Burn a Koran Day
Cidu Bill on Sep 7th 2010
You have to wonder how many of the politicians who rallied against the “Ground Zero Mosque” for their own political ends are saying now “Okay, well, I didn’t mean for it to go this far.”
For that matter, you have to wonder how many of those politicians are saying “Hell, yeah!”
Filed in Bill Bickel, Islam, religion | 145 responses so far
Kamino Neko Sep 7th 2010 at 08:59 pm 1
Funny, just before I cruised over here, I was reading a thread elsewhere where someone claimed that Fahrenheit 451 was a bad book, because the idea that book burnings would take hold in the US is an absurd idea…
src666 Sep 7th 2010 at 09:13 pm 2
There’s no idea so absurd that you can’t find a group of people willing to advocate for it.
The problem is that the media, in it’s ever expanding quest for ratings, gives them a forum in which to do so.
Igelino Sep 7th 2010 at 09:20 pm 3
Suppose it doesn’t surprise anyone, but the one out of AP via Yahoo spun a few details differently.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100907/ap_on_re_us/quran_burning
Igelino Sep 7th 2010 at 09:23 pm 4
Oh, and there’s always the question of how to properly dispose of a Koran that is no longer usable, or how to dispose of the pieces of paper that have surahs or “allah” written on them.
As far as I know, it’s by burning.
Lihtox Sep 7th 2010 at 09:53 pm 5
@Igelino: This church has put out a book called “Islam is of the Devil”, so I don’t think the burning is done out of any sense of reverence for the name of allah.
I suggest we designate Sept 12 as “Read the Koran” day; because how many Americans have ever bothered to do that?
James Pollock Sep 7th 2010 at 10:11 pm 6
On the one hand, yes, they have a First Amendment right to burn books. But I would contend that A) intentionally increasing the likelihood of injury or death to others is unChristian, and B) intentionally inciting people to attack U.S. military forces in the field is unAmerican. Certainly, it is cowardly to incite violence from someplace safe. I suspect they would not be so brave about announcing their plans, much less carrying them out, if they weren’t safe here in America… a safety preserved by the very soldiers likely to bear the brunt of the outrage the cowards plan to create.
zbicyclist Sep 7th 2010 at 11:11 pm 7
If only this WAS a comic.
Cidu Bill Sep 7th 2010 at 11:28 pm 8
No way, zbicylist, now that Johnny Hart’s dead.
Eric Sep 8th 2010 at 12:07 am 9
Maybe we can put a stop to this nonsense by starting an internet rumor along the lines that by buying a Koran to burn, you’re actually supporting Muslin extremists (if the Koran’s popularity on Amazon goes up, the terrorists win).
Eric Sep 8th 2010 at 12:10 am 10
Also, I hope it rains.
James Pollock Sep 8th 2010 at 12:23 am 11
I hereby declare September 11 to be “do something misguided and stupid and claim it’s in the name of religion” day.
David N Sep 8th 2010 at 12:47 am 12
Funny how some of the same folks who lump all Muslims together - cause you know they all got together and voted on 9/11 - are the first ones to squeal, “You can’t say all Christians are like this man and his church!” Karma’s a cast iron you-know-what …
But let us not forget something else, as horrible as it is and as bad as it is. Some of these nutjobs strongly want and desire an attack on this country, so they can point their holier-than-thou fingers. Patriotism ain’t what it used to be.
amo Sep 8th 2010 at 12:54 am 13
Oh my. It’s coming to be the point where I don’t even know if it’s worth paying attention to the news anymore. It seems to always be some story about people getting attention for stupidity. If it’s not some reality tv persona (notice the lack of “star” title) it’s some nut job. And yes I know I need to keep paying attention to the news… it’s just frustrating to me what the “main” stories are a lot of the time. Sigh… I think it’s time to go snuggle in a blanket and go to bed.
Cidu Bill Sep 8th 2010 at 12:58 am 14
Or, James, “do something misguided and stupid and claim it’s in the name of patriotism” day
James Pollock Sep 8th 2010 at 01:24 am 15
Bill, “do something stupid and misguided and claim it’s in the name of patriotism week” occurs around the first week of July, and generally involves accidental self-mutilation and the starting of house, vehicle, and brush fires. Once upon a time in my youth, it was confined to only one day, July 4, but nowadays it runs for at least a week. Actual highlight from my youth: The fellow who thought he’d get a pretty big bang if he filled a Hefty bag with oxy-acetylene mix and touched it off with a torch. He was correct.
Winner of the Official Catch-Phrase of “do something stupid and misguided and claim it’s in the name of patriotism week” is “Hey, everyone, check this out!” Runner-ups were “Why didn’t it go off? Go up there and light it again.” and “Hey, was that thing still burning when it landed on the neighbor’s roof?”
Skaloop Sep 8th 2010 at 01:59 am 16
Some other church groups, as a form of protest against the burning of the Koran, are staging readings of the Koran. A nice juxtaposition, I think.
James Pollock Sep 8th 2010 at 02:17 am 17
Sure, MOST of America’s religious bigots stay hidden, and only come out to post anonymously on the Internet. But guess who’ll show up in al Qaeda’s recruiting videos?
Rebecca Sep 8th 2010 at 03:07 am 18
I’d rather they burn Korans than mosques.
Rebecca Sep 8th 2010 at 03:17 am 19
There’s an interesting quote in this story:
Gen. David Petraeus warned Tuesday in an e-mail to The Associated Press that “images of the burning of a Quran would undoubtedly be used by extremists in Afghanistan — and around the world — to inflame public opinion and incite violence.” … Jones responded that he is also concerned but is “wondering, ‘When do we stop?’”
I’ll tell you where we should stop: at burning the Quran in public!
Kilby Sep 8th 2010 at 03:54 am 20
Even if everyone on the planet immediately recognizes that this campaign is an abomination (to all religions), the worst part is that this moron’s idea has proven extremely successful: he has acheived (worldwide) much more than his allotted 15-minute share of fame. History has seen other 2-bit idiots (Munich 1923) become famous pyromaniacs (Berlin 1933-45), so let’s hope that the forces of reason win this one (soon).
minorannoyance Sep 8th 2010 at 04:32 am 21
I’d almost bet money this guy has been phoning and emailing all the right-wing shouters he could find, hoping somebody will take up his cause and make him another Joe the Plumber.
I’d also bet money that nobody with any clout will take the bait, but will instead rant about how Liberal Media is unfairly connecting this outrage to the anti-mosque hysteria whipped up by right-wing radio and Fox News. Which is like saying it’s unfair to connect a car wreck to the drunk who was driving.
chuckers Sep 8th 2010 at 05:12 am 22
Apparently he needs a permit to hold this little book burning thing but the fire dept. won’t issue him one (might have been in the article but I didn’t read it.)
My suggestion was to toss a couple of Bibles on it as a protest against all of the Christian Terrorist through the years.
I also hope the media doesn’t show up for this loon. Treat it like a streaker at a ball game.
Tim Sep 8th 2010 at 05:57 am 23
chuckers, I doubt for a moment that the media won’t show up. I expect reporters from all over the world to follow this guy for years, even if he decides not to burn a Koran.
That being said, who are the “Christian Terrorists” you refer to? There have been people who committed horrible acts through history in the name of Christ, but they were acting against His teaching and example. Those who murder in the name of Mohammed are doing exactly what he taught and following his example.
Czhorat Sep 8th 2010 at 06:20 am 24
@Tim - do you remember the period in Britain known as the “Troubles”? It wasn’t all that long ago.
Mainstream, moderate Muslims say that terrorism is un-Islamic. I’ll take them at their word for their interpretation of their own religion the same way I believe Christians who say that they really don’t want to stone witches anymore.
And the crazy thing is that this guy has 50 people in his church. I think people like Palin and Gingrich who try to dress up their bigotry in some kind of code are more dangerous because they mainstream these kind of fringe views.
Carl Sep 8th 2010 at 06:26 am 25
James, do you realize how hard atheists like me are struggling now not to take advantage of that incredibly easy straight line?
Kilby Sep 8th 2010 at 07:06 am 26
@ 23, 24 - If you are looking for violence committed in the name of Christianity, there’s always the Crusades and the Inquisition, not to mention the unspeakable acts done in the name of “Christianising” the native populations of the Americas.
Personally, I think the crusades were closely related to an infantile understanding of how people should handle their faith. The question remains as to whether the violent sects within Islam will take equally as long to “grow up” (and become human) as the medieval Church did.
