AFA’s predictable response to the “Ground Zero Mosque”

Timothy Kincaid

August 11th, 2010

The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer has a predictably extremist and lunatic bizarrely irrational response to the proposed Islamic Center and mosque planned for 51 Park Street in Manhattan.

Permits should not be granted to build even one more mosque in the United States of America, let alone the monstrosity planned for Ground Zero. This is for one simple reason: each Islamic mosque is dedicated to the overthrow of the American government.

Each one is a potential jihadist recruitment and training center, and determined to implement the “Grand Jihad” of which Andy McCarthy has written.

Because of this subversive ideology, Muslims cannot claim religious freedom protections under the First Amendment. They are currently using First Amendment freedoms to make plans to destroy the First Amendment altogether. There is no such thing as freedom of religion in Islam, and it is sheer and utter folly for Americans to delude themselves into thinking otherwise.

The world of Fischer’s imagination must be a very dark and scary place to live.

Erin

August 11th, 2010

Let’s just throw the first amendment out the window now too. These people need to be shipped off to live in Iran for a week and see how much they want to complain about the US and our freedoms after that.

Jim Burroway

August 11th, 2010

Oh thank God. I’m tired of these contentious posts! ;-)

Jim Burroway

August 11th, 2010

By the way, I wonder if we should create a Bryan Fischer award. If so, how would it be different from the LaBarbera Award?

johnathan

August 11th, 2010

Excuse me for my deluded understanding of the First Amendment protection of religious expression, but is this protection of religious expression somehow limited in the Constitutional language solely to Judeo-Christian tenets of faith?

I don’t believe so, as the First Amendment to the Constitution reads, in part, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …”

If someone wishes to correct me (respectfully, that is), please do so. And perhaps, they should correct the AFA as well, because I sure as hell can’t find this language in the First Amendment.

Elisabeth Harrison

August 11th, 2010

Hi there,

I totally agree with your perspective on the unacceptability/general horrificness of Bryan Fischer’s statement, but I was wondering whether you might reconsider your use of the word “lunatic” to describe it?

First off, the term is often used as a pejorative against people who are psychiatrised, or who self-identify as mad, so it should probably be avoided on those grounds alone.

Second, as a person with a psychiatric history who is also deeply committed to anti-racism, I’m insulted that you seem to be associating “lunacy” with perspectives like those of Fischer. Even if Fischer is a “lunatic,” I doubt that it’s the cause of his racism/Islamophobia.

Otherwise, I want to say that I think your blog is amazing, and that you do extremely important work, and I really would like to thank you for that!

Elisabeth Harrison

Timothy Kincaid

August 11th, 2010

Sorry Elisabeth, I wasn’t thinking of “lunatic” in terms of mental illness (an association that I don’t make). But I’ve revised it to eliminate any confusion or insult.

Ryan

August 11th, 2010

I don’t think anyone could win a Bryan Fischer Award other than Bryan Fisher. Who else on earth would have the brass balls to propose that we institute a religious litmus test for immigrants, based on whether or not their religion is likely to support gay marriage?

Jason D

August 11th, 2010

Fischer also said we needed sectarian cleansing of the military.

I sense a pattern.

Elisabeth Harrison

August 11th, 2010

Thanks, Timothy! I appreciate that!

Lindoro Almaviva

August 11th, 2010

I see not much of a difference between this lunatic and what some readers here were espousing, so lemme ask the question:

\What morel standing do we have to criticize this guy in here, given how many of our own readers are looking at this and agreeing with him?

johnathan

August 11th, 2010

Lindoro,

Very true indeed. A sad observation, but true indeed

Mark F.

August 11th, 2010

“Who else on earth would have the brass balls to propose that we institute a religious litmus test for immigrants, based on whether or not their religion is likely to support gay marriage?”

A lot of conservatives favor eliminating immigration from countries which have a lot of Muslims. Which would be quite legal, in fact. I don’t think a religious test would be.

lurker

August 11th, 2010

“There is no such thing as freedom of religion in Islam, and it is sheer and utter folly for Americans to delude themselves into thinking otherwise.”

