?

Or maybe, if there really *are* Muslims who don't believe in violence the analogy should be that it's like apologizing and pretending to *Italians* that there is no Mafia. It might make them feel good, but it encourages the Mafia. And the usual victims of the Mafia were other Italians just as the usual victim of violent Islam are other Muslims.

And, seriously now, how can we possibly expect those non-violent or "moderate" Muslims to stand against the violent Islamists if *we* refuse to?

The truth hurts. Cartoons of Muhammad with a bomb in his turban *hurt*. The words of the Pope *hurt*. But the blame for the hurt doesn't rest on cartoonists or Popes. The blame rests squarely on Islamists, on kidnappers who force conversion at gun point, on rioters killing people over cartoons, on systems that promote honor killings and holding women as property.

It rests on "Muslims" who come to the US and claim a "Muslim right" to practice their "Muslim ways" by practicing slavery and rape. It rests on Islamic theocracies executing people for apostasy, homosexuality, and for *being* raped.

The words of the Pope are NOTHING compared to the actions of Muhammad's followers.

Comments

Ymarsakar said…
Hey, maybe we should get out of the Middle East. Wouldn't that allow peace a chance and give Muslims a reason not to hate us, if we stop interfering with their religion and politics?
Synova said…
Heh. ;-)
Ymarsakar said…
You might be interested in Stratfor's perspective on this Pope deal. Bookworm has the goods because she has the subscription to Stratfor email wise.

Link

Popular posts from this blog

Some times some people.

 

It's Not Projection

Take the case of "fascism". When you can see clear as day that the person who is accusing you of fascism is a fascist, they aren't projecting. They're talking about something ELSE. Basically, in the case of fascism, the basic set of fascist government controls are the default assumption of reality for a whole lot of people. The government is supposed to control every part of your life. The government is supposed to make you moral and good and reflect "justice". The government is supposed to do this by picking winners from the good people and losers from the bad people. The government is supposed to control the way people do business, how businesses (and farmers) function and what they produce. And people should be made to cooperate with this control because they are part of society and society is dependent on everyone being in compliance. This is simply the Truth. It's how the world works and how the world is supposed to work. The Socialist Nationalism, ...

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...