Tom T. Sep 8th 2010 at 08:32 am 27
“This protest will embolden the enemy” was a common rebuke to people who took to the streets to oppose the Vietnam War. Just because the protestor in this case is a hateful guy doesn’t make it less troubling to hear an active-duty general taking a public stand on what constitutes acceptable political speech.
We’re an offensive culture. Any number of artists and musicians make their living trying to offend, and for the most part we tell the people who are offended to live with it (think of Bill Donohue and the Catholic League). Muslims shouldn’t be treated as a special-needs population in this regard.
Powers Sep 8th 2010 at 08:35 am 28
I love how Christians are so quick to claim that anything bad done in the name of their religion was “against Jesus’ teachings”. Any honest Christian must recognize that the words of the Bible can be interpreted to justify just about anything.
Truth Seeker Sep 8th 2010 at 08:44 am 29
Kirby,
I am assuming that your understanding of the Crusades and Inquisition are based on an extensive study of them rather than an assumption of what they were that you never bothered to check if they were true.
I am not an expert, so I do not claim that your understanding is completely wrong, but my understanding is that the Crusades were not wars intended to spread Christiainity, but rather attemps to prevent the spread of the political influence of the Muslim world into Europe and to retake Christian land in the Holy Land that had been lost. This is too simplistic a rendering of a complex issue, but so is your blanket statement.
I have not done as much research on the Inquisition or the “Christianising” of Native Americans, so I will not comment on that.
Czhorat Sep 8th 2010 at 08:58 am 30
@Truth Seeker (29)
If people insist on making the lazy an inaccurate assertion that Middle-Eastern terrorism is primarily an attempt to spread Islam or attack non-believers on religious grounds then there’s no sense in fighting the same lazy assertion when it comes to the Crusades.
DrDan Sep 8th 2010 at 09:40 am 31
My biggest fear is not that it will provoke attacks in the middle east, but provoke something here. I remember the IRA bombings in the 70’s, for that matter the War protest bombings in the 60’s. Look at the beliefs behind the Oklahoma Bombing, Atlanta Olympic bombing, and to show it isn’t hard to get a nut to do something, the unabomber
David Sep 8th 2010 at 10:07 am 32
Igelino (4), there is the equivalent to funeral services for writings with significant words on them. I can’t find the reference, but I heard at a seminar once that there are essentially tombs for holding the pieces of paper. I do know that ‘G-d’ is used by Orthodox Jews, because if ‘God’ is written out, the paper that it’s written on has to be buried properly. I was wondering what the policy on email and online posts is, and I found plenty of websites that use ‘G-d’.
padraig Sep 8th 2010 at 10:09 am 33
“International” day? Does that mean they’re doing this in Florida AND Mississippi?
James Pollock Sep 8th 2010 at 10:25 am 34
It’s not that hard to find Christian terrorists… in this country, they firebomb reproductive health clinics and shoot doctors. I think the damage has already been done, and the radicals will get just about as much propaganda mileage out of this guys announcement of his plans as they would if he actually carried them through… and he’s given the Afghani resistance just one more reason why they should fight to drive the U.N. troops from Afghanistan… because “the Americans plan to burn all their Korans.”
There are two kinds of insults, the kind that are intentional and the kind that are accidental. When an insult is made by accident, we ask the offended to let it go. When it is intentional, we ask the offendors to apologize. In a rational society of give and take, we understand that there is no right not to be offended… and we also understand that saying certain things to certain people at certain times WILL get us punched in the face (and worse). The problem in this situation is that the ones doing the talking and the ones who will get punched in the face (and worse) because of that talking are not the same people.
Ian Osmond Sep 8th 2010 at 11:01 am 35
David #32: in Judaism, the “G-d” thing is a fence around a fence around a fence around the law.
The law is to treat G-d’s name with respect — that means the four-letter name of G-d spelled with a yod, a hay, a vav, and another hay, and was probably pronounced something like “Yahweh” (the “vav”, in Modern Hebrew is pronounced like a “v”, but in ancient Hebrew, was pronounced like a “w”), and which has been Anglicized as “Jehovah”. The actual pronounciation has been lost to history.
In reality, it’s only that name, written in Hebrew, that really counts.
However, out of respect for that name, we Jews don’t even ever USE it at all. Instead, we say things like “Adonai”, which means “my lord.”
But, out of reflected holiness, we don’t even use the replacement term “Adonai” casually, and might more commonly say “Hashem”, which just means “The Name”.
The English word “God” isn’t a name of God. But out of respect for God, we treat the word with respect, anyway. And, to show even MORE respect, we typically write it out “G-d”. Not because there’s anything WRONG with writing out “God”, but simply as a reminder to ourselves that we DO treat things with respect.
So, given that we Jews feel that even things that reflect G-d so indirectly ought to be treated as holy, it shouldn’t be surprising that Pastor Jones’s idea quite literally makes me sick to my stomach. The idea that, in MY country, during MY lifetime, a person who calls himself an American, and even a RELIGIOUS person, is actually serious about wanting to burn a holy book . . . that makes me very literally want to throw up.
Dyfsunctional Sep 8th 2010 at 11:10 am 36
Timothy McVeigh was a Roman Catholic. Would the same pastor pick April 19 as a day to burn Christian Bibles in remembrance of the bombing of a federal office building in Oklahoma? Would the anti-”Ground Zero Mosque” crowd protest the building of a Catholic Church within sight of that building? No and no. This is bigotry coming to a boil. The 9/11 sensitivity is just lipstick on a pig.
And, might I remind the good Reverend that the First Amendment only goes so far to protect his freedom of speech. The upper limit of that protection is the point at which the First Amendment rights of others are violated.
ShireNomad Sep 8th 2010 at 12:52 pm 37
As Obama has emphasized (in a slightly different context), these people have the right to practice religion however and wherever they like.
…suddenly “is it wise, is it respectful?” seems a more important question.
I think Jones’ point has been made — Americans let people (Muslim, atheist, whatever) disrespect that which is sacred to Christians and laugh at those who gripe, but we panic and scream when someone does the same to something sacred to Muslims. But the point was made with the mere threat, and I hope he proves Christianity the nobler by not going through with it.
Proginoskes Sep 8th 2010 at 12:52 pm 38
If you think this is bad, remember: Next year is the 10th anniversary of 9/11. You ain’t seen nothin’ yet!
James Pollock Sep 8th 2010 at 01:33 pm 39
I still think we’re missing the difference between being angry about something and doing something do intentionally hurt someone else as a result of that anger. It is true that in America, many people do things that anger Christians in particular, sometimes quite intentionally, and we expect the Christians to “take it”. But they are hardly alone in this… I bet any group can point to someone, somewhere who said or did something offensive to that group, and we expect everyone to “just get over it”. For a recent example, some people were offended that Mr. Beck chose the anniversary of the date MLK held a rally and gave a speech at the Lincoln Memorial to hold a rally and give a speech. (Lost in the shuffle… Mr. Beck’s speech was in support of troops, while Dr. King was opposed to war on religious grounds.)
So what’s different here? The people being provoked are not Americans, and don’t have our lifetime experience of the expectation of tolerance… I doubt that American Muslims will do much of anything about this, other than publicly express sorrow that this seems like a rational course of action to someone. (Plus, they’ll point out once again that “Muslim” and “terrorist” mean different things… which will have no effect whatsoever on anyone.) Other places in the world, different story… Anger WILL lead to violence. We just so happen to have troops operating in some of those other places.
Igelino Sep 8th 2010 at 01:43 pm 40
David @32: I don’t know for sure what would be ‘proper’ disposal. When I worked in Saudi Arabia, several of my colleagues had a little jar on their desks where they kept little scraps of paper. Before they threw away any paper (letters, printouts, memos) they would tear off any references to God and put the scraps into the jar. They said they would burn them later.
Whatever the correct disposal is, the church in Florida COULD have done something outright disrespectful. Our own army crossed that line in interrogations. Simply burning Korans wouldn’t be as psychologically ‘useful’ as leaving them in bathrooms or smearing them with body fluids.
Back in the mid-80’s, it was customary to write some variation of “in the name of God…” on every written correspondence, so pretty much every written thing, including utility bills and every single page of hundred-page printouts, had the name of God on it. You could tell the more devout colleagues by whether they had such a jar, and how quickly the jar filled up.
But you’re right, the intent seems to be disrespectful. I say “seems to” because he claims to have prayed for guidance and is doing it based on those prayers. Maybe he got a response that the burning is the correct move.
There’s also a precept in Islam that only God may judge what’s in a person’s heart. A Muslim may only punish actions. So if burning the Koran isn’t against Muslim law, while it may be disgusting, it isn’t right to be punished for it.