Um. there is no such thing as “freedom of religion” in Christianity, either. That would be a *secualar* thing, i.e., the Constitution.

What dingbats.

Lynn David

August 12th, 2010

The only ones who should deserve a Bryan Fischer award would possibly be the FRC’s Perkins and that Kincaid fool…. er, Cliff Kincaid, that is.

I wonder what Bryan Fischer would have to say about the Christian Identity or militia movements in his home state of Idaho.

KZ

August 12th, 2010

May be a Bryan Fischer award could be given whenever someone earns a number of LaBarbera awards. I know Fischer has at least two concerning the Prop 8 ruling and his “homosexual-acts-are-domestic-terrorism” statement. I think he has another one from earlier this year.

Trencherbone

August 12th, 2010

The Muslims have made a major tactical blunder with the Ground Zero Victory Mosque, and we Islamically-aware counterjihadists need to use it and strike while the iron is hot. The Muslim grand strategy requires incremental creeping Sharia and supremacism, where Islam insidiously takes over and slowly destroys Western civilization by a thousand cuts. Every advance should be so small that the ‘najis kafir sons of pigs and monkeys’ (that’s us, folks!) either don’t notice it, or can’t be bothered to oppose such a minor irritation.

But this abomination has half awoken the sleeping giant of American Public Opinion. We need to keep prodding the giant to prevent him falling back to sleep, and hopefully get him to awake fully. To do this we need to spread our message beyond the counter-jihadist blogosphere, using local media and social networks etc.

We also need to link the Mosque issue to the general problems of Islamic supremacism in as many ways as possible, a full list of topics can be found here: http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/everything-you-need-to-know-about-islam.html

A particular example that most Americans will be unaware of is the Islamic motivation for the Beslan child-rape orgy and massacre, the sixth anniversary of which approaches. The MSM went to great lengths to cover up both the vileness of the sexual tortures, and the Muslim involvement and Islamic doctrinal basis of this attack on kafir children http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/beslan-child-rape-torture-enforced.html

Although Beslan did not produce the greatest number of casualties of the current jihad, it exceeds all others in its sadism and depravity, and graphically illustrates what we have allowed into the West. Please ensure through your blogs and forums that the anniversary of Beslan is not forgotten this year.

Lindoro Almaviva

August 12th, 2010

Like I said, why are we criticizing when so many in our midst agree with the position being criticized. Not long from now we will be known as the gay anti-Muslim blog.

Désirée

August 12th, 2010

Lindoro, why is being opposed to Islam not allowed? I oppose Islam just as oppose Christianity – both are delusional states of mind. Do I want a Mosque 2 blocks from ground zero? no. Can I do anything about it legally? no. Can I voice my opinion that it is a bad idea without it being racist or bigoted? Absolutely. Disliking Islam does not make me a bigot or on par with the homophobes who try to use force of law to put us down. Why must you insist that every negative word spoken about Islam is indicative of bigotry?

L. Junius Brutus

August 12th, 2010

Islam has a special status. You can be against Christianity, Mormonism, Scientology, conservatism, communism, but not Islam. If you are, then you’re a racist, even though Islam is not a race. And even though Islam’s founder said that gay people should be killed, we have to like and love the Islam that he created, and consider him a great and wonderful man.

The funny thing is, I bet that most people who demean and disparage the families of the victims who oppose this Ground Zero mosque (even going so far as to call them and the other 80% of Americans stupid, bigoted and/or ignorant), because the mosque builders have a legal right to build it; would probably be outraged if anyone published cartoons that “offended” Muslims, even though the cartoon-publishers have a legal right to do just that. It doesn’t matter when families of the victims of 9/11 are offended, but it sure as hell does matter when Muslims get offended.

Flame away at this inconvenient truth.

Ben Mathis

August 12th, 2010

Criticism about Islam is racist when you don´t know anything about the religion. Far more harm has been done in the name of Christianity over the centuries yet we will judge those people on an individual basis because they tend to be white and western, but all of Islam gets lumped in one basket because, well, “browns”.

9/11 was far more the fault of American “Christians” who support the war in the middle east than it is of Islam. Hope that helps.

Jim Burroway

August 12th, 2010

Bryan Fischer’s views are no longer relegated to the lunatic fringe (with apologies to people with mental illness). Just last night while I was at the gym, I saw Newt Gingrich last night announcing his opposition to building ANY mosques ANYWHERE in American.

This is not the fringe. This is becoming mainstream, First Amendment be damned. Gingrich is actually urging our nation to emulate Saudi Arabia. Each and every one of us should be outraged by that suggestion. But I suspect instead that Gingrich will end up getting a lot of votes when he runs for President in 2012.

When I said in another thread that American society is becoming increasingly xenophobic in the past nine years, I meant it. This is just one more piece of supporting evidence. These sentiments would be unrecognizable among our founding fathers.

L. Junius Brutus

August 12th, 2010

Ben: “Criticism about Islam is racist when you don´t know anything about the religion.”

But the more people learn about Islam, the less they like it. I did not regard Islam negatively 10 years ago, when I knew nothing about it, but now I do.

“Far more harm has been done in the name of Christianity over the centuries”

Uh, yeah, but Christianity got its act together, and now, Christian countries are the most civilized countries in the world. The same cannot be said of Islamic countries. Quite the contrary, the 7 countries that have the death penalty for you and me are all Islamic countries.

Oops, sorry, I forgot that it’s racist to criticize Islam.

“9/11 was far more the fault of American “Christians” who support the war in the middle east than it is of Islam. Hope that helps.”

It helped me realize that you are a spewer of bullcrap.

Jim: “This is becoming mainstream, First Amendment be damned.”

How about treating religion like very other belief system? No special rights for religion. It prevents us from doing anything when religion goes wrong. The only reason that Scientology can’t be outlawed as a racket/criminal organization (the way Germany does), is because it masquerades as a religion.

“But I suspect instead that Gingrich will end up getting a lot of votes when he runs for President in 2012.”

Maybe in the Republican primary. For reasons wholly non-mosque-related, he can’t win the general election.

Priya Lynn

August 12th, 2010

Lindoro said “why are we criticizing when so many in our midst agree with the position being criticized.”.

I don’t agree with the position being criticized and I have no responsibility for those that do so it is right and correct for me to criticize that position regardless of those who agree with it.

Junius said “And even though Islam’s founder said that gay people should be killed, we have to like and love the Islam that he created, and consider him a great and wonderful man.”.

The Christian god said gays should be killed and yet we’re supposed to pretend he’s loving and just.

Junius said “The funny thing is, I bet that most people who demean and disparage the families of the victims who oppose this Ground Zero mosque (even going so far as to call them and the other 80% of Americans stupid, bigoted and/or ignorant), because the mosque builders have a legal right to build it; would probably be outraged if anyone published cartoons that “offended” Muslims, even though the cartoon-publishers have a legal right to do just that. It doesn’t matter when families of the victims of 9/11 are offended, but it sure as hell does matter when Muslims get offended.

Flame away at this inconvenient truth.”.

No truth in anything you said. Once again you lie saying we called those in opposition stupid which we did not and I applaud the people who printed the cartoons Muslims find offensive. You are the most truth challenged gay supporter on this blog.

Priya Lynn

August 12th, 2010

I take back my last sentence. The anti-atheist poster David is the most truth challenged, Junius is #2.

L. Junius Brutus

August 12th, 2010

“The Christian god said gays should be killed and yet we’re supposed to pretend he’s loving and just.”

Most Christians do not regard Leviticus as God’s word, only the minority fundamentalists do. Moreover, people do not get death threats when they criticize the Christian god, and there aren’t any terrorist attacks on them, either. The same is not true of people who criticize or mock Muhammad, or even draw a cartoon of that man, like Kurt Westergaard.

“No truth in anything you said. Once again you lie saying we called those in opposition stupid which we did not and I applaud the people who printed the cartoons Muslims find offensive. You are the most truth challenged gay supporter on this blog.”

*You* did not call those opposed stupid, but Emily did. I quote:

“Moi: Keep on dreaming, with your 20% support. Apparently, everyone but the 20% you belong to is completely bigoted and ignorant.

Emily: yes, they are. Intelligent people have always been in the minority, Brutus. I’m thankful to be on the right side.”

As for the cartoons issue, I applaud you for your consistent position. However, consistency is not the rule among the politically correct, but rather the exception.

Désirée

August 12th, 2010

so Ben, is my criticism of the religion valid because I do know something about it? Because I was a religious studies student in school, focusing on western relgion (Christianity, Judaism and Islam). Once again, criticism bigotry. If you believe otherwise, there is no point ever having a discussion about anything. If that were true, then Roger Ebert is the biggest bigot on the planet.

Why not try having a discussion about a legitimate criticism without waving around the “bigot” hammer as if that automatically wins the debate for your side.

Désirée

August 12th, 2010

there was supposed to be a not equals sign between “criticism” and “bigotry” there, but I guess the board doesn’t like those symbols

Jason D

August 12th, 2010

“Uh, yeah, but Christianity got its act together, and now, Christian countries are the most civilized countries in the world.”

Actually the most prosperous, civilized, and gay friendly countries appear to be the least religious.
http://www.alternet.org/belief/144174/is_belief_in_god_hurting_america/

And count me as one who both understood why certain muslims were offended, but totally agreed the cartoonists had a right to express themselves.

And for the record, I do have a problem with terrorism and theocratic dominionists, however it’s ridiculous to lump all people of X faith into one box just as it would be to lump all gay people in one box. I have christian friends precisely because I’m smart enough not to lump them in with AFA or Fred Phelps. Why people suspend rational arguments when it comes to Islam is beyond me.

Désirée

August 12th, 2010

but this discussion wasn’t about Islam, or all Muslims. It was specifically about the goals and motivations of those particular Muslims building a mosque near ground zero. But according to some, criticizing anything any Muslim does is bigoted, thus shutting down any reasonable discussion and turning the whole thing into an us vs. them internet flame war just waiting for Godwin’s Law to get invoked.

L. Junius Brutus

August 12th, 2010

Jason D: “Actually the most prosperous, civilized, and gay friendly countries appear to be the least religious.”

That does not surprise me. However, there seems to be a definite correlation between Islam and intolerance. Intolerance of other religions, of sexual orientation and of women’s rights. All countries that allow gay marriage are at least (nominally) majority Christian. Very few Christian countries criminalize homosexuality, whereas only two (Indonesia and Turkey) Islamic countries do not criminalize it, and all seven countries that punish homosexuality with death are Islamic countries. Islamic minorities in Europe are almost uniquely intolerant of homosexuality. Think of Amsterdam, once a tolerant gay Mecca (no pun intended), now gay people have to fear for their lives, because of the influx of Islamic immigrants.

“And count me as one who both understood why certain muslims were offended, but totally agreed the cartoonists had a right to express themselves.”

Good to know.

“I have christian friends precisely because I’m smart enough not to lump them in with AFA or Fred Phelps. ”

AFA and Fred Phelps are acting the way Jesus did not, while violent Islamic extremists are acting the way Muhammad did act. He was a warlord who waged war to expand Islam, and so did all of his successors. He also killed his critics and commanded his followers to kill a myriad of people, including homosexuals. So I do think that there is a fundamental difference between those two religions, both in theology and in practice (as you can see in the statistics I mentioned earlier).

Chris McCoy

August 12th, 2010

Some people seem to have a real hard time understanding the meaning of this word. So I’ll repeat it again.

Bigot: noun
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially
: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

If you are intolerant of Islam and/or Muslims, you are a bigot.
If you are intolerant of Christianity and/or Christians, you are a bigot.
If you are intolerant of BGLTs, you are a bigot.

Is is possible to criticize something/someone without being a bigot? Certainly.

When does criticism cross the line into bigotry? I think an obvious example is what Tim pointed out in the Original Post with Bryan Fischer’s remark that Muslims should not be allowed the 1st Amendment rights to freedom of religion and freedom of association.

Do bigots have the right to voice their bigotry? Sure, they have the same rights to free speech as anyone else.

