What Is It Going To Take?
Tuesday, February 5th, 2008It seems that the only religion you can be intolerant of today is Christianity:
A HOSPITAL porter was “devastated” last night after he was sacked following a row with a Muslim doctor over a crucifix.
Joseph Protano, a devout Roman Catholic, was a regular visitor to a prayer room open to all faiths at Royal Manchester Children’s Hospital.
But Mr Protono, 54, became increasingly angry to find that a crucifix and a statue of the Virgin Mary were regularly being left covered up.
On one visit he discovered three Muslims – two patients and a consultant – inside the prayer room with the two icons masked by a cloth. A picture of the Virgin Mary had also been placed face down.
Mr Protano is alleged to have uncovered the symbols and stood the picture back up before leaving the room. But minutes later there was a “confrontation” in the corridor after the group followed him out.
The Muslims accused Mr Protano of using racist language and assault, but he strongly denies the charges against him and claims they verbally abused him.
Mr Protano, from Salford, was suspended four days after the incident in December and has now been fired.
So here’s the situation: This hospital has one prayer area for all faiths to share. Some of those faiths do not worship Christ, but have their own deity. So, they go in this room, cover up the Christian symbols and then do their thing. Up to this point, I have no problem with what is going on.
However, upon finishing their service, prayer, etc., the Muslims fail to uncover the Christian symbols when they are leaving. Instead, they leave the symbols covered, which of course insults Christians. So, this guy goes in and uncovers the symbols while the Muslims are using the room. This, of course, insults the Muslims. Mayhem ensues.
After listening to both sides, the hospital fires the Christian. So, why has a simple disagreement, which could have been resolved in many ways more amicably than this, been elevated to an offense serious enough to fire someone? One word: fear.
If you haven’t heard, the Muslim population in Great Britain is growing by leaps and bounds. Also, the Muslims who are immigrating to Great Britain are not assimilating into the British culture; rather they are keeping their own culture, religion, and religious laws and imposing it on those who enter their areas. In many ways, this immigration resembles what is going on in the southern parts of the U.S. where Mexicans are illegally crossing the border and staying. Both groups are creating large population centers, and within those population centers they speak their own language, worship their own religion, and do all they can to prevent assimilation into the local culture. The main difference is that the Mexican culture is not that different from the American culture, so there are few if any problems from that standpoint. However, there is a huge difference between Islamic culture and Western culture and that is causing a lot of problems in Britain.
Unfortunately, when it comes to disputes involving Western and Islamic cultures, usually whomever is in charge will side with the Islamic point of view in an effort to show their commitment to “diversity” and tolerance. Also, since Muslims world-wide have begun perpetrating violence on groups of non-Muslims who they believe have offended them, sometimes fear ensures that the Muslims get what they want.
In Britain, Muslim protesters often display signs such as the one above during protests over everything from cartoon depictions of Mohammed to women who dare to show their face in public. These are not exceptions to the rule; these are the rule during these Muslim protests.
Recently, two sisters in Irving, Texas were both savagely killed by their father in an apparent honor killing. One of the girls was making the mistake of seeing someone who was not a Muslim, and some say that when the father found out he killed both girls.
One of the important reasons America became a “melting pot” was that people who came here were willing to assimilate into the American culture. Surely, they brought their own culture with them, but instead of imposing it on their young they allowed the young to take the best of their native culture and combine it with American culture. This allowed the young to become educated and accepted among the rest of the people already here, and thus opened the door to the American Dream.
There is no way in hell extremist Muslims are going to assimilate into Western culture. In fact, as they have stated over and over again, their goal is to create one Islamic government to rule the world by use of force (see War on Terror). Yes, a majority of Muslims are peaceful people who fit into society fine, but guess what? I haven’t seen any massive demonstrations against Muslim extremists by these Muslims since September 11, 2001. In fact, the entire group of “nice” Muslims has hardly said a word in support of America since then. Why not? Truth is, they are as scared as we are of what the extremists are capable of, and given the choice, they’ll keep their mouths shut rather than suffer the wrath of their fellow Muslims.
Which leaves only two questions: How long is it going to take Americans to figure out that Radical Islam is coming for its sons and daughters? What are Americans willing to do to protect their sons and daughters, as well as their way of life?
Print This Post
February 5th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
The murders of the Said sisters in suburban Dallas were, to this experienced eye, quite obviously dishonor killings.
Ellen R. Sheeley, Author
“Reclaiming Honor in Jordan”
February 5th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
The West cannot adopt a bend-over-backwards posture, murmuring cultural or moral relativism. Honor killings are a clear violation of human rights. They are crimes which should be prosecuted and punished the same as any first degree murder.
Our Western culture brought democracy and freedom. We cannot just hand it over — apologizing all the way — because we believe in freedom and basic human rights.
Karen Tintori, author
Unto the Daughters: The Legacy of an Honor Killing in a Sicilian-American Family
http://www.karentintori.com
February 6th, 2008 at 9:47 am
Nick, it’s hard to imagine that rightwing efforts to portray white anglo-saxon protestants as victims of persecution will ever gain much mainstream purchase, regardless of Dobson’s efforts. As for:
I haven’t seen any massive demonstrations against Muslim extremists by these Muslims since September 11, 2001. In fact, the entire group of “nice” Muslims has hardly said a word in support of America since then.
