"If Western civilization hadn’t already committed suicide, we wouldn’t be facing defeat."

Yesterday, tim the Godless Heathen excerpted pieces of Pam Geller's response to her critics. I responded in the comments:

There's a huge part of me Tim that finds Pam's point of view troubling. I'll see if I can articulate why.

Think about the idiots recently who were stomping on the flag. Freedom of speech would suggest that they have the right to do what they did, as offensive to the rest of us as it might be. But should they?

I think the answer is clearly no.

Think of the artist years ago who dropped a crucifix in a jar of urine, piss Christ I think is what the exhibit was called... the artist had every right to put this on display but... should he have?

Pam Geller has every right to do what she's done... but... should she have?

I have to believe... to be consistent... that she should not have.

And this is where she and I part ways.

I understand her intent... I disagree with her methods.

I would care very little for those who might desecrate the Virgin Mary or Jesus Christ... so I can understand those who find problems with desecrating the prophet Muhammad.

I think there are better ways to get our points across.

Much better, more dignified, ways than the ways Ms. Geller is employing.

This morning, I awake to Tom McDonald saying pretty much the same thing, only more eloquently, more effectively, and with a broader point:

A foreign enemy attempted to commit an act of violence against law-abiding American citizens on American soil. This was the reaction Pamela Geller expected and wanted, and this was the one she got. She is now a marked woman. That is a direct and predictable consequence of a freely chosen action. She owns that now and for the rest of her life.

There was no point to the action, but then again there’s no point to Corpus Christi or the Vagina Monologues or other works of hate and foolishness. They’re simply the emotional spasms of a dying culture. I don’t choose to communicate that way, and I think it’s wrong. I respond by ignoring it. They exercise their rights to free speech, and I exercise my right to ignore them. The vast majority of Muslims do the same.

Geller’s problem is that she’ll cheerfully kick 99% of the Muslims in the face in order to find the two guys who will kick back. That’s not really much of a strategy for winning a culture war, but right now it’s all anybody seems willing to do. You don’t stir a hornet’s nest and walk away without a few stings, even in America, even under the protection of the First Amendment. What you have to do is find a better way to deal with hornets than poking their nest.

This is a war the jihadists will win. If Western civilization hadn’t already committed suicide, we wouldn’t be facing defeat. Secularism, socialism, political correctness, sexual insanity, and demographic freefall have already written the final chapter of Europe, and I don’t see America recovering from its current death spiral. Only a healthy religion can drive out a diseased one. We’re too weak and fractured to resist for long.

We had a healthy religion, and we traded it for cheap goods, easy sex, and mindless distractions. We had the Gospel, and we gave it up for dollar stores, gay “marriage” and no-fault divorce, and reality TV. Worst of all, the people of Christ gave up the core of their faith in a sad attempt to fit in with a culture that will always hate them. Hell, at least the Indians got some beads for Manhattan. What do Christians have to show for their craven capitulation?

So, no: we’re not coming back from this. The most we can do is spit in the eye of the enemy as he bayonets us.

Tom's got more, including an update responding to those who think him to be an apologist for jihad.

I think him to be a prophet of sorts while hoping he's wrong.

God help us, draw us unto Yourself, help us defeat this enemy Your way.

Amen.

Comments

[Lands’nGrooves]

Sorry, Rick,you know I'm gonn'a take issue with this.

Let’s examine what is being considered here to be offensive or mockery. Its cartoons. Did you see the picture in the story? That’s the winning cartoon of Geller’s contest . Do you think that is offensive? And let’s also be clear, any depiction of Mohammed is considered offensive. Any drawing, any painting, anything, no matter the intent or purpose. Even those with the best of intentions is considered wrong. I believe Mo is depicted on the capital building. IS that wrong?

And by the way, the Koran does not cover this. From my understanding the Taliban in 2001 instituted the ban on depicting Mo. So when you lump in drawing Mo with anything else of offensive nature in regards to religion sensitivity please remember and consider that.

“This was the reaction Pamela Geller expected and wanted, and this was the one she got.”

That is beyond silly. I’m pretty sure Geller didn’t want to be killed.

“I don’t choose to communicate that way, and I think it’s wrong. I respond by ignoring it.”

And that’s the proper way to respond. That’s how I feel about flag burners. They don’t deserve a second of my attention. Certainly not trying to kill them.

“What you have to do is find a better way to deal with hornets than poking their nest.”

Ah yes, don’t screw with people who may kill you for offending them. Screw that, they deserve to be mocked. Just for being so easily offended. That and wanting us all dead.

And that “hornet’s nest” is the reason we should all be standing with Geller. These murderous lunatics will kill over a cartoon, we should all offended by that. Certainly not taking their side. And that’s exactly what you do when you say “Yes, free speech is cool BUT….” No! Wrong! Free speech is also the right to offend.

Muslims are offending by the mere existence of Jews and Christians and homosexuals. What should we do? Allow them to do what exactly? Kill them all? Just like they do?

“This is a war the jihadists will win.”

Yup, if more and more people agree with Mr. McDonald in regards to not offending Muslims by merely drawing a picture.

“The most we can do is spit in the eye of the enemy as he bayonets us.”

Ironic coming from someone who doesn’t dare “offend”. Wouldn’t want to be in the foxhole with him or his spine of jello.

tim aka The Godless Heathen

[Rick]

I continue to believe that we're on the same side of this tim... the side that believes jihadists must be defeated... yet it's also clear that we disagree on tactics.

The idea that people should be killed because of the offense taken over a cartoon is abhorrent. I think we agree.

But it's the idea that needs to be defeated and not necessarily the people holding to the idea.

Ideas are defeated by better ideas. And that's the challenge.

The risk of defeating the people, rather than the ideas or notions those same people are clinging to, is that we become like those people. We can't afford to stoop to that level.

This is where the rubber meets the road and where our differences in essence lie.

According to my Christian beliefs, beliefs that are admittedly challenging, all people are created by God with inherent dignity, a dignity deserving of our respect. We need not respect an abhorrent ideal held by those people but we must respect the dignity of the persons holding the abhorrent ideals.

This doesn't mean that we roll over particularly if threatened. Just War theory exists for a reason. But neither does it mean that in the attempt to counter an abhorrent idea, we offend the vast majority of those who might also find the idea abhorrent.

Rather than have to kill the nearly 2 billion Muslims in the world to solve this problem, which I think is the end result of Pam Geller's tactics, we need to figure out a way to have Muslims police their own and convince the sensible to convince the unsensible.

All I have time for at the moment.