I have never liked John Stewart. He isn’t funny, and is worshipped for having a team of writers who tell him to say supposedly funny things. Most of all, his views suck, are totally biased, not well-reasoned (but do make for good punch lines), and are the reason why college students have the inability to think for themselves – they are so entertaining that students think his one-liners can and should be their only source of news and political discourse. But I don’t like pure ad hominems, so let’s look at the latest gem from Mr. Stewart.
I ran across this video this morning on Reddit, which everybody is saying is the best thing ever said about the Ground Zero Mosque situation:
|The Daily Show With Jon Stewart||Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c|
This is what caught my attention: “There is a difference between what you can do and what you should do. For instance, you can build a Catholic church next to a playground. Should you?”
Maybe funny, except factually misleading and dangerously short-sighted…
Priests molest at the same or a lower rate than the rest of the population. Don’t believe me? Good myths never die, especