For the first time ever, I listened to a podcast of Andrew Lawton on TheRebel.media.
The first two segments dealt with two related stories, both being Muslim encroachments on our rights.
The first story was about the US Supreme Court decision (8 to 1) finding against Abercrombie and Fitch for refusing to hire a woman who was insisting on her right to trump the company’s dress code with her own. This is the Al Jazeera version of the news and this is the New Yorker’s take on it.
The second was a Canadian story about a Muslim high school soccer team which refused to play against a Christian team because there were two girls playing on the team.
Here are three versions of the story: Pamela Geller’s – CTV’s – Jerry Coyne’s blog.
The show was excellent, nothing was said in it that I would disagree with, yet, I was missing the real answers, I was missing the points that should have been made on this matter.
Talking about the issues on their particular merits is pointless. The answer to the question ‘why’ is so obvious that asking it over and over again is puzzling. Pointing out that:
“…. but doing it this way they’ve shown a profound level of ignorance for the rights of other people as though theirs are the only rights that matter. They’re looking for a right to discriminate, not just a right to have their own religion but a right to violate other people’s rights.” (emphasis mine)
…. is a bit redundant. Is this still a question? Of course Muslims believe that theirs is the only right that matters. That is the essence of their faith. They are proclaiming it loudly in Canadian courtrooms. There is no God but God and its laws are the only ones a Muslim is truly supposed to obey. They also have a religious obligation to make them prevail (Jihad). We should not be surprised by this by now.
The Muslims, therefore, are NOT the problem here. WE ARE.
Muslims do what Muslims do. Yes, their faith is primitive, yes, they are obnoxious, yes, they abuse the system and our tolerance, but that’s what they are. That’s who they are. They want to conquer the world, they want to subjugate us, they want to rule us and they don’t even try to hide their intentions. Islam means submission and their ultimate goal is the subjugation of the whole world to the primitive tenets of their intolerant ideology. The answer to every single one of the puzzled questions about the motivation behind the actions of Muslims is the same: everything Muslims do have a single purpose: the advancement of the interest of their faith. Gaining footholds, expanding their sphere of influence, wearing down opposition to their ideas and practices, supressing criticism against their intolerance, changing our ways to accommodate their intolerance.
…..And they can do that because WE let them get away with it. WE are empowering them. WE are accommodating them.
We are on a mission of being nice and tolerant, they are on a mission to conquer the world.
They correctly see our mission as a sign of weakness and they are smart enough to use it against us at any and every opportunity they get.
The whole of western civilization is losing its way, losing its self-confidence, losing its will to survive.
Muslims, on the other hand, will increase their self-confidence with every little victory we are handing to them. The real question is NOT why the Muslims do what they do but why are we allowing them to get away with it.
The moment we ask that question we have to realize that the problems are much more serious than just the accommodation of Islam.
The problem goes far deeper than ethnic, gender or religion issues.
The problem lies in our constitutions, our supreme courts, our entire zeitgeist that is fundamentally opposed to individual freedom and property rights.
The problem isn’t just the fact that the Supreme Court is making decisions that fly in the face of everything that I would find just, fair and equitable; the problem is the set of documents and the ideals they represent that those decisions are based upon.
The problem is the idea that the state can simply trump any decision you make about your personal life, your personal space, how you live, how you take your shower and light your room, what you think, what you say, what you eat, what you drink and how much, how you do your business, who do you associate with, what sort of contracts you make and I could go on and on and on.
The problem is the confused and confusing language of human rights declarations, laws and manifestos, such as FDR’s second bill of rights and all the documents and movements they inspired. The problem is the blatant stupidity of our own Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The problem is positive rights. The problem is group ‘rights.’ The problem is the lack of understanding of what public and private space is. The problem is that we allow group privileges to override personal rights.
The problem is that all of the above are inspired by a socialist ideology, the belief that the will of the collective (whatever that may be at any moment) should have primacy over the will of the individual.
The problem is that politics trumps individual rights.
The problem is that the majority of the people in our societies (pretty much including the whole developed world) do not want freedom, but some sort of fluid conformity with ideologies that can change their direction like the wind.
Socialists, environmentalists, Muslims, gender rights advocates and all other activists on the wide spectrum of statist ideologies are simply taking advantage of our collective weakness, our tolerance, our diminishing resolve to defend the freedoms that made the world we live in today possible.
Our problems will not be solved unless we find our resolve again. Our problems will not be solved until we stand up for individual freedom and against group privileges. Our problems will not be solved as long as we have discrimination enshrined in our constitutions and in our laws.
The problem is not that people are trying to destroy our freedoms. The problem is that we are letting them.