However, the right to free speech does not include the right not to be counter-criticized, and it does not mean you cannot have your ideas called out as bigotry if they are. As the saying goes, it’s not libel if it’s true.

Is all bigotry wrong? I would point out that most people believe that child molestation is wrong, and that being intolerant of child molestation and child molesters, is universally considered morally sound, is also by definition, bigotry.

Timothy Kincaid

August 12th, 2010

This is not the fringe. This is becoming mainstream, First Amendment be damned. Gingrich is actually urging our nation to emulate Saudi Arabia. Each and every one of us should be outraged by that suggestion. But I suspect instead that Gingrich will end up getting a lot of votes when he runs for President in 2012.

I think that has the potential to hurt him with a lot of actively religious folk. They may not like Islam or the Moslems, but they aren’t too fond of the idea of churches being banned.

L. Junius Brutus

August 12th, 2010

Chris McCoy: “Some people seem to have a real hard time understanding the meaning of this word. So I’ll repeat it again.”

Some people need to read definitions they look up before they post them here, to see whether they are actually applicable to the case at hand.

“If you are intolerant of Islam and/or Muslims, you are a bigot.”

If you are intolerant of conservatism and/or conservatives, you are a bigot.

“If you are intolerant of BGLTs, you are a bigot.”

I am intolerant of BLTs. Am I a bigot? I am lactose intolerant. Am I a bigot?

By the way, you don’t define intolerance. What is intolerance of an ideology, like conservatism or Islam?

“However, the right to free speech does not include the right not to be counter-criticized, and it does not mean you cannot have your ideas called out as bigotry if they are.”

Uh… duuuuuuh. Thank you for that, Captain Obvious. By the way, according to your own reasoning, people who are intolerant of bigots are also bigots. I guess everyone is a bigot! Bigots of the world, unite, so that there can be peace and harmony in the whole world!

Richard Rush

August 13th, 2010

Some things need to be repeated . . . L. Junius Brutus said:

Think of Amsterdam, once a tolerant gay Mecca (no pun intended), now gay people have to fear for their lives, because of the influx of Islamic immigrants.

While I believe the U.S. should severely restrict the immigration of Muslims, the U.S. must also assure that Muslims who are U.S. citizen (or who are otherwise here legally) receive all the rights and protections accorded by the constitution, including the right to build mosques. Bryan Fischer needs to have his nose rubbed in the fact that “freedom of religion” in the U.S. applies to everyone. But, as an aside, I suspect that a mosque full of average Muslims would make the American Family Association look like Liberals.

Emily K

August 13th, 2010

I am intolerant of BLTs. Am I a bigot? I am lactose intolerant. Am I a bigot?

Uh… duuuuuuh. Thank you for that, Captain Obvious.

Bigots of the world, unite, so that there can be peace and harmony in the whole world!

Brutus, please step back and take a chill pill. I don’t know why people disagreeing with you on this topic has you this upset that you need to respond to every single person with increasingly sarcastic and pointless remarks. It doesn’t further meaningful conversation.

Maybe you’re upset at people calling you a bigot. Well, join the club (of which Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown are members). Either way, if you are so sure you are correct, and so sure you are NOT a bigot, then you will feel confident enough to cease insisting as such. Because you aren’t going to convince anybody who opposes you here, just as nobody is going to convince you. So just save your energy and go lobby congress about placing a religious test on immigrants or something, as Richard Rush and Bryan Fischer have advocated. Talk is cheap.

Something’s got a very special hold on you with this subject matter and I don’t know what that is. Nor do I really care, frankly. But it must be something big and terrible.

Ok, everyone can resume their bickering. I’m out.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

 

Latest Posts

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Emphasis Mine

Today In History, 1948: "Homosexual Ring Broken Up" At Mizzou

Today In History, 1960: Daughters of Bilitis Hold First National Convention

Today In History, 1969: "One Profession Frowned Upon In Hollywood"

Today In History, 1993: Russia Decriminalizes Homosexuality

Born On This Day, 1927: Marijane Meaker

House GOP Caucus Heard "Homosexuals Worthy Of Death" Verse Before Spending Bill Vote

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.