In principle, “read a Koran day” is nice. I think it needs to be done by someone who has studied the Koran formally and is familiar with various commentators. But in the end, it boils down to having respect for different beliefs, and focusing on what they have in common. And maybe looking at what benefits they have had in their respective cultures. That’s not possible if you’re a member of a “church of whatever” that believes their own culture is the pinnacle of cultural evolution and their owns beliefs are at the pinnacle of religious and spiritual beliefs.
KobeClan Sep 8th 2010 at 02:02 pm 41
@Lihtox, #5: Am curious to know how many people in this thread HAVE read the Koran. Makes for interesting and enlightening reading. If you haven’t read it, please do. I guarantee it will change your mind about current events.
A free pulled pork sandwich for anyone who has read it. And I’ll toss in a beer if you read it in its original Arabic.
Czhorat Sep 8th 2010 at 02:10 pm 42
“”I think Jones’ point has been made — Americans let people (Muslim, atheist, whatever) disrespect that which is sacred to Christians and laugh at those who gripe, but we panic and scream when someone does the same to something sacred to Muslims. But the point was made with the mere threat, and I hope he proves Christianity the nobler by not going through with it.”"
No, Jones’ point is simply that he’s a bigot expressing his bigotry. he is the same bigot who put a sign on his church lawn saying “No Homo Mayor” when an openly gay man was running for (and won) that particular office. From the interviews I’ve heard of him he’s a hateful, small-minded, and not terribly bright man.
So far as people offending Christians is concerned, I wasn’t aware of any Bible-burnings or other high-profile actions that deliberately offensive that were taken without critique. Even if there were, you need to recognize a distinction between being a member of a majority and a minority. In present-day America Christians don’t need any special protection because they have all the power already. It’s not symmetrical, no matter how much the American right-wing wants to pretend that it is.
Elyrest Sep 8th 2010 at 02:30 pm 43
I haven’t read the Koran except for exerts. I also haven’t read much of the Bible either - really only the scriptures that were used in Mass when I was a child. Most of my knowledge of both books is second hand and I’m betting that this is true for most people. Yes, there are some who have read the Bible all the way through and the same for the Koran, but not most people. Most people who burn books burn the ones they have never read. That way they don’t have to find out what other people really think. I wonder how this works with e-books?
KobeClan Sep 8th 2010 at 02:42 pm 44
@Elyrest: BINGO! We are assuming to know what muslims think without trying to understand those things, such as the Koran, which motivate them.
An example from current events: A major charity in Pakistan is refusing to help flood-stricken Christians unless they convert to Islam. Claims the Koran does not allow money donated by Muslims to assist “non-believers”.
Question: Accurate or inaccurate interpretation of the Koran? In my opinion, its spot on. In fact, the relevant passage is not easily interpreted otherwise.
It is wise not to grow comfortable in your own ignorance.
Czhorat Sep 8th 2010 at 02:48 pm 45
@Elyrest: It works like this with e-books: http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/book_burning.png
@KobeClan
So you’re the Muslim theologan on this board? I suspect that most mainstream Muslims, like most mainstream Christians, do not interpret their Holy books literally, nor do they follow commandments which wouldn’t allow them to live in a religiously pluralistic world.
Winter Wallaby Sep 8th 2010 at 02:55 pm 46
KobeClan #41, I have read the Koran. Please send me my free pork pulled sandwich. It did not change my view of current events - please provide whatever compensation is appropriate for failure of your “guarantee.”
I’m not really sure what in the Koran would conceivably have changed my view of current events, unless I took a different approach to it than I took to any old religious book, and assumed that modern believers applied everything in it unchanged to the modern world. (”Hey, I just read the Bible, and found the most interesting things out about Jews - did you know they sacrifice animals at their temple and stone witches!”)
Igelino, do you have a suggestion for a fairly neutral academic book (English language) to read side-by-side with the Koran that explains what’s going on? Frustratingly, most books that I’ve found on the Koran or Muhammad’s life have tended to either be hagiographies or Muslim-bashing.
Elyrest Sep 8th 2010 at 02:58 pm 47
Czhorat (45) Thanks for the xkcd link. I don’t remember seeing that one before. I liked it.
I also think that it is important to note that even if you read the Bible and the Koran you are reading someone else’s translation/interpretation. And most likely their translation was taken from another source. Holy books are only starting points for any religion - few religions adhere to everything. That’s why judging a religion by what “you think” they are about is so dangerous.
The Abbot of Unreason Sep 8th 2010 at 03:16 pm 48
I like how his “day” is only 3 hours long.
Elyrest Sep 8th 2010 at 03:21 pm 49
“I like how his “day” is only 3 hours long.”
I guess if god made the universe in seven days three hours would be plenty.
paperboy Sep 8th 2010 at 03:32 pm 50
“You have to wonder how many of the politicians who rallied against the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ for their own political ends are saying now ‘Okay, well, I didn’t mean for it to go this far.’ ”
“This far”?? You mean burning paper? I wish ALL conflicts were fought with symbolic acts, rather than violent force. (Muslims retaliate by burning Bibles; we hit back with Muhammed cartoons; they return fire by spitting on the American flag; etc.)
Cidu Bill Sep 8th 2010 at 03:36 pm 51
By “this far,” I meant “ugly, with no pretense of anything but outright bigotry.” It’s very likely to go downhill from here.
KobeClan Sep 8th 2010 at 03:45 pm 52
Winter Wallaby #46
I’m Irish-Catholic. The Old Testament can be summed up in three words for me, “He is coming”.
Quote some New Testament stuff and we will talk.
Read the al-Qur’ān? Great! Please tell me why you are not troubled by the treatment of non-believers and women as dictated. How about jihad and how the original meaning of the word allowed Islam to conquer most of the known world? Are you aware there are about 800 million people who still accept that meaning? 800 million people who believe the entire globe should be under sharia law? Why doesn’t this alter your opinions?
The Koran is the word of God, not open to interpretation to accommodate Western sensibilities. Modern believers? There are moderate Muslims, but there is no moderate Islam.
OH! What DO you think of Muslim charities restricting donations to Muslim only?
John in Tronna Sep 8th 2010 at 03:53 pm 53
Well, as a faithful Christian, on that day, I intend to burn a Koran.
On to a CD, maybe. My hard drive is getting kind of full.
I don’t know if I’ll ever read one. I can’t claim to have read the Bible through, and I have about ten or so copies of that. But I have read a few excerpts, and I find them more difficult to read than Bibles (bad translations, maybe? Shorter history of translation?). And in the original Arabic? I have enough troubles reading the Roman alphabet left to right, let alone a right-to-left rather homogenous-looking abjad with whose vowels are optional and whose consonants can appear in one of four forms (thank God the Arabs didn’t develop case, too). Although, thanks to my mixed Anglo-Irish-Scottish ancestry, I should have no troubles with glottal stops and that [i]cchhhh[/i] sound.
If you really want to burn a book, then grab some manifesto of al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, PIRA, Tamil Tigers, Westboro Baptist, etc, and burn that. You know, the ones that actually spell out their spin on their holy books that allows them to go blow innocent civilians up, since the rest of us can read the same books and yet see no need for example to actively not-suffer the living of witches.
I don’t know if I made any sense there, but I’m between classes, and I’m late…
S.P. Charles Sep 8th 2010 at 03:58 pm 54
I’m just wondering: Do Christian charities do a whole lot for non-Christians without proselytizing strings attached?
Ian Osmond Sep 8th 2010 at 04:15 pm 55
S.P. Charles: depends on which one. Some do, some don’t.
paperboy Sep 8th 2010 at 04:20 pm 56
“It’s very likely to go downhill from here.” You mean the situation in the U.S.? If there weren’t huge anti-Muslim actions right after the September 11 attacks, do you think there’s going to be a surge now?
“A Christian, a Jew and a Muslim are hiking in the mountains in winter, and a sudden snow storm strands them. They huddle together, but are still cold and there’s no wood around. ‘I’d burn my Bible’, the Christian says, ‘But the warmth would only extend to me.’ ‘I’d burn my Talmud’ said the Jew, ‘but then you’d owe me $158.63′ . ‘I’d burn my Koran,’ said the Muslim, ‘but then I’d have to kill you both.’ “
KobeClan Sep 8th 2010 at 04:24 pm 57
@S.P. Charles: Christians, as a group, are the most charitable people in the world. Most, but not all the religious charities I belong to have no strings attached. I know of plenty that try to crowbar beliefs down the throats of vulnerable people but most do not.
@Winter Wallaby: Worded my statement wrong. Should have said: If you thought Islam was the same as most of the world’s popular religions, reading the Quran will change you mind.
Still owe you a sam’ich. Let me know when you will next be in St. Louis.
