Moral Relativism

[JerrySeinfeld]

Here is the whole article by National Post and here is an excerpt - the saddest part is that this has been the case in one form or another for years in this country.

link

Picture in your mind a white supremacist who accuses blacks of operating a "wicked web of control and exploitation"; who explains genocidal treatment of blacks as "divine punishment"; and who foresees the "total extermination" of blacks at the hands of whites. Would such a speaker be a welcome presence on Canada's tightly regulated airwaves?

We suspect not. But change "white" to "Muslim," and "black" to "Jewish" in the above hypothetical, and you are word-for-word describing the published statements of Israr Ahmad, an anti-Semitic Pakistani preacher who has appeared on Canadian cable network VisionTV several times -- most recently, on Saturday afternoon.

The Saturday broadcast was particularly surprising because VisionTV already had been put on notice about Mr. Ahmad following a July 14 broadcast in which he told his listeners that "Jihad in the way of Allah, for the cause of Allah, can be pursued either with your financial resources or your bodily strength when you go to fight the enemy in the battlefield." On July 20, the network's president put out a sensible press release condemning "in the strongest possible terms any speech derogatory of particular religious, ethnic or cultural groups." But thanks to a programming glitch at the station, Mr. Ahmad was back on VisionTV the very next day.

While we accept that the July 21 broadcast was an accident, the incident fed into existing complaints about the network. Since its inception, VisionTV has shown a pronounced liberal bias. Evangelists have had to pay hefty sums to get their shows on the network -- and even then, they have appeared late at night or very early in the morning. Meanwhile, the channel's own original programming has been dominated by schismatic Catholics (those who favour female ordination, for instance) and United Churchers who question the divinity of Christ or who favour gay marriage.

Canadians also are understandably upset that Mr. Ahmad appeared on VisionTV in the first place. Our society (rightly) has zero-tolerance for traditional Archie Bunker-style racism, anti-Semitism and homophobia. Yet when the same hatred spews forth from someone speaking Arabic or Urdu, the instinct of some liberal Canadians is to permit it (or at least look the other way) in the name of cultural sensitivity.

This relativism comes across as hypocrisy. As you read this, an Albertan youth pastor is facing human rights charges because he disparaged gay activists in a letter to a Red Deer newspaper. What message does it send to this country that such a man must be shut up, while a Muslim who foresees the "total extermination" of Jews has been permitted to preach on a television network available in eight million Canadian households?

[xul]

Those clergies advocating racialism and racial hatred is disgusting.

Then there is a problem but what is the solution?

Advocating anti-Muslim and acting against whole Muslim society will not be a solution. This is the result that those Islamic extremists want. Just as in Afghanistan, bombing several of Canadian soldiers is not the whole results that Taliban wants. Making Canadian soldiers shooting at innocents with horror is their purpose.

So, people must fight against the extremists while avoid to hurt any innocent.

Edited July 25, 2007 by xul

[Harry Nads]

Those clergies advocating racialism and racial hatred is disgusting.

Then there is a problem but what is the solution?

Education is the solution. Radicalism has been a problem since the beginning of time. Many people don't want to hear this but part of the problem is that there are too many have nots in this world. While I'm not linking poverty to ignorance, studies clearly prove that those who do not have the resources to educate themselves are left behind and these are the people who are most susceptible to being brainwashed by those who preach hate.

Canada must continue to support poor nations and make it a priority to fight terrorism wherever it resides.

[ScottSA]

Education is the solution. Radicalism has been a problem since the beginning of time. Many people don't want to hear this but part of the problem is that there are too many have nots in this world. While I'm not linking poverty to ignorance, studies clearly prove that those who do not have the resources to educate themselves are left behind and these are the people who are most susceptible to being brainwashed by those who preach hate.

I do hope this cliche is at least partly in jest.

[mikedavid00]

Canada must continue to support poor nations and make it a priority to fight terrorism wherever it resides.

Sorry I disagree.

We cannot change Islam and the stoneage. Little Canada isn't going to change this. This is something that needs to come from within.

'The key is education' is so 1993. We've learned not to mess around with the affairs of foreign religion becasue it doesn't work. It's a lose lose situation.

Lets focus on keeping those people out of Canada to begin with.

It almost sounds like... YOUR the traitor.

[xul]

Those clergies advocating racialism and racial hatred is disgusting.

Then there is a problem but what is the solution?

Education is the solution. Radicalism has been a problem since the beginning of time. Many people don't want to hear this but part of the problem is that there are too many have nots in this world. While I'm not linking poverty to ignorance, studies clearly prove that those who do not have the resources to educate themselves are left behind and these are the people who are most susceptible to being brainwashed by those who preach hate.

Canada must continue to support poor nations and make it a priority to fight terrorism wherever it resides.

I agree with you.

Making those people to keep contacts with the world is also important. Most racial hatreds based on the ignorance of other people in the world. So isolating a race or a country is not a correct way to turn it to good. Keeping contacts with them, bringing up and encouraging open-minded people is the right way to fight against terrorism.

[jefferiah]

Well, Xul, that is only true to an extent. Look alot of terrorists have come to North America to get fine educations. Or even in Europe. You know, it may be in some cases that bad conditions can help fuel this, but it is naive to allow the blame to rest solely on that. And this oppression card gets abused. On top of that Canada is a pushover nation.

The topic itself was about how Muslims are allowed to call for destruction of Israel, but any criticism of Muslims is now considered offensive. I remember reading a few years back about a Muslim student group at the U of T who held an on-campus meeting where they spread out a map of the "enemy"----Israel. So some Jewish students held a "Know Radical Islam" awareness meeting. You know just to discuss this issue, and there were many complaints of discrimination from the Muslim students. If we cannot even talk about a problem that is prevalent among many muslims (there is no denying it) while they are allowed to talk smack about the Western countries they are lucky to be living in, there is something very rotten in Denmark.

To send foreign aid to countries is useless. You can pour a gajillion katrillion billion dollars into a country, but it won't necessarily help. They don't fly in with airplanes and drop it on the general population you know---which would also not be good, for obvious reasons. But if you send money to a corrupt nation with a corrupt government they are not going to feed mouths, they are going to fund the things they want.

Edited July 26, 2007 by jefferiah

[mikedavid00]

Keeping contacts with them, bringing up and encouraging open-minded people is the right way to fight against terrorism.

Of course, you of all people on the forum are goign to have an open, liberal, global mindset of the world. The world is open to you and is your oyster.. or.. well.. maybe Canada and Australia.. or ok.. maybe just Canada. After all..

never mind.

Edited July 27, 2007 by mikedavid00

[mikedavid00]

To send foreign aid to countries is useless. You can pour a gajillion katrillion billion dollars into a country, but it won't necessarily help. They don't fly in with airplanes and drop it on the general population you know

Yes but you see, Xul can come here. Xul can come to Canada. Xul envisions our countries as a charity to help those with their hand out.

I'm *so* p*ssed off right now!!

(over unrelated things.. but i'm really mad now so tonight my posts wont be nice. It's fun to catch Argus on a bad day. Watch out! Geoff *used* to be a GREAT read when he was in a bad mood. But he's employed and happy so everything he sees is through a rose colored glass so terrorists can blow up a subway in Canada and he wont care).

[xul]

Well, Xul, that is only true to an extent. Look alot of terrorists have come to North America to get fine educations. Or even in Europe. You know, it may be in some cases that bad conditions can help fuel this, but it is naive to allow the blame to rest solely on that. And this oppression card gets abused. On top of that Canada is a pushover nation.

The topic itself was about how Muslims are allowed to call for destruction of Israel, but any criticism of Muslims is now considered offensive. I remember reading a few years back about a Muslim student group at the U of T who held an on-campus meeting where they spread out a map of the "enemy"----Israel. So some Jewish students held a "Know Radical Islam" awareness meeting. You know just to discuss this issue, and there were many complaints of discrimination from the Muslim students. If we cannot even talk about a problem that is prevalent among many muslims (there is no denying it) while they are allowed to talk smack about the Western countries they are lucky to be living in, there is something very rotten in Denmark.

To send foreign aid to countries is useless. You can pour a gajillion katrillion billion dollars into a country, but it won't necessarily help. They don't fly in with airplanes and drop it on the general population you know---which would also not be good, for obvious reasons. But if you send money to a corrupt nation with a corrupt government they are not going to feed mouths, they are going to fund the things they want.

I'm an engineer and I used to use some engineering way to analysis problems. In mechanical engineering, when I analyse a mechanism or a truss, if I am uncertain with effection of a certain part of it, I will move the part away to see what will happen.

Let's use the same way to analyse the effect of education. You said there are some Muslim students who held an meeting to advocate to destroy Israel and they complained discrimination without awaring their own discrimination to others. That is unpleasant. But you might imagine. If they was not educated, just as those in Afghanistan and Iraq, the circumstance would be more worse than it is now.

The percentage of terrorists in educated people is far less than those in uneducated ones. The 911 attack was not made by real Aarabian students. They joined the terrorits early than they get visas. They just used the student identity to cover their identity of terrorists. Some people educated in west commited terrorism because they were educated in their hometown by those religionist when they were teenagers, a very vulnerable stage in their life. I don't know there are how many Muslim in Canada. If they were not different with those in their homeland, Canada police might be overwhelmed and there would be no peace. I guess most Musilim move to Canada because them don't like terrorism and violence in their country. Of couse, this don't mean they will agree with Israeli.

[ScottSA]

Making those people to keep contacts with the world is also important. Most racial hatreds based on the ignorance of other people in the world. So isolating a race or a country is not a correct way to turn it to good. Keeping contacts with them, bringing up and encouraging open-minded people is the right way to fight against terrorism.

Most of the terrorists who actually succeed, and most of the leaders are very well educated...some with western educations. Many of them grew up in secular society. "Education," presumably meaning to instill rightthink, is apparently irrelevant.

[xul]

Of course, you of all people on the forum are goign to have an open, liberal, global mindset of the world. The world is open to you and is your oyster.. or.. well.. maybe Canada and Australia.. or ok.. maybe just Canada. After all..

never mind.

Ther world is open to everyone who does not refuse to live peacefully with others.

[xul]

Most of the terrorists who actually succeed, and most of the leaders are very well educated...some with western educations. Many of them grew up in secular society. "Education," presumably meaning to instill rightthink, is apparently irrelevant.

I agree the facts you said. But we must consider that most educated people are not easily become terrorists than those uneducated people. Just as in an Iraq hospital, a journalist reports:"There are dozens of people was killed by missed American Tomahawks." It is fact but if American fires thousands of Tomahawks, we can still consider that Tomahawk is an efficient weapon.

[xul]

Yes but you see, Xul can come here. Xul can come to Canada. Xul envisions our countries as a charity to help those with their hand out.

Have I said Canada must supply charity to anyone?

[White Doors]

To send foreign aid to countries is useless. You can pour a gajillion katrillion billion dollars into a country, but it won't necessarily help. They don't fly in with airplanes and drop it on the general population you know

Yes but you see, Xul can come here. Xul can come to Canada. Xul envisions our countries as a charity to help those with their hand out.

I'm *so* p*ssed off right now!!

(over unrelated things.. but i'm really mad now so tonight my posts wont be nice. It's fun to catch Argus on a bad day. Watch out! Geoff *used* to be a GREAT read when he was in a bad mood. But he's employed and happy so everything he sees is through a rose colored glass so terrorists can blow up a subway in Canada and he wont care).

Sorry, but you are no argus.

[jbg]

Advocating anti-Muslim ________ and acting against whole Muslim society will not be a solution. This is the result that those Islamic extremists want. Just as in Afghanistan, bombing several of Canadian soldiers is not the whole results that Taliban wants. Making Canadian soldiers shooting at innocents with horror is their purpose.

So, people must fight against the extremists while avoid to hurt any innocent.

I put a "blank" into your post for a reason. Your post makes no grammatical sense.

Worse than that, your post makes no sense at all. You are guilty of a false equivalence here. The problem is that the "whole Muslim society" is deadly silient in the face of their leaders'' screeching for the death of their opponents.

Edited August 6, 2007 by jbg

[ScottSA]

I put a "blank" into your post for a reason. Your post makes no grammatical sense.

Worse than that, your post makes no sense at all. You are guilty of a false equivalence here. The problem is that the "whole Muslim society" is deadly silient in the face of their leaders'' screeching for the death of their opponents.

Not quite. A great number of them are also screeching for western Sharia and a change in western foreign policy.

[WestViking]

Terrorism has moved into the 21st century. Terrorists hide ina civilian population in order to make the most of civilian casualties if they are attacked. Makes for great media releases. Terrorists can only hide amongst civilians by terrorizing them. They tell their unwilling hosts that they may be killed if (the terrorists) are attacked, but they will be murdered if they don't co-operate. Terrorists regularly murder a few 'resistors' to make it plain they are serious.

You cannot educate people held hostage.

Moreover, the myth that terrorists are poor people with nothing to lose is sharply contradicted by fact. Osama bin Laden is hardly a pauper. The crew that carried off 9/11 were not poor - they were well funded and lived very well prior to the attack. The latest British bombers were all educated professionals.

You cannot educate a religious zealot.

Muslims have a clear choice. They can continue to tacitly allow the radicals in their number to hold them hostage and risk death when free men retaliate against terrorist aggression, or they can renounce war on people of other faiths and hope to survive.

Edited August 6, 2007 by WestViking

[jbg]

Terrorism has moved into the 21st century. Terrorists hide ina civilian population in order to make the most of civilian casualties if they are attacked. Makes for great media releases.

Ever notice the "fish wife screeches" of the Muslims after their (human shield) children are killed in an Israeli air raid? Do you notice such anguish when one of their children explodes on a packed Israeli bus?

Moreover, the myth that terrorists are poor people with nothing to lose is sharply contradicted by fact. Osama bin Laden is hardly a pauper. The crew that carried off 9/11 were not poor - they were well funded and lived very well prior to the attack. The latest British bombers were all educated professionals.

The "doctors" in Britain who tried to bomb the London nightclubs and Glasgow Airport (one of them dead after a thankfully long period of living with third degree burns) are a prime example.

