The article is written by the publisher and presumably the editor as well, a Mr. Robert Beierle. This fellow goes on to complain about all the "liberals" in the world who are "demanding" that he, and his fellow "legal" American citizens, tolerate Muslims and homosexuals and "whacko environmentalists" and illegal immigrants. He spends two pages ranting about the Cordoba House project, a community center being built in lower Manhattan. He accuses Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf (a prominent NY Muslim cleric, who has not only spoken out against the radicalization of Islam, but also assisted the FBI in fighting it) of being a terrorist and channeling money to terrorist groups. He then goes on to call Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of New York City, a "butthole" for supporting the First Amendment rights of Muslims.
Mr. Beierle does make one good point though: we have here a group of people who follow a religion that stones homosexuals, adulterers, and heretics (literally); and is so intolerant of other religions that they've been fighting holy wars for 1400 years, yet they ask us for the tolerance to practice their religion. Now, I know that this is the type of fanaticism that Imam Rauf is trying to downplay, but it does happen. Just like Christian fanatics bomb abortion centers, and Jewish fanatics build walls and camps. So maybe we should look at what we tolerate before we start pointing fingers at what others will tolerate, hmm?
Now, this whole "Ground Zero Mosque" thing has been blown way out of proportion by the media and certain politicians who can sense their 15 minutes expiring and are stretching them as long as possible. Personally, I think that anyone who doesn't live in New York or didn't lose someone on 9/11/01 should just keep their big nose out of it, because it has absolutely no affect on your life. I could write an entire post on the rest of what I think about this situation, but a nice man over at Cracked.com (of all places) has already summed it up pretty well.
The rant then veers off on another topic: gay marriage. Mr. Beierle seems to think that the recent ruling on Proposition 8 in California is a case of a judge legislating from the bench. His argument is that the people spoke, and a judge came in and changed the law based on his personal bias. Never mind that the law itself was unconstitutional, or that it discriminated based on sexual orientation. This is clearly another case of liberals shoving their ideals down the throats of God fearing, legal, Christian American tax-paying citizens!
Look, what it comes down to is this: Mr. Beierle says he's ok with "union ceremonies" (whatever that might be), which would probably be just dandy in the eyes of most homosexuals, if those "union ceremonies" carried the same legal rights as a marriage ceremony. But they don't. What we're talking about here is a legal definition, which has nothing to do with your religious beliefs, so I'll make you a deal here: I won't start a religion based on the American legal system if you won't write laws based on your religious beliefs, ok?
There's more here, about Michele Obama, and people in uniform, and illegal immigrants... it just goes on and on. I won't bore you with the rest, but suffice to say it's a rant that would have made Goebbels proud. What I'm really getting at here is this: I hope, Mr. Robert Beierle of Creative Insight (a most ironic name), that you have enjoyed your rant. I hope that you enjoy your First Amendment rights to free speech, religion, and press; rights you would deny others because they don't share your beliefs. I may not like what you say, and I think you are ignorant and sad, but I will tolerate you saying it, because it is your right, and to deny yours would cheapen mine. I would hope that you might read this, but apparently you haven't figured out the Internet just yet. That's ok, maybe someone will print it out for you.
"Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population."
1 comment:
Freaking Awesome. Sometimes free speech has it's flaws, but the minute we try to shut up morons like him, we defeat the whole purpose of it. Good for you in pointing out his moronic ranting and the irony of him using his rights and freedoms to try and demand the denial of others.
Post a Comment