KobeClan Sep 8th 2010 at 04:36 pm 58
Here are some of my wife’s favorite passages from the Quran:
“Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other…” (Surah 4:33a)
“…and men are a degree above them. Allah is Mighty, Wise.” (Surah 2:228b)
Women are your fields: go, then, into your fields whenever you please…” (Surah 2:223a)
My wife loves the last one. Says it doesn’t apply to me ‘cuz I’m not a farmer. Guess that’s how a moderate Muslim would interpret it.
Rasheed Sep 8th 2010 at 04:37 pm 59
Plemon el-Amin on CNN pretty much said anything I could on this matter, and very eloquently. The only thing I have to add is if anyone has dyslexia flareups like me, I feel sorry for any Koreans near the trailer in this picture. Probably has to do with what i perceive to be a missing space in the phrase and throws the whole caption out of whack for me.
Elyrest Sep 8th 2010 at 04:42 pm 60
“I feel sorry for any Koreans near the trailer in this picture. ”
Thanks for the laugh and I have to admit that that’s what I read the first time.
James Pollock Sep 8th 2010 at 04:42 pm 61
paperboy - after 9/11, President Bush was very careful to point out that we were attacked by terrorists, not Muslims. He did several public appearances designed to minimize misplaced anger at American Muslims. There was some anyway, but it was isolated. Today, nearly 1 in 5 Americans think the President IS a Muslim (and by an amazing coincidence, this same group also disapproves of everything he does.)
Yes, there is a very real possibility that vandalism and assaults directed at Muslims will increase. Getting Saddam Hussein was nice, but it turns out he didn’t have anything to do with it. The anger won’t have a proper outlet until Osama bin Laden is in U.S. custody… and then the anger will be between the people who want to give him a fair trial and then execute him, and the ones who just want to execute him.
Kilby Sep 8th 2010 at 05:05 pm 62
@ 29 - The Crusades were a series of attacks or wars perpetrated (for whatever political reasons) under the aegis and with the backing of the Church, and therefore qualify as “Holy Wars”. I fail to see why they are any less (or more) objectionable than the current concept of “Jihad”.
The Inquisition was a blatant misuse of religious authority to support a (de facto) theocracy. There are governments that still indulge in torture (occasionally by proxy), but things have at least improved to the point that there are no longer any Christian theocracies doing so (at least not to my knowledge).
As for the conquest of the Americas, I’ll ignore the (intentional) wholesale murders and the (unintentional) spead of pandemic diseases, and simply cite one cultural abomination that arouses my ire. It just happens to be a book-burning: in an effort to destroy the (non-Christian) Mayan culture, Bishop Diego de Landa went and burned every codex he could get his little ignorant and intolerant fingers onto. He was so successful that there are only four significant Mayan books left.
It is difficult for me to express how I feel about that jerk without using profanity, so I’ll stop now. The same goes for the idiot pictured up above.
Kilby Sep 8th 2010 at 05:11 pm 63
@ 62 - Osama bin Laden is just a figurehead, a convenient red herring to distract from the real problem. If you want to fight the root causes of international terrorism, you have to do the same thing that Woodward and Bernstein did during Watergate: follow the money. Bin Laden didn’t raise the cash that backed his attacks alone, nor would he be able to hide for so long without extensive help. Find out who’s paying the bills, and you will have a better chance at combating the problem.
James Pollock Sep 8th 2010 at 05:52 pm 64
Kilby, I’m assuming that was directed at me. I didn’t say that capturing bin Laden would end the terrorism problem for the U.S. I said that the simmering rage in the U.S. needs a target, and will keep slipping onto other people, until he is captured. We were hit hard, and denied a reprisal because the terrorists who carried out the attack all died before we even knew what was happening. (OK, technically not true on United 93, but close enough.)
Conductor Sep 8th 2010 at 06:00 pm 65
Burn burn burn….. hope they make a great bonfire…
Igelino Sep 8th 2010 at 06:01 pm 66
KobeClan @41: you owe me a sandwich and half a beer.
It’s funny you would give bonus points for the Arabic, because the Arabic is SO MUCH DIFFERENT from a translation. They simply don’t say the same thing. The Arabic is considered by native speakers to be very fine poetry.
Translating poetry is difficult, and preserving all aspects of good poetry is impossible. In addition, there are cultural references that aren’t obvious without a commentary, just like with the bible. And culture has changed since the Koran was written.
So even native speakers rely on commentaries. Commentaries are so important that they’re even graded according to their reliability. No religious leader can pretend that their interpretation is correct without some backing by reliable commentators.
So what I’m saying is that simple word-for-word translations are not only out of context, but also missing the various nuances that would be present in the original poetry.
Winter Wallaby @46: I’ve only ever read the Koran and parts of what’s called Hadith, and had religious guys to debate meaning and content with. I dunno any English books about it. But I really did value the conversations, the guys were nearly always thoughtful about their beliefs and about my questions. Oddly, I was more comfortable challenging their writings in their country than I was challenging biblical writings in my country (USA).
I wish some Muslim prof would post stuff.
paperboy Sep 8th 2010 at 06:10 pm 67
James Pollock#61- “Yes, there is a very real possibility that vandalism and assaults directed at Muslims will increase. ” You mean from demanding a “mosque” be moved a few blocks? I don’t see the correlation. A Leftist Supervisor in San Francisco, David Campos, has said: ” Every community needs to decide for itself what makes sense, and what I hear from a lot of people is , they would rather not have this business here. The fact that it’s been there a while doesn’t mean that it’s right for the community today.’
KobeClan Sep 8th 2010 at 06:40 pm 68
Igelino@66 Good points! Learning to read even a little Arabic enables one to better understand both the true meaning of al-Qur’ān and the Arabic culture itself. What people in the West fail to comprehend is that the Koran is their religion is their culture is their government. The Islamic trilogy, as it were. We put Western values to foreign cultures all the time, normally totally missing their true nature.
I will argue your point that Arab cultures have evolved. They have, but not by much compared to other cultures. This is do to the nature of the Quran itself. Back to the Islamic trilogy. Very, very hard to change.
Kilby Sep 8th 2010 at 06:53 pm 69
@ James Pollock - My post (63) was not directed “at” you, it was merely meant as a parallel observation. I absolutely agree that there is a disturbing amount of enragement seething within America. However, I do not think it is productive to use Bin Laden as a magnet to focus this anger. Executing Bin Laden (either in combat or via a judicial trial) might make many people happy, but it would also lead some people to think that the problem had been solved. The terrorist leadership would simply devolve to the next lieutenant, and their finanical and logistic support structure would not be affected in the slightest.
James Pollock Sep 8th 2010 at 06:57 pm 70
paperboy - no, not from demanding that a “mosque” be moved a few blocks (apparently, Murfreesboro, TN is still too close, and Gainsville, FL is WAY too close). but from various people combining A) some people’s very specific fear and/or hatred of Muslims with B) nearly all Americans’ fear and/or hatred of terrorists. This will combine with a lot of people’s fears and uncertainties about the economy… in other words, people with no jobs and no prospects have plenty of spare time and usually either depression or anger. That makes a pressure cooker, and that pressure is likely to build until something releases it. We can only hope the release isn’t an explosive one.
James Pollock Sep 8th 2010 at 07:10 pm 71
Kilby - The damage the terrorists can do to America is insignificant compared to the damage Americans can do to America. It’s a cliche, but the 9/11 terrorists have done as much damage as they can do. Everything since then is our own fault. As long as there is a symbol of “the guy who got away”, 9/11 will remain an open wound on the American psyche. Once we no longer have the mental image of bin Laden sitting in his cave laughing at us, we can move on to the next step, celebrate the heroes (the men and women of FDNY who went into the towers, the men and women of United 93 who stopped the fourth attack in a field in Pennsylvania, or the people of Gander, Newfoundland) and begin to (finally) heal.
Elyrest Sep 8th 2010 at 07:41 pm 72
“America was built by people who reject everything Imam Obama stands for, reject everything Imam Obama is doing…Obama’s propaganda is the propaganda of failed, dead regimes: the old Soviet Union, Cuba. Obama’s railing against capitalism. He’s railing against private property…Barack Obama is the antithesis of the founding of this country…Had Obama been around at the founding of this country and had he been known, he would be a joke in American history books today.”
– Rush Limbaugh [from Doonesbury’s “Say What?”]
No wonder we have so much crazy running all over the place when people like this have a national outlet.
