Friday, January 11, 2008

Christian hate speech

If you think this doesn't border on hate-speech and incitement to violence, then I'd love to know why not.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

what's yer problem with advocacy for the persecuted??

Benjamin Ady said...

Nameless one,

That's a reasonable question, I suppose. =)

I don't have any problem with advocacy for the persecuted per se.

My problem was more with a white upper middle class white American male characterizing his in-group as "persecuted". The reality is that his in-group are among the biggest *perpetrators* of persecution on the planet. The invasion and occupation of Iraq, a Muslim country, has led to the deaths of a *minimum* of 150,000 Muslims over the past 5 years, as well as forcing 2 million Muslims to leave their home country to become refugees, and thus also forcing tens of thousands of Muslim women, many of them young girls, into prostitution, just to get enough to eat.

He's propogating the mindset that *led* to these horrors--that Americans are in danger, and that it is the job of American Christians to stand up to "dangerous radical Islam", since this "dangerous radical Islam" is the ... source of all the danger in the world.

So ... what have so called radical Muslim terrorists done to compare with what American Christian terrorists have done? ... And why isn't Chuck speaking out against the terrorists who are associated with his in-group, instead of against the terrorists who are associated with what he thinks of as "the other"? Why is he talking about radical Muslims terrorizing christians with the implicit approval of their governments, but *not* speaking out about American Christians terrorizing Muslims with the implicit approval of *their* government.

To quote from the Bible Chuck uses: "Let judgment begin at the house of God"--which is to say--it would be more profitable to critique American Christian terrorists, and let the upright, godly, moral, normal Muslim people critique the Muslim terrorists. Or the Israelites to critique the Israeli terrorists. Etc.

When we characterize "the other" as the source of evil, refusing to acknowledge that there is *at least* as much, if not more, evil here in our own in-group (that is say, in ourself), at best we are condescending, and at worst, we end up characterizing them as less human than ourselves, as hateful, as anathema. This inevitably leads to violence against them. This violence is further justified and continued by the same means. In this commentary, Chuck makes himself a part of that machinery.

the nameless dude said...

I think as you do the Iraq war is unjust and stupid...I also agree that the rationale of America under threat and better to fight the enemy over there rather than have them run wild on our streets is conspiratorial horse pucky .....however this does not in any way negate the fact that Christ followers across the planet are being tortured and slaughtered often times at the hand of foaming mouthed jihadists.That is a tragic fact. This cannot be minimized simply coz Chuck Colson yanks your chain.The other thing you need to note is this the US military albeit unwelcome and albeit misguided and misinformed in its rationale does have rules of engagement; psychos like Ossama and his blood thirsty miscreants do not. You cannot reasonably compare the US military and the bastards who who took out the twin towers or the cowardly 7-7 London bombers

the nameless dude said...

I think as you do the Iraq war is unjust and stupid...I also agree that the rationale of America under threat and better to fight the enmy over ther rather than have them run wild on our streets is conspiratorial horse pucky .....however this does not in any way negate the fact that Christ followers across the planet are being tortured and slaughtered often times at the hand of foaming mouthed jihadists.That is a tragic fact. This cannot be minimized bsimply coz Chuck Colson yanks your chain.The other thing you need to note is this the Us military albeit unwelcome and albeit misguided and misinformed in its rationale does have rules of engagement; psychos like Ossama and his blood thirsty miscreants do not

Benjamin Ady said...

Nameless Dude,

Sounds like we mostly agree =)

The U.S. military rules of engagement are problematic on multiple fronts. First of all they allow for some really heinous stuff. Second of all how they are or aren't interpreted is a matter of ... cultural tone within the military, which is *set* by people at the top, whose attitude is demonstrably problematic.

Furthermore, beyond that, ... what's the point of rules of engagement when the whole organization in involved in the illegal invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation?

I'm hard pressed to see how the evil done by Al Quaeda begins to approach the evil accomplished by the U.S. military in the past, ... 50 years.

One things for sure, whatever evil they've done, they've done it on a budget of less than .01% of what we've done it on. Which just goes to show how brilliant they really are, since a bit part of their strategy is to elicit exactly such a high budget response. Make the behemoth overtax his energy resources swatting at flies. 1.6 Trillion dollars is a hell of a lot of money. Al Quaeda leaders are no doubt ongoingly laughing with joy at their enormous success in this tactic.