It was early in the morning; I hadn’t had coffee yet. I turned on my facebook news feed to see that Seth Rogen had just married a muslim dude in England. The happy couple were hoping to show all that you could be both muslim and gay.
Wait. What? Seth Rogen? Who knew?
I opened the newslink in another window, rubbed my eyes, and re-read it. It was Sean Rogan, not Seth Rogen. Okay, that makes a little more sense. But the “muslim and gay” thing … does the rest of islam know about this?
I briefly perused some of the public posts about the matter, and it seems that islam-at-large was well aware of the nuptials and was uniformly irate about it. …and probably not because they weren’t invited, either.
Since I’m grouchy before my two cups of coffee, I decided to zero in on one of the public posts and be deliberately provocative. I chose a post made by some group [in England, I surmised] by the name of London Internationals friends. Their facebook photo [currently] shows a red heart with a banner across it emblazoned with Grenfell. Awww.
This group’s solidarity with human decency ends there, apparently, for their public comment on the matter equivocated a gay wedding with a muslim spouse as being The West telling other nations how to live their lives. And this, of course, would mean “we will bomb you and be having fun slaughters your entire population.”
…yes, that is a direct quote.
I badgered, mocked and harangued the London Internationals friends’ idiotic challenge, and each of their replies, for the next hour or so, until they replied with the islamist trump card: US militarism. The US has bombed 30 nations since the end of World War Two, I was reminded. The accusation came with an internet link, so I knew it to be scrupulously honest and true.
Yeah? Not one of those nations was bombed because two dudes decided to get married. Islamists murder for exactly that reason − or near-enough that the difference is negligible to any but a sophist deliberately dodging the point. And this muslim promised to do exactly that.
That isn’t even to mention the fact that islamists have, themselves, bombed twice as many nations in half the time. If the point is that the US is a bully, then to deny that islamism isn’t twice the bully is to be a hypocrite and psychopath. Besides which, most of US militarism of the past generation is predicated, specifically, on islamism going out of its way to respond with war [and war-like] to issues that had not been intrinsically militaristic in nature until islamists made them that way.
Let us not forget that among the official excuses used by pan-islamist paramilitary outfits for targeting Western and US concerns, up to and including 9-11, is that we in the west commit cultural warfare upon islam in the form of Hollywood movies, cosmetics sales to women enslaved behind burqas, promote atheism, homosexuality, judaism … and other corruptions. These long predate any “you turned us into terrorists by bombing our homes” rationalizations, as well. Blaming the victim is so … progressive.
And while we’re on the general subject of rationalizing islamism, let me just remind everyone of the French burkini ban of roughly a year ago, and the seemingly universal libertarian response to it. Not to mention the gross disconnect their response had with the libertarian non-aggression principle.
Once again, the holy NAP prohibits the initiation of force, but permits force to be used in self-defense or in the defense of others, including − presumably − when the one being coerced cannot defend himself, or does not understand the issue to need self-defense. The initiators of force in the Burqini Faux-Show were not the boorish Frog Police making the poor muslim woman remove her head covering in public; it was and always will be the institution of islam which denies women the bodily autonomy to have the legitimate choice of what they wear in the first place, denying them self-determination from birth.
A muslim woman who actually chooses to not wear the muslim symbols of oppression are seen, by islam, as turning their backs on islam. They are called apostates for doing so. The official islamic response to apostasy is death − preferably by stoning. It is considered an “honor killing”. These happen from time to time in the US, and significantly more frequently in England and the rest of Europe. Does anyone seriously wish to claim muslim women have an actual choice in the matter?
They don’t and never have. Until islam grows up and joins the rest of the world in the 21st century by leaving the 12th behind, muslim women are nothing but second-class citizens − if that − millimeters above dogs and jews. …and atheists, and homosexuals, and Hollywood, and cosmetics sellers.
But, interestingly, not slaves. Islam officially frowns on killing slaves, particularly if they are not one’s own. But islam doesn’t frown on the fun of “slaughters your entire population” over a muslim having a gay wedding in England.
Why, it’s an attack on Greater Islamia. With bombs and everything. …practically.