KobeClan Sep 8th 2010 at 08:14 pm 73
@Elyrest Ummmm. I might be as welcome as a wet fart in a hot tub, but I read the above quote and agree with most of it. Other than some hyperbole, it seems spot on. Is there anyone left in America who doesn’t think Obama’s agenda is socialist/marxist?
paperboy Sep 8th 2010 at 08:22 pm 74
When you’re trying to defend a group that believes a god told someone proper dress, dietary habits and the correct way to oppress women, “crazy” becomes a standard that no longer has detriment.
Carl Sep 8th 2010 at 09:01 pm 75
KobeClan, are you serious? Maybe you’ve never met an actual Marxist? Obama is in the pockets of the frickin’ banks.
KobeClan Sep 8th 2010 at 09:08 pm 76
@Carl Ummm. Do you know what a Marxist is? Just asking.
Does that mean you agree with El Rushbo’s quote like I do and am only quibbling with the appropriate description of O’s philosophy? Can’t say I disagree with you, though, but would word it differently: Obama’s in bed with the bankers.
S.P. Charles Sep 8th 2010 at 09:19 pm 77
Carl, if Obama can be a follower of Reverend Wright, a Muslim, and an atheist, he should have no problem at all being both a Marxist and a pawn of the banks.
KobeClan Sep 8th 2010 at 09:27 pm 78
Marx wanted the banks to become insolvent so they could be nationalised.
Sounds Obamaish to me.
In all honesty, what we are seeing today is fascism, the private ownership but government control of banks and industry (I know most of you think Rush is a fascist. Sorry to disappoint y’all).
James Pollock Sep 8th 2010 at 09:42 pm 79
I’ll just point out that the banks made THEMSELVES insolvent while Obama was a senator. Were the leaders of the banks Marxists?
(and for the record, I am center-left… the government has a role to play in business as the regulator, and well-regulated business runs better than unregulated business. The banks were stable for the entire time Glass-Steagall was in effect; Republicans learned nothing from the S&L fiasco and deregulated the financial industry with Gramm-Leach-Bliley.)
Obama also is a center-leftist, not a socialist. Take healthcare reform… the socialist approach was single-payer. The centrist approach is additional regulation to avoid private insurance firms from cost-shifting. I guess we’ll see what the Republican approach is (after “repeal everything”, I mean.)
KobeClan Sep 8th 2010 at 10:28 pm 80
@James #79 You might want to research Obama’s previous statements regarding health care. Sorry to burst your bubble. He’s been a supporter of single payer for years (since at least 2003). Try Googling ” obama single payer”. Google is amazing that way.
You also might want to research the government’s role in the sub-prime mortgage fiasco. Start with “redlining” and work from there. Government regulation led to our current banking crisis.
Well-regulated is best done by militias, not government.
Chakolate Sep 8th 2010 at 10:43 pm 81
I see that guy and I have to trot out what is becoming a daily mantra: “Not all Christians are like that.” “Not all Christians are like that.” “Not all Christians are like that.”
Eventually I can get it to, “Most Christians are not like that.” “Most Christians are not like that.” “Most Christians are not like that.”
And then something else happens and I have to go back to the beginning and start over. Sigh.
CIDU Bill Sep 8th 2010 at 10:59 pm 82
Chakolate, that’s probably how American Muslims feel, multiplied by a thousand.
Elyrest Sep 8th 2010 at 11:08 pm 83
KobeClan (73) You missed my point entirely. By equating hate for the president with hate for Muslims - “Imam Obama” - Limbaugh is fanning the flames of intolerance.
Winter Wallaby Sep 8th 2010 at 11:09 pm 84
Thanks, Igelino.
KobeClan:
Really? Catholics aren’t supposed to use the first 75% of their holy book to form religious dogma? You might want to complain to the Vatican about that, they’ve been using it for 20+ centuries.
Hm. Good point, that is pretty troubling. And looking through the Koran, I see many even more misogynistic verses:
You’re right, these verses from the Koran are absolutely terrible stuff. I’m now totally in favor of burning this so-called “holy book” and making blanket judgments about anyone crazy enough to belong to this terrible religion.
Winter Wallaby Sep 8th 2010 at 11:12 pm 85
Whoops, grabbed the wrong book off the shelf. Those verses are from the New Testament (Eph 5:22-24, 1 Tim 2:13-15, Col 3:18, NIV), not the Koran. Those verses aren’t misogynistic or troubling, they’re beautiful and moving. Sorry, my bad.
Lola Sep 8th 2010 at 11:17 pm 86
Freedom of speech demands that Mr. Jones can say just about anything, whether it’s silly or profoundly deep. Starting a fire when the local fire department won’t issue a permit is a different matter altogether.
What would he do if some Islamic, Hindu, Taoist or Druidic congregation got together to burn bibles. My guess is he’d believe they shouldn’t be allowed to and would completely miss the hypocracy of that position.
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 01:08 am 87
Redlining was the process by which banks refused to write loans for properties in the “wrong” neighborhoods (no matter who the buyer was… though of course most of the people who want to buy houses in the “wrong” neighborhoods are, well, the “wrong” sort. The process was outlawed over 40 years ago, and the banks were required to make decisions on the creditworthiness of the borrower, not the location of the property offered as collateral.
The major inflator of the housing bubble was the process of “securitization” of the mortgages. Banks would gather a group of mortgages and offer securities based on the underlying mortgages. These were rated by the credit-rating bureaus and sold as quickly as possible. Because the bank did not hold the mortgages nor intend to, but did generate fees based on processing the loan, there was an incentive to make bad loans (and as many of them as possible). Add some speculators and you have a recipe for a bubble. When the banks couldn’t pass on the securitized mortgages any more, their balance sheets took a hit. Eventually, they had so many overvalued loans that they couldn’t sell that they couldn’t hide them all. As long as they could pass on the risk to others (with the complicity of the credit rating bureaus, who, surprise! are dependent on the banks for THEIR income) they could claim they were running a profitable business. Back before they were allowed to run securities businesses, banks had to be careful about loaning money.
I suppose there’s an argument that a lot of people took out loans they couldn’t afford, and they are to blame for that… and “don’t take out a loan you can’t afford to repay” remains very good advice. But the banks and mortgage brokers were complicit in every one of those loans, and later evidence showed that the banks KNEW they were making loans the customers couldn’t repay when they were doing it. But the bonuses, you see, went to the people who closed the most loans… not to the people who safeguarded the bank’s own financial interest by refusing to make bad loans.
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 01:26 am 88
As for single payer… do you judge the man by what he says, or by what he does? Obama didn’t fight for single payer. The D’s took it off the table on their own, early in the process, because they thought a more centrist plan would be more acceptable to Republicans and Obama still harbored the misconception that it would be possible to govern from the center and achieve bipartisan support.
The healthcare plan actually delivered is not socialist (ask the socialists!).
Igelino Sep 9th 2010 at 05:05 am 89
KobeClan #68: That’s one of the things religions around the world have in common. Religion tied to culture tied to government. Christianity in America and Europe. Judaism in Israel. Confucianism in China. Buddhism in Japan. Hinduism in India. Islam in the middle east.
chuckers Sep 9th 2010 at 07:53 am 90
Ummm…Shintoism in Japan, not Buddhism. And after WWII, they aren’t really allowed to do that any more. At least not legally.
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 09:07 am 91
Winter Wallaby. Excellent points! You have exposed the enormous dilemma of followers of the great religions: how do we reconcile the contradictions inherent within our holy scriptures. Most were written years after historic events took place by men who may or may not have understood their significance and meaning.
A Jesuit priest, a long-time friend and mentor, said to judge Jesus and Mohammed by their actions, not the words of their followers (yes, I will get to you, James). So how did these great men/prophets (or Son of God) treat women?
Adultery?
Jesus: “…Go, woman, and sin no more!”
Mohammed: “And she was put in a ditch up to her chest and he commanded people and they stoned her.”
Marriage?
Jesus: Unknown. No mention of marriage in Bible.
Mohammed: Thirteen wives and concubines, one of which was his daughter-in-law, and one of which was six years old when they were betrothed.
Also, Muhammad declared that if a man’s prayer was disrupted by a woman passing in front of him, his prayer was not acceptable. (Will give him the benefit of doubt, since he could have been misquoted!)
All in all, the same question can be asked of Jesus and Mohammed that can be asked of Clinton and Bush: Which one would you trust to watch your teenage daughter?
As for the Old Testament? As a Christian by the Grace of God and a Catholic by choice, I’ll stick with “He is coming”.
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 09:38 am 92
James Pollack
I AM judging him by his actions. Obama is quoted as saying “…single payer will take years to achieve.” (Quote can be found by Googling “Obama single payer” sigh)
ObamaCare is but the first step. If a man says he is going to run a marathon do you not think it reasonable to believe him after 5 or 6 miles?
