These Christians are part of a group that routinely harassed people at the Arab Festival (which is why they were arrested). And they not only targeted Muslims, but Catholics as well.
Too bad the Clarion Project are a bunch of Muslim-hating liars (which is probably why you cite them):
What they were throwing was water bottles, incidentally.
No, not “anyone”, just you personally. I’m well aware that most people who claim to oppose child rape (including myself) are sincere in maintaining that it’s a serious crime and a barbarous act of violence.
But when the particular child rape that somebody’s getting loudly and ostentatiously upset over is a historically unclear account of a marital relationship fourteen centuries ago that was considered normal by the standards of all contemporary societies?
Yeah, that person is indeed just an Islamophobe grasping at straws.
It’s more like Schrödinger’s Hatred. He’s more than happy to point his finger at this or that news story from Iran (or from Shi’a groups) as proof that Islam is The Badds because they’re Muslims. But they cease being Muslims when it’s inconvenient that they be.
He can’t know whether Iranians are Muslim or not until he opens the news story to look at the cat :p.
One problem with “tolerance” is that it sometimes has to make an either-or choice.
Say you want to be religiously tolerant. You also want to promote acceptance of LGBT people.
So what do you do when you encounter a religion that promotes violence against LGBT people? You have to make a choice; can’t be tolerant of both. (I’m not referring to Islam specifically, but a hypothetical religion.)
It’s more like Schrödinger’s Hatred. He’s more than happy to point his finger at this or that appalling news story from Iran (or from Shi’a groups) as proof that Islam is The Badds because they’re Muslims. But they cease being Muslims when it’s inconvenient that they be.
He can’t know whether Iranians are Muslim or not until he opens the news story to look at the cat :p.
No, what settles things is the fact that an independent investigation found no evidence that concerns about the ethnic origins of the perpetrators or fears of being thought racist were behind the police inaction, but instead it was because the police didn’t actually seem to care about what happened to children from poor and broken homes.
Sure you can. Take, for example, Christianity - there are many Christians who are intolerant of LGBT people. But there are also many who embrace LGBT people, and many LBGT people who are themselves Christian.
Well, that’s when you vigorously endorse the interpretations of the religion in question that don’t promote violence against LGBT people.
Say you’ve got the High Priest of the Bigendian Mother Church proclaiming “Teh gayz are just awful! Anybody who tolerates teh gayz is guilty of Littleendian heresy!” And you’ve got your rival group, the Swedenborg-Synod Bigendians, proclaiming “We think teh gayz r ok and we’re just as good Bigendians as anyone else!”
That, my friends, is your opportunity to stand in solidarity with the Swedenborg-Synod Bigendians: invite them to your clergy exchange program, donate to their LGBT Bigendian Safe Space shelter program to help care for LGBT people who are fleeing oppression by the Bigendian Mother Church, whatever.
That’s how you practice tolerance in such a way as to encourage tolerance.
Which is why it chaps my hide so bad to see Radical-Mullah Cheer Squad members like Haberdash falling all over themselves to AGREE with the hateful violent-extremist Islamists that their oppressive fundamentalist interpretation of Islam is the correct one. Dumbshits don’t even realize which side they’re actually fighting on.
I’m all for people adopting the Muslim equivalent of “we go to church on Easter to please grandma and paper over our serviceable American liberalism with platitudes about ‘what Jesus really said’ because that’s easier than being an atheist” attitude that has fruitfully displaced Christianity in so much of the civilized world. It doesn’t do much good to spell it out, though – the way to make modernity appealing is to spread modernity.
The main part of the Detroit Free Press article I linked above isn’t available at that link, but here’s the full version:
Compare that to Haberdash’s description of what happened.
If you really meant that, you wouldn’t spend so much time and energy insisting that liberal tolerance is fundamentally incompatible with Islam because “the book says so”.
You’re not fooling us, cupcake: what you’re in this game for is not to promote liberal attitudes within Islam, but rather to enjoy hating and despising Islam on the pretext that it can’t absorb liberal attitudes.
Do obnoxious proselytizers not have a right to free speech?
Of which they were acquitted, since it’s obvious that it was an inapplicable charge. You can’t disturb the tranquility of a parade.
They were arrested for advocating Christianity in Dearborn in an obnoxious way. Which is exactly the sort of thing the First Amendment protects.
It’s funny how you keep finding things that don’t fall under the umbrella of “free speech” while claiming to be such a fan of it.
The Arab Festival isn’t a parade. And one of them was found guilty of refusing to obey a police officer. And when the Muslim, Catholic, African American, and Mormon-hating Christians were disruptive again in 2012, they were told to leave or be ticketed for disturbing the peace. They also sued, but they lost, appealed, and lost again, the court writing, “The video from the 2012 festival demonstrates that (evangelists’) speech and conduct intended to incite the crowd to turn violent. … Although robustly guarded by the First Amendment, religious conduct remains subject to regulation for the protection of society,”
It’s funny how you’re constantly wrong about, well, pretty much everything.
Big surprise which side of that ruling you fall on. Big.
Yes, the one that’s legally binding.
Has your Muslim-hate expanded into a hate for the rule of law now, too?
Is that question addressed to me? Of course obnoxious proselytizers have a right to free speech. What you don’t have a right to is immunity from other people calling you out on your bullshit.
No no no no NO ! Free speech means you **must **agree with all speech. And support it. And materially help speech being broadcast far and wide. And crush whoever disagrees with said speech, burn their children, rape their homes and enjoy the lamentations of their women.
Anything less makes you an islamofascistophile.
Err, unless of course whoever made whatever speech was a Muslim. Then the rules are mirrored, for self-evident reasons.
Every single Muslim society, even the most extreme.
You really have no idea what the Hadith are do you?