I want to start off this post by saying that I find almost no common cause with the likes of Pamela Geller, Glenn Beck, or Terry Jones. I find their rhetoric to be somewhere in between distasteful and disgusting. And if blaming them for the actions of others got them entirely out of the public sphere, I would consider that a positive development.
But (and you knew there would be a “but”) I still would not be entirely comfortable with how it was done. The notion that we have to taper down our rhetoric due to the actions of unhinged individuals bothers me.
By way of explanation, let me cop to something: I am a religious bigot. Not towards Muslims, though. I dislike the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS) with a passion.
I find their culture to be sick to the core. Whatever their value as human beings, doing right and moral things as they see it, has been corrupted by their religious institutions. They have become tools of an evil institution that brainwashes and enslaves their girls and expels their boys into the desert.
I believe the state of Texas was right to try to take their children away. I do believe they should be protected by the rule of law (thus, I understood the courts ruling the way that they did) and I don’t believe they should be summarily killed, but I believe that they are worthy of the harshest of condemnation.
I believe that I should be able say these things, in no uncertain terms, and not share in the blame if someone reads my words and decides that something violent needs to be done. I believe that “sharing the blame” of these sorts of actions (I recognize that almost nobody thinks that the blame falls entirely with the alleged instigator) creates a society in which we must all walk on eggshells to avoid anything that might set a psychopath off.
It’s not that different from violent video games. Violent video games may well encourage violence. There’s research to suggest otherwise, but even if they do, we should not cater society to the fringiest element that might want to do video game things in real life.
Now, if I were to advocate violence outright (not hypothetically, cryptically, or “in code” which can be interpreted any number of ways), the killing of children, and so on, that does change the calculation. If I were to celebrate their actions, then not only would I deserve (some of the) blame but I would probably be seeking (some of the) credit.
In the case of Atlas Shrugs, they’ve denounced the violence (albeit with a somewhat defensive tone, unsurprisingly brushing Islam with the same tar that they claim they should not be brushed with) and point to the fact that they had previously barred him from their forum. This does not mean that what they do is okay. Their ugly words should be caused out for what they are. I condemn them. But I thought them worthy of condemnation last week, too. Because what they do is wrong regardless of what some mentally disturbed Norwegian does.
I recognize that it is not exactly this cut and dried. And there is some value in “watching what we say” and consider the actions of others (both for, and in the case of Terry Jones, in response) and weigh the value of our with the possible repercussions. I am a rather staid pundit that gets rather uncomfortable with extremist rhetoric. I believe we should treat our political enemies and what we perceive to be our opposing cultures with much more respect than Geller and the likes of her give Islam. But not so much because of the actions of wicked and mentally disturbed third parties. Not to give them the power to silence us.
{Edited to add a paragraph that got lost somehow}
And to think you’ve condemned the FLDS on Pioneer Day of all days. I hope your hand cart gets bogged down in quicksand, Will Truman.
*if you’re not a Utahn, this may not register as the joke it is intended to be*
Yeah, well, remember the havoc that ensued when July 4th fell on that Sunday? We had one set of fireworks for the Mormons on Saturday the 3rd, and another set for the rest of us. Dunno if it was like that in your neck of the woods, though.
You must live in Park City. In all the years I’ve been here (in SLC and now St. George) there has never been an organized fireworks display on a Sunday. Always the day before or the day after.
I sometimes joke to myself that if the Rapture were to happen on a Sunday, the local governemnts would figure out how to get it moved to the Monday after.
It might have been the case that the Gentile fireworks were done by the local churches. They sometimes seemed to pick up the slack on those sorts of things. I remember one of my coworkers commenting “being an atheist means going to the [something] Baptist Church every couple of years for a non-LDS-approved celebration” or something to that effect.
(Not unlike how my wife and I decided that if we were to settle down in Mormonland, we would send our kids to the Lutheran school so that they might get a good secular education.)
Re: The Rapture… hilarious.
About the education thing, I gotta tell ya, I’m still blown away by the “release time” accorded the children to go across the street to seminary.
In all honesty, after this long being here, I’m sort of used to it. I figure many states still have blue laws based primarily on a religious basis, so Utah, despite being a bit more peculiar than some, is not too terribly peculiar. Except for that whole “running legislation past the 12 Apostles for approval.” That one still gets under my skin.
Me, I’d rather take my chances on the 12 Apostles than Congress.
The 12 Apostles of the Mormon Church? You’d be right at home here in Utah.
Me? I’ll still take some representative democracy.
Apologies for trespassing on your site, Will. Mr. Kain continues to play his foolish games by restricting/banning my ability to submit comments on the other sites at the League. Sorry. I keep hoping he has a change of heart but that appears to be not even in the realm of possibilities.
