Friday, November 06, 2009
Remember that you can now demand support to practice Satanism in the UK armed forces and ask for a symbol of Wicca on an American VA headstone. So the issue is not Islam or any single belief system. The point is that there is no evaluation system at all. Maybe the wicca are fine and loyal, maybe some muslims are and others are not. What has happened is that a screen has been arbitrarily drawn around some actions and motives if they are declared religious and they cannot be questioned. What makes this doubly unsustainable is not only does it not work but it is also arbitrary and hypocritical.
Every now and then the KKK and Neo-nazis crawl out and try to get recognized as just another faith group. They get reliably slapped down. The problem is that everyone knows that if they weren't a small group of losers, if they were instead a growing menace tied to wealthy overseas interests and had a reputation for effectively using violence (in the last 75 years, maybe Robert Byrd did defang them) then their pretensions would receive a more respectful hearing.
(who implied that muslims need to get ready for a Day of Reckoning)
To AZM Why is your problem my problem?
Because it is your problem and mine. Because we as a nation get to decide who is in it, and those rules need to get enforced, but we as individuals can only act to protect ourselves not to sequester and attack other citizens who have not done harm. If I encounter a jihadi committing violence then I will feel called upon to stop him. If I encounter someone attempting to commit violence on a child because of who that child's father is then I will feel called on to stop him. We can discuss what our immigration policies should be. We can discuss what our standards for background investigations and security checks should be. We can discuss how loyal members of the muslim community can do more to confront and expel threats from their community and prove themselves as valuable to the American nation, as citizens of Japanese and German heritage did in WW-II. We cannot reasonably discuss whether someone who is not a threat should face private violence.
Loyalty must be made a virtue. You get what you pay for. Why are there scholarship programs that do not demand military service? Why is there only a 5 point bonus for some veterans for some Civil Service jobs? Why is anybody allowed to vote or serve on a jury who is not an honorably discharged veteran, or reservist, or an officer serving during war or for temporary training? Why does anybody get to vote for a branch of government that pays over half of their income? Why does anybody get to vote who is a financial dependent?
We are talking past each other I fear. My point was that as a private citizen you should be free to like or do business with whoever you please to but that your words had edged unfortunately close to a call for actions that may only be legitimate when considered by a sovereign government that represents the collective will of a free citizenry. The question of whether you can put a sign outside your house declaring it a "muslim free zone" or judenrein may be worth considering under the restriction on fighting words and verbal assaults but I would give you wide latitude to be an obnoxious curmudgeon if you so choose. Ideally if you discriminate against your innocent neighbors then others will think less of you and your business will suffer. I do not believe that the government should support any such discrimination but given that I do believe that the government should, except in cases of 2nd Amendment extremis, have a monopoly on the use of force it has the theoretical power to enact a policy of internment or deportation that no private person can attempt. We do not want a Bad Day at Black Rock.
I agree with marymcl that the muslim community has a heavy responsibility for the way that they are perceived. My words regarding every man's responsibility to defend the innocent, especially if things get critical, from private violence stand and I would think better of you if you supported them.