I’m not sure what it is that you are expecting from the worldwide Muslim community, but if you are looking to understand how Muslims themselves feel about extremists within their faith, this would be a good place to start. As for Muslims being “in support of America since” 9/11, if you do a little more research, you will find that there were widespread expressions of sympathy and support from Muslims following the attacks of 9/11. There was also worldwide support of the ouster of the Taliban from Afghanistan following those attacks, and if we had kept our focus and resources in that country, we could have kept that good will. It was our diversion into Iraq that did us in, and will be forever known as the worst foreign policy blunder our country has ever made and a permanent black mark on our credibilty and moral standing in the world. Keeping in mind that the Middle East has a long and painful history of western imperialism, it’s not that hard to understand that Bush’s ham-fisted approach at “democratizing” might be met with some ambivalence.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Ellen:
I agree, but until he’s convicted I try to use verbiage similar to “alleged” just to keep things straight.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Karen:
You are right, we can’t just hand over our freedom and way of life to some other culture just because we don’t want to offend them. Tolerance of other cultures is generally a good thing, but it doesn’t include surrendering to someone else’s values.
February 6th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Ann:
What I would have like to have seen following Sept. 11, 2001 was the American Muslim community make a loud and long public demonstration of their support for America and their repudiation of the extremists in their faith. Instead, all we got were groups like CAIR complaining about how Muslims were being mistreated after Sept. 11, and how Muslims need public foot baths at the airport, and how they had to be accommodated by their employer for their 5 times a day prayers. In short, instead of showing their support, they used the situation to further their petty little agenda.
As for good will, if America has not earned all the good will it needs by what it does for foreign countries when a disaster hits (Indonesia Tsunami, Earthquakes in the Middle East, etc.), all at no charge, maybe we should re-think our involvement in these types of situations. Maybe we should let some other country spend their blood and treasure helping out in a major disaster for the next decade or so. Lord knows we would benefit from the savings.
February 6th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
I think in the case of the hospital porter and the airline attendant we are seeing isolated instances of administrators overreacting to situations that could have been resolved better. I also think they are rare and isolated cases and the reason you hear about them in the news is either because they are so unusual (man bites dog) or because advocacy groups sought them out to use for propaganda purposes.
As a Christian, I can honestly say that I have never felt discriminated against in the slightest. To the contrary, it is clear that this is a nation that bends over backwards to make every accommodation to the Christian faith. You see Christian churches on every street corner. The TV and radio airwaves are filled each week with religious-based programming. Every president and most every elected official in our nation’s long history has been a professed Christian.
The notion that Christians in this country are in peril or are repressed in any way is just ridiculous. If they were any less repressed we would be teetering on the verge of a theocracy.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Mike:
In general, we agree; for the most part, Christians have been treated with great respect and are usually not discriminated against because of their faith.
However, a few years ago a new trend started spreading across the nation, and it was spearheaded by the ACLU and other like-minded people. These activists went around claiming they had been offended by such things as Nativity Scenes, crosses, and other Christian symbols which have been displayed in public for hundreds of years. All of a sudden, a Nativity Scene at Christmas was being interpreted as a statement against Islam or a device by which religion was being foisted upon the atheists. One by one, these people were attacking any public display of faith as being patently offensive and demanding its immediate removal regardless of cost. It seems that these activists believed that when the Constitution said, “Freedom of Religion” they interpreted it as “Freedom From Religion.”
At its worst, these people had forced stores to prohibit their employees from wishing their customers a Merry Christmas so as not to offend anyone.
Public outcry has reversed some of these travesties. However, there remains a large number of activists in this country who are determined to remove any mention or display of religious faith from the public square because they mistakenly believe they have a right to not be offended. If we are not careful, little by little they will get their way, and we all will be the poorer for it.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
I can sympathize with many of these complaints. I do believe there is a group of folks who are actively trying to rid society of all public displays of faith and religion. However, I think this is a very small number of activists with very little real influence whose impact is being exaggerated by groups on the religious right for its propagandistic value.
At the same time, I also believe that groups on the right tend to pick fights on this issue and push things too far. Why, for example, when we have nativity scenes on every street corner and in every shop window, do we also have to have one on the courthouse lawn? People who object to this are not being anti-Christian, they are just being practical. Because if you allow Christian groups to use public property that way, what are you going to do for the Jews and the Muslims and the Hindus and the Hari Krishnas and the Scientologists, etc. etc.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Nick, I believe the “activists” shoe is on the other foot. This group has been tracking the activities of the so-called “religious” right in Texas, much of which has close ties to national organizations as well. They are extremely well-funded and organized, and one of their main stated goals is to obliterate the Constitutional separation of church and state. (In fact, they succeeded in getting a proviso added to the Texas GOP platform calling the separation of church and state a “myth”). The ACLU has naturally been an impediment to their efforts and consequently have been the target of endless factually-challenged smears. I urge you to fact-check any of the claims made by TFN.
February 8th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Mike, it isn’t that we have to have a Nativity Scene on the courthouse lawn; its that if the people who run the courthouse want to display one, they should be able to. Practicality has absolutely nothing to do with it. Face it: if practicality was the main concern, no one would ever put up holiday decorations; its hardly a practical activity.
As for the people who are trying to get rid of all public displays of religion, I hardly think that you can lay the blame on the religious right for “exaggerating” what is going on. After all, the media is hardly an institution of the religious right, and they’re the ones who control the newspapers and the television news networks. I don’t think there is any way to exaggerate stuff like this.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Westerners should spend some time in the Middle East to experience the tolerance of Islam. We should allow them the same priviledges and freedoms that they extend to Christians.
I have little sympathy for those that do not understand that Islam has no tolerance for other religions.
February 11th, 2008 at 10:47 am
So Thomas, does this mean that you want Christians to act just like the Islamic extremists — to emulate them and be just as intolerant and hateful as they are?