As for redlining, it was essentially actuary tables for loan officers. It worked. Was it fair? No.
You are right about “securitization”. The feds allowed it. Now we go back to that “well-regulated” thing. Lets just say that federal regulations often reflect what’s best for the politicians rather than what’s best for the people.
Back to red-lining. A reporter at the Tribune looked at the distribution of foreclosed single-family homes in Chicago and found that the vast majority were located in those areas that were formerly red-lined. Curious.
But the politicians had the best of intentions!
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions (and the skulls of Catholic priests).
czhorst Sep 9th 2010 at 10:09 am 93
You’re right KobeChan. The housing bubble collapse was caused by letting darkies into white neighbborhoods where they donz’t belong.
It had nothing to do with misleading lending practices which underrepresented risk, the abovementioned securitization that insulated lending institutions from the risks of their own bad loans, or a general economioc downturn.
Thanks for clearing that up.
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 10:36 am 94
Redlining became illegal 40 years ago (along with restrictive covenants). That reform didn’t cause a banking crisis. Banking deregulation happened in the 1990’s. That reform DID cause a banking crisis. The banks loosened up qualifications to get a loan to chase profits. With more people able to get loans, the number of potential buyers for each property went up. When the number of potential buyers goes up, the price goes up because only one person can actually buy it. As long as banks kept making it easier to get a loan, real estate prices kept going up. As soon as they started making it harder to get a loan, the bubble burst. The banks fell into a trap, chasing short-term profits at the expense of long-term stability. The problem wasn’t making loans on bad properties… it was making loans to people who couldn’t meet the payment terms.
In the middle class neighborhoods, the borrowing wasn’t first mortgages to buy the property, it was second mortgages and home-equity lines of credit to buy “stuff”… so you get less foreclosures there, but lots of personal bankruptcies. At the upper end of middle class, you start to see foreclosures again, because the values of those homes dropped the most.
When you switch to “whose prophet can beat up whose prophet”, well, I don’t have a dog in that fight. By definition people won’t see any flaws in their chosen prophet, real or imagined by critics, that’s the part of religion where what little polite discussion there is quickly gets heated. None for me, thank you.
I will stick to my contention that most modern religious people pick and choose the parts of their holy books and writings they like, and disregard the rest; it is usually possible to argue mutually exclusive positions by quoting scripture on either side.
The Catholic church once persecuted people for stating publicly that the Earth moves. Nowadays, the church gets by just fine on an Earth that goes around the sun.
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 10:58 am 95
@James Pollock. And Obama as a center-leftist? Miss that one?
Everything about mortgages you wrote is true. And allowed by fed regulation. Banks were never “deregulated”, they were “reregulated”, regulated differently by those people who say they protect our interests, politicians. Gets back to that “well-regulated” thing again. Bankers can’t piss without fed approval. The financial fiasco has many authors: Democrat, Republican, bankers, et al.
One to two million of the single-family home foreclosures were for loans where both income levels and immigration status were not documented. Allowed by fed regulation. No, better to say demanded by politicians. Start with Carter, Clinton, Dodd, and Frank. Toss in a handful of Republicans and you get Bush bailing everyone out with taxpayer money.
Blaming banks is easier than blaming the politicians we voted for. Helps us look in the mirror and not see a jackass looking back. I learned that lesson the hard waywhen I voted for Clinton. Only made THAT mistake once.
Oh! And my prophet doesn’t fight. He turns the other cheek.
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 10:58 am 96
President Obama has now publicly asked this group to not carry out their plans… providing extra “proof” to the “Obama is a Muslim” crowd.
Czhorat Sep 9th 2010 at 11:32 am 97
KobeClan
Obama is center-left by any sane set of definitions within modern America.
Health reform, but not single payer.
For same-sex civil unions, but not marriages.
Moving at a glacial pace to do away with “don’t ask - don’t tell”.
For escalation in Afghanistan, de-escalation in Iraq.
For the State secrets act.
In fact, the debatable part of “center-left” isn’t “Center” — it’s “Left”.
In terms of prophets, yours might not fight, but his followers sure do. Quite often. But don’t worry - I have faith in your ability to grow up. After all, it only took around 400 years to admit that their were wrong for persecuting Gallileo for stating that the Earth orbits the Sun. That’s progress, right?
Mark M Sep 9th 2010 at 12:02 pm 98
I find the name of the church interesting - The Dove World Outreach Center. “Dove” as in the bird of peace? Right. Like others have said, this is all about publicity, and he certainly got it.
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 01:51 pm 99
Czhorat
Health reform: single payer as ultimate goal (google “Obama single payer”, double sigh). If you are for socialized medicine, doesn’t that make you a socialist by definition?
As for the other issues, give him time. He has supported them all privately, and supported some on the campaign trail. As a very skilled politician from Chicago (with Rahm advising him), he will get around to them. Never said Obama was dumb.
As for the Catholic Church:
2nd Commandment, what does it mean? Beyond the obvious (no God Damns), its really meaning is simple:
Do no evil in God’s name.
Great evil has been done in the name of God, mostly justified by passages from the Old Testament. I don’t need to document them here.
I personally believe there are more Catholic priests in the caves of Hell than on the clouds of Heaven. Doesn’t diminish the power of Yeshua’s message.
I’m glad you have faith in me to grow. Wish I could return the sentiment.
I have seen and I believe. Blessed are those who have not seen and believe. And woe unto those who have seen but do not believe.
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 01:55 pm 100
BTW I do believe this burning of the Koran is an example of doing evil in God’s name.
Findus Sep 9th 2010 at 02:04 pm 101
Winter Wallaby (46): Here is a book I recommend: Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World through Islamic Eyes by Tamim Ansary. I have learned a number of things about (political) Islam: the process that led to the importance of the Koran in Arabic, the change in meaning of the word djihad over time, different forms of government (some very tolerant of other religions) by leaders of Islamic faith, schisms…
Obviously, it is not an explanation of the Koran by paragraph. Neither is it a history of the world. Is it academic? 65 footnotes for 350 pages, but the language is is conversational, not scholarly. I liked the book because the author is not trying to proselytize.
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 04:48 pm 102
Single-payer isn’t socialized medicine… it’s socialized insurance. I know, still socialism, and socialism is always bad, but with socialized medicine, the doctors and other care providers all work for the government. If you want something the government doesn’t provide, you need a plane ticket. With socialized insurance, the doctors work for themselves, and if you want something the government doesn’t provide, you can still get it if you pay for it yourself. Think it doesn’t make any difference? There are several areas of medicine not covered by insurance… like non-reconstructive plastic surgery or LASIK. There are doctors making a fine living who never deal with insurance companies for payment.
Obama did change the way student loans work. He kicked the banks out of the business of providing students loans with federal guarantees. They had a nice, subsidized business where they would loan the money to students and collect the interest. If the student didn’t repay, the government would. 100% upside with no risk. Then Obama came along and socialized the government-loan business.
I dropped my daughter off at the socialized local high school this morning, before I got on the socialized highway system. Later on, I watched the socialized fire trucks head out under the watchful eyes of the socialized police force. Meanwhile, airplanes flew overhead, guided by socialized air traffic control. Heck, the electrons powering my computer come from the socialized Bonneville Power Administration. “Socialism”, even the “creeping” kind, doesn’t scare me.
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 05:33 pm 103
James. Socialism sounds great in theory, works crappy in practice. Same problem always surfaces. Who determines the allocation of limited resources.
Funny you bring up medicine. Happen to kinda be in that field. There’s a world of hurt coming our way. I hope I’m wrong and you are right.
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 06:17 pm 104
Which of the socialized services I mentioned do you prefer privatized? (K-12 education, highways, firefighting, police, air traffic control, electicity generation and distribution)
Socialism or no socialism, you still have to deal with the allocation of limited resources.
Insurance is socialism… everybody pays, but only those who need it get benefits.
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 07:04 pm 105
I want to decide how to allocate that which I produce.
You can decide what to do with the fruit of your labors.
Education for starters. Probably the best example of our government’s ability to waste our money.
I’d like to know your opinion of the ~$500,000,000.oo High School Los Angeles just built. Now there’s a great selling point for big government.
Oh! Just got back from Fresno. Their new City Hall is gorgeous! The city is bankrupt, but their new City Hall is gorgeous! They lied to the voters about the cost, it ran millions over budget, but its gorgeous!
They don’t have money for toilet paper in either building, but who cares! The building is gorgeous!
Lola Sep 9th 2010 at 07:45 pm 106
I know this is really petty, but I can’t get past the fact that this guy looks like Jed Clampett.
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 07:53 pm 107
Government-paid public schools aren’t the only approach to education, of course. We could leave the education of children to religious organizations (I don’t see any problem with putting, say, Catholic priests in charge of lots of children. Perhaps a madrassa solution would be best?) Or do you pine for the days of old, when the children could get jobs in the factories?
Don’t know anything about high schools in Los Angeles, and don’t care, either. But if it’s shiny new buildings you like, come to Multnomah County, Oregon. They built a new state-of-the-art jail… but have never had the operating funds to use it. It gets rented as a location set for film and TV, but otherwise sits empty and unused. (Google “Wapato jail”). You’ll like this part, too… the vast majority of registered voters in Multnomah County are registered Democrats (one of only 3 or 4 counties in the state where Democrats outnumber Republicans).
But, funny you should pick education… that’s the line of work I used to be in (though not the socialized kind).
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 07:55 pm 108
The latest news is that the burning is off, in a deal in exchange for moving the “ground zero mosque” further away from ground zero. The developer of that project, of course, never heard of this deal.
paperboy Sep 9th 2010 at 08:01 pm 109
Called off ?? Aw,man; then what am I gonna do with all these Korans??
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 08:34 pm 110
James I have a great idea. Lets give all children the opportunity to go to the public school Obama’s daughters go to. No. Wait! You say Obama and most other politicians send their children to PRIVATE schools? Never mind.
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 08:35 pm 111
paperboy - Halloween is only 8 weeks away. Give them out to the little monsters…
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 08:58 pm 112
What difference does it make what school(s) the Obamas choose for their children? Should we shut down the UC system because some parents choose to send their children to Stanford? Wait! I know, why don’t we give all children the benefit of a Secret Service protective detail, too?
mitch4 Sep 9th 2010 at 09:16 pm 113
From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. Plus tip.
— Karl Marx via Vic Lee
And to answer James, clearly none of those should be privatized. I don’t even understand why some of them are expected to show a profit. (Public transport.)
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 09:31 pm 114
James Oregon! splains alot. Gov. Ted Kulongoski! Looks like you’re headin’ for a world of hurt! 10% budget shortfall in a state that requires a balanced budget. I think your state income tax is ’bout 9%. What’s good ol’ Ted askin’ for? 10%? 11%? Promising you “fiscal restraint” in exchange for higher taxes? Betcha he’s threatening cuts in education, fire and police protection, and road maintenance!
Hikes in electical costs?
What was the name of that woman who walked away from PGE with that great severance package? Peggy Fowler? Higher rates will cover the $3-$4 million she’s getting.
Looks like those allocations of limited resources is comin’ home to roost!
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 09:50 pm 115
Yes, Oregon. Where our sales tax is at 0%. We can’t all be financially stable like California.
PGE is a private enterprise. In fact, it used to be part of Enron. Are you trying to point out that we SHOULD have socialized it when we had the chance? Or did you do inadequate opposition research?
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 10:19 pm 116
PGE is a private enterprise with a state granted monopoly. Also loosely regulated by government agencies. Guess we can call it quasi-fascist.
I was in Fresno cuz an old bud wanted to offer me a job. Told him “no thanks”. The business environment in CA is toxic. Looks like Oregon is heading in that direction. Hope for your sake the voters toss Gov. Alfred E. Neumann out. Higher taxes with higher spending AND a lousy economy (11% unemployment?) is a death spiral.
Too bad Packwood was such a sleaze bag or Oregon might still be a red state.
Carl Sep 9th 2010 at 10:25 pm 117
Kobeclan:
So you aren’t actually a Catholic? Because ignoring the entire Hebrew Bible is directly contrary to Catholic practice. Maybe you mean “I call myself a Catholic but only obey the parts of their rules that I happen to personally like.”
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 10:46 pm 118
Carl Who died and made you Pope?
Happen to be at my desk next to my copy of “Catechism of the Catholic Church”. Its serendipity that I’m reading my favorite section: Part Four, Section Two: The Lord’s Prayer.
The Catechism contains almost no references to the Old Testament that are intrinsic to being a devout Catholic. In fact, very few references at all.
I don’t ignore it. I merely view it in the proper context: “He is coming”.
Nice try. But if you are Catholic, might want to buy are copy and READ it cuz I think you might be a tad confused.
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 11:08 pm 119
More inadequate opposition research. The governor of Oregon is not currently running for office. These last few postings of yours are sufficiently trollish that I’m going to move you to the “ignore” setting.
KobeClan Sep 9th 2010 at 11:22 pm 120
James Ummm. So he’s a lame duck. Guess that’s good news. Seems like Oregon needs some.
Buzz Killington Sep 9th 2010 at 11:35 pm 121
Actually, this was supposed to be “Burn a Korean” day, in protest of corner stores which overcharge for Skol and Coors, but the pastor was too much of a nice guy to point out the mistake to Billy-Jim, the illiterate sign painter, and… well - things just got a little out of hand!
James Pollock Sep 9th 2010 at 11:44 pm 122
On the Daily show last night, they showed a clip of the Fox News interview with this guy. He said they weren’t against Islam, they were against RADICAL Islam, and so moderate Muslims should be on his side. I suppose it’s possible they edited it out of context… but I don’t think so. Nevertheless, international “do something misguided and stupid and claim it’s in the name of religion” day WILL GO ON AS SCHEDULED.
Winter Wallaby Sep 10th 2010 at 12:13 am 123
KobeClan, having previously stated (in contradiction of 2000 years of Catholic doctrine) that the Hebrew Bible is irrelevant to dogma, and challenging me to “Quote some New Testament stuff and we will talk,” you’ve now chosen to ignore quotes from the New Testament and switched to “judge Jesus and Mohammed by their actions, not the words of their followers.” Really? Catholics don’t use the New Testabment epistles either? The Apostle Paul is just some “follower”? Seriously? This is beyond ridiculous.
If you actually believe this, then you’re a shockingly bad reader. Part 3, Section 2, on the Ten Commandments, alone takes up 1/7th of the Catechism. (Two guesses which part of the Bible the Ten Commandments is from.) I could cite about 10,000 Vatican encyclicals and Council canons that rely on the Hebrew Bible, but I see little point to it. Arguing over whether the the Catholic Church uses the Hebrew Bible for more than “He is Coming” is like arguing over whether water is wet.
To repeat the point that you chose to ignore: your process of picking terrible quotes from the Koran to show that Muslims are terrible works equally well with the Bible to show that Christians are terrible. Your desire to ignore any part of the Bible that you find inconvenient doesn’t make your position any more coherent.
Thanks for the suggestion Findus, sounds like a good book!
Igelino Sep 10th 2010 at 04:59 am 124
Lola @ 106 I agree. He should remove those cheek patties and grow porkchop sideburns. : )
chuckers Sep 10th 2010 at 07:27 am 125
‘Across this land everybody settled down
To a night of fitful dreams
And strange apparitions
As we tossed and turned we saw ourselves exactly as we are
And not surprisingly we found it frightening
Hey!
Well you don’t choose the place or choose the time
But history’s a slippery slide
Be careful of those nasty drops down to the right
When you’re hit it must seem a pretty good choice
For they give all of our malice voice
What do we expect if we won’t open our arms
(Singin’ Hey) We’re all just earrings to the left of our parents
They’re all just haircuts to the left of theirs
And we all wonder
“Why do Nazis grow like wildflowers!”
(Hey!) Helen let’s ditch the car let’s hide
We’ll through seeds of doubt at passersby
They will cross onto our side,
We’ll sing our songs into the night
As we cast off all those strange facades
We’ll see that we’re all uniquely scarred
By the same hand
Beneath the same smile
(Singin’ Hey) We’re all just earrings to the left of our parents
They’re all just haircuts to the left of theirs
And we all wonder
“Why do Nazis grow like wildflowers!”
Everybody dreams the same visions in the end
I know, everybody feels trapped and tired
So if you see a strange door to your right
Then drop your things and run for it
(Singin’ Hey) We’re all just earrings to the left of our parents
They’re all just haircuts to the left of theirs
And we all wonder
“Why do Nazis grow like wildflowers!”
“Why do Nazis grow like wildflowers!”‘
Detcord Sep 10th 2010 at 08:49 am 126
Winter Wallaby (84 & 123)
Sorry to be a pedant about this, but either your history or your mathematics are wrong. Catholocism began with the First Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. Christianity came to be about 300 years before the Roman Emperor Constantine I convened said Council. That puts Catholocism at about 1,710 years old, which is somewhat short of +20 centuries.