Muslims have a clear choice. They can continue to tacitly allow the radicals in their number to hold them hostage and risk death when free men retaliate against terrorist aggression, or they can renounce war on people of other faiths and hope to survive.

They almost always make the wrong choice. Note that most fled Israel in response to their "leaders'" request. The ones that stayed behind, in Israel, now have more rights than any other Arabs, and probably greater prosperity. Edited August 6, 2007 by jbg

[FascistLibertarian]

Another thread that just turned into bashign Muslims.

The key point here, and I think we can all agree, is in Canada we need to treat everyone equal.

Everyone should have the same rights to and rights from.

If you break a law your race, religion, ethnic group, sexual orientation or background/upbringing should not be a factor.

[jbg]

Another thread that just turned into bashign Muslims.

The key point here, and I think we can all agree, is in Canada we need to treat everyone equal.

Everyone should have the same rights to and rights from.

If you break a law your race, religion, ethnic group, sexual orientation or background/upbringing should not be a factor.

Why is insisting on Muslims' adhereing to the same standards as everyone else a "bash"?

[Pliny]

Another thread that just turned into bashign Muslims.

The key point here, and I think we can all agree, is in Canada we need to treat everyone equal.

Everyone should have the same rights to and rights from.

If you break a law your race, religion, ethnic group, sexual orientation or background/upbringing should not be a factor.

What's a "fascistLibertarian"?

Political correctness wishes us all equal as well. Their problem is that we should all be "equal" to the lowest common denominator. What do you mean by equal?

The problem the west has with Muslims is in who should make the law. In the west it is government that makes laws. Force and aggression against another can only be used by government or government designated authority. Islam requires it make the laws. There will inevitably be a struggle.

Can Islam accept that it cannot be a theocracy? Can it accept that it cannot validly use force against non-Muslims or even Muslims where it has no authority to do so? Their law, their justice is based upon Islam and has existed for centuries.

Basically, the power struggle is the problem as it has been throughout history. Islam points to western decadence and immorality and its negative influences while the west points to Islam's oppression, barbarity and lack of individual freedom. Is either one wrong?

[Higgly]

I agree that crackpots who preach violence should not be allowed on the air.... George Bush, Dick Cheney, Rheummy, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Margaret Wente, John Ibbitson, Rabid Frum, Marcus Gee, Pat Robertson...

[ScottSA]

Basically, the power struggle is the problem as it has been throughout history. Islam points to western decadence and immorality and its negative influences while the west points to Islam's oppression, barbarity and lack of individual freedom. Is either one wrong?

True now, but not historically true. Until the 17th century (1683 to be exact), the struggle was one of brute force against brute force with both sides rooted in unshakeable religious conviction. Christianity made advances in Spain, and Islam made advances in Bysantium and attempts in Europe. After that, Christendom shot ahead in every sphere of existence for centuries, just as firmly rooted in conviction, but in a conviction that had learned to be more open to science and social change. Islam simply stopped, and even regressed.

But it's only in the last 200 years or so that the subject of Islam's intolerance has become an accusation by the west, and only in the last 25 that anyone in the west (other than colonial administrators) really cared one way or another.

It's also only in the last 50 years that the west has been worthy of accusations of decadence. And our recent decadence and relativistic thought system is our greatest weakness, because while Islam may believe in the wrong things, at least it believes in something. Your question, "Is either one wrong?" speaks volumes about our weakness in the west. We say we believe in tolerance, but that's simply another way of saying we believe in nothing and so we accept everything. Islam believes we are wrong, but we're not quite sure Islam is wrong. How can we ever win as long as we hold that attitude?

[xul]

Worse than that, your post makes no sense at all. You are guilty of a false equivalence here.

I was not "equivalence" of them. I just said that the result of anti-whole Muslim was expected by those terrorists and extremists. For instance:

There is a boy, his father is a criminal, and his father evilly try to turn his son to a criminal. He always told his son:"I'm a criminal. You are my son. You will not be trust by others forever. You must turn to me."

All neighbours of the boy was disturbed by his father's crime. So they relieve their outrages at the boy and said such as "Your father is a criminal, so you will be a criminal. We all refuse you.", etc.

The boy keeps silient in his father's crimes, Partly caused that his is his father, perhaps partly caused by the manners those neighbours acting on him.

The neighbours doing is not equal to the father doing, but the result is that his father expected.

Do you think what the neighbours acting is a good way to the boy or a good way to themselves?

The problem is that the "whole Muslim society" is deadly silient in the face of their leaders'' screeching for the death of their opponents.

I don't think all Muslim countries screeching for the death of Israel. Several Arabian country such as Egypt and Jordan have embassies in Israel. Can they be considered as "screeching for the death of their opponents?"