He’s “dug” in and trying to show everyone that he won’t tolerate any more silliness. Yeah, he’s turned over a new leaf–his personality changes are sometimes just too much to take and for that matter, very hard to keep track of. He’s the new sheriff in town and dammit Heidegger, you’re going to be my first victim to show everyone how tough I am! I should think a mildly intelligent parrot would be more than capable of filling the shoes of Mr. Kain, with his droll, robotic, lifeless, bloodless, manner of expression. Wachet auf, Kain!
Sigh.
And may I add,
Plaudite, amici, comedia finita est.
Well, that’s just funny! The American Right doesn’t commit acts of terrorism because they lack ambition, wherewithal, and are just plain lazy.
Well thank God for Conservative layabouts.
We’re saved by our sloth. Nothing like those ambitious, hard-working, swarthy looking, mass murdering terrorists! Arbeit macht Frei!!
This one’s pretty schizophrenic, WT. You should feel free to slag on LDS; Geller et al., should be more respectful of Islam.
Not feeling you on this one.
I find their culture to be sick to the core. Whatever their value as human beings, doing right and moral things as they see it, has been corrupted by their religious institutions. They have become tools of an evil institution that brainwashes and enslaves their girls and expels their boys into the desert.
Surely you see this could be said about Mormons or Muslims by their critics…
First, not the LDS, but the FLDS. It’s a pretty crucial distinction.
Surely you see this could be said about Mormons or Muslims by their critics…
Sure. And there are some cultures of Islam wherein the criticism is quite on the mark. I am not one to use “that’s bigoted” as an argument. My main problem with Geller et al is on the merits. I believe they take some very valid criticisms of some Islamic cultures, paint too broad a brush for a multifaceted group, and present them as being an existential threat that they are not.
If someone wants to argue that I am doing the same with regard to the FLDS, they are free to do so. They’re free to call be a bigot (err, as I did!). But they shouldn’t mistake that for an argument. I recognize that a lot of liberals do it. Doesn’t mean I like it when they do.
First, WT, appy-ollogies for not catching the distinction of “FLDS,” the Warren Jeffs guy. That’s rather fish in the barrel, though, like condemning “the Austrian.”
I don’t follow the JihadWatch crowd; occasionally they drift over my transom, making a substantive argument that nobody else dares make. I’ve made a bit of a study of Islam on my own: I prefer going to the sources and learn the most from “moderate” Muslims like Tariq Ramadan. What they don’t say is the key to understanding Islam and Islamism as it understands itself. What they don’t say where they would ordinarily be expected to is as clear as an unmuddied lake.
And I must say I’m unconvinced that the Islam that fits your quote above is as obviously fringey as FLDS. At some point, one must look at the particulars and realities of this thing and not try to get by with generic bleatings about fundamentalist religion [bad], as if one size fits all.
I hung onto this one, a debate between Daniel Pipes and moderate Muslim Muqtedar Khan, a respected American academic. The gentle reader shall make up his own mind:
http://www.ijtihad.org/debate.htm
Me, I don’t disagree with either one of them. Islam is what it is, but let’s make no mistake, it’s not the Kiwanis Club.
Thank-you, thank-you, thank-you, Tom! So happy you held on to this debate–love Pipes–and he’s a fanatical lover of classical music for bonus points.
A brilliant guy, a funny guy–have had many enjoyable discussions with him-I’m just amazed the fascist politically-correct cretins even let him speak. The Lefty loud mouths frequently do everything in their power to thwart his right to free speech—hysterically, goonishly screaming about Israel’s continuing practice of “genocide”. Sometimes I think it would have been a better solution for Israel to swap countries with Germany.
That’s partly what makes the case so instructive. It’s a case that most people can agree on. And one I feel pretty strongly about. Therefore, when I see someone criticize Islam, I think of it in the context of the FLDS. Otherwise, it becomes too easy to say (to yourself, or others) “That’s bigoted and I shouldn’t think that.”
Whether it’s bigoted or not is beside the point. The question is whether it’s true.
That’s something of a different debate. There are comparisons between the two that favor the FLDS (they stick to their own, mostly, and don’t bother non-members all that much) and others that favor the Muslims (it’s less top-down and more maleable). Islam is a religion that runs a gamut, while the FLDS is a narrow sect. Anyhow, my point is as DensityDuck mentions below.
His point is that “calling out” the FLDS is not the same as suggesting that FLDS members should be gunned down in the street.
Exactly. And if someone does gun them down on the streets, the problem isn’t that someone was calling out the FLDS. Nor should it imply that those calling out the FLDS have a secret desire for it to happen.