KobeClan Sep 10th 2010 at 10:10 am 127
Winter Wallaby Dude, do your homework:
First Commandment: You shall have no other gods before Me
Matthew 4:10; 6:24; 22:37-38; Luke 4:8; Revelation 14:7.
Second Commandment: Thou shalt not worship Idols
Acts 15:20; 17:16; 29; 1 Corinthians 5:10-11; 6:9; 10:7, 14, 19; 12:2; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Galatians 5:20; Ephesians 5:5; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 1:9; 1 Peter 4:3; 1 John 5:21;
Revelation 2:14; 9:20; 21:8; 22:15.
Third Commandment: Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain
Matthew 5:33-34; 1 Timothy 6:1; James 2:7.
Fourth Commandment: Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it Holy
Matthew 12:8, 12; 24:20; Mark 1:21; 2:27-28; 6:2; Luke 4:16, 31; 6:5; 23:56; Acts 13:14, 42, 44; 15:21; 16:13; 17:1-2; 18:4; Hebrews 4:4, 9-10 (See also Amplified, ASV, BBE, NASB, NIV, RSV and NRSV.)
Fifth Commandment: Honour your father and your mother
Matthew 15:4; 19:19; Mark 7:10; 10:19; Luke 18:20; Romans 1:30; Ephesians 6:1-2; Colossians 3:20; 2 Timothy 3:2.
Sixth Commandment: Thou shalt not Murder
Matthew 5:21-22; 19:18; Mark 7:21; 10:19; Luke 18:20; Romans 1:29; 13:9; Galatians 5:21; 1 Timothy 1:9; James 2:11; 1 Peter 4:15; 1 John 3:15; Revelation 9:21; 21:8; 22:15.
Seventh Commandment: Thou shalt not commit Adultery
Matthew 5:27-28; 19:18; Mark 7:21; 10:11-12, 19; Luke 16:18; 18:20; Acts 21:25; Romans 1:29; 2:22; 7:3; 13:9; 1 Corinthians 5:11; 6:9, 18; 10:8; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Hebrews 13:4; James 2:11; 2 Peter 2:14; Jude 1:7; Revelation 2:14; 2:21-22; 9:21.
Eighth Commandment: Thou shalt not Steal
Matthew 19:18; Mark 7:22; 10:19; Luke 18:20; Romans 2:21; 13:9; 1 Corinthians 5:10-11; 6:10; Ephesians 4:28; 1 Peter 4:15; Revelation 9:21.
Ninth Commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness
Matthew 15:19; 19:18; Mark 10:19; Luke 18:20; John 8:44; Acts 5:3-4; Romans 1:29; 13:9; Ephesians 4:25; Colossians 3:9; 1 Timothy 4:2; 2 Timothy 3:3; Revelation 21:8; 22:15.
Tenth Commandment: Thou shalt not Covet your neighbour’s things
Mark 7:22; Luke 12:15; Acts 20:33; Romans 1:29; 7:7; 13:9; 1 Corinthians 5:10-11; 6:10; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3, 5; 1 Timothy 6:10; 2 Timothy 3:2; 2 Peter 2:14; Hebrews 13:5.
Of course the Ten Commandments are first seen in the New Testament. Never said they weren’t.
I am a Christian, not a Jew. “He is coming” is all you need.
So. Loser’s bracket. Clinton or Mohammed?
Danny Boy (London Derriere) Sep 10th 2010 at 10:19 am 128
“The Distributed Commandments Service”
Brilliant parody, Kobe Beef! You make your satiric persona sound like a high-IQ bent total idiot! How do you come up with this stuff?
KobeClan Sep 10th 2010 at 11:10 am 129
Danny Boy Don’t quit your day job. You’re not gonna replace Don Rickles.
Also, forgot to mention that the Jews and some Protestant sects group the Ten commandments differently. So the Ten Commandments listed in Exodus 20:2-20:17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-5:21 are NOT the Catholic version.
Winter Wallaby, I thought we WERE having a discussion about issues that have perplexed religious scholars for centuries: the inherent contradictions in most scripture.
An old mentor, Fr. Dave, always counseled me, when not sure of the morality of my actions, to ask “what would Jesus do?”. Clichéd, I know. But it has served me well.
When I doubted my faith and started shopping around for something more “User Friendly” for a teenager, we talked about Islam. Fr. Dave advised me to ask the same question differently, “what would Mohammed do?”.
Try it yourself and get back to me.
Igelino Sep 10th 2010 at 11:51 am 130
Rats. I suppose I won’t get my ham sandwich or half a beer. Probably not even turkey ham or alcohol free.
paperboy Sep 10th 2010 at 01:22 pm 131
“Jones said Thursday he would call off the planned burning of Qurans based on a deal negotiated with Musri that the location of a mosque planned near ground zero in New York would be changed.”
Sounds like the Monty Python Terry Jones came up with this. The Rev.:”Move the mosque or the Korans get it!!” Imams: “For allahs’ sake, at least let the newer editions go!”
This guy better fade away after September 11. If he gets a reality show, I’m joining the taliban.
Danny Boy (London Derriere) Sep 10th 2010 at 01:37 pm 132
“I am not ridickle-ous!” — kobe Beef
Gilgamesh Sep 10th 2010 at 02:09 pm 133
Two great book recommendations in two days. Both added to my Amazon wish list. Thanks Winter Wallaby and Findus.
And yes I do read the books on my wish list.
Who knew CIDU Bill was operating a think tank.
KobeClan Sep 10th 2010 at 02:49 pm 134
Danny Boy That’s a LOL for me. Thnx.
Ted in Fort Lauderdale Sep 10th 2010 at 03:06 pm 135
KobeClan - at this point is seems you must be a troll - but if not, apparently being a good Catholic in your mind means ignoring the words of Jesus (from Matthew in the “New Testament”):
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law and the Prophets; I have
not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven
and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will
by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches
others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but
whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the
kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses
that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law, you will certainly not enter
the kingdom of heaven.”
But that’s just what Jesus _said_ and I guess you know better than _that_…
Mark in Boston Sep 10th 2010 at 03:16 pm 136
What would Jesus do?
Mouth off to the judge and get the death penalty.
KobeClan Sep 10th 2010 at 04:08 pm 137
Ted Ummm. “He is coming”. Sounds like in that passage he’s saying “Here I am”. I miss your point, if you have one.
Few years back was talking with a Marianist priest who had asked me what I had been reading.
Told him the “Our Father” section of the Catholic Catechism. He shook his head and frowned.
“There are two things that get Catholics into trouble”, he said. “The Old Testament and “The Lord’s Prayer”. Careful what you take out of them.”
Most evil perpetrated by the Catholic Church has been justified by the Old Testament. Just ask Galileo.
I most admit I was a little “trollish” with James, but I found it sweetly ironic he’s from Oregon.
Other than that, what? Bashing the Catholic Church is trollish? I thought you’d all approve and embrace me.
chuckers Sep 10th 2010 at 05:11 pm 138
“What would Jesus do?”
E.g. Not wash his hands before dinner? I think I will pass on that one.
Igelino Sep 10th 2010 at 09:10 pm 139
I saw this today and got to wondering whether there was ever a Christian chapel inside one of the two towers.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/nyregion/11religion.html
Carl Sep 10th 2010 at 10:16 pm 140
What would Jesus do?
“Judging from his history, Jesus would give up, get horribly killed, and then wait for a higher power to take care of everything.” Satan, Casey and Andy.
In actual Christian gospel, Jesus orders his followers to do anything to get weapons, including sell the clothes off their backs.
KobeClan Sep 11th 2010 at 11:59 am 141
Carl Here’s the passage:
“And He said to them, “When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?”
So they said, “Nothing.”
Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: ‘And He was numbered with the transgressors.’ For the things concerning Me have an end.”
So they said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.”
And He said to them, “It is enough.” ” (Luke 22:35-38, NKJV)
Not tell us what you think this passage means?
James Pollock Sep 11th 2010 at 02:54 pm 142
Two swordsmen enter, but only one leaves…
paperboy Sep 11th 2010 at 03:09 pm 143
They should make this into a movie and call it “The Burn Ultimatum”.
James Pollock Sep 11th 2010 at 03:58 pm 144
News Update: This should surprise no one… Fred Phelps has horned in on this action and says he wants to burn Korans, too. (Which is odd, because apparently fundamentalist Muslims dislike gay people almost as much as Fred does.)
Elyrest Sep 11th 2010 at 06:08 pm 145
I saw this in yesterday’s Washington Post:
“Turns out conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh and possible-Koran-fueled-firebug, Terry Jones, were high school classmates. Both were members of Cape Central High School’s class of ‘69 in Cape Girardeau, Missouri. ”
That was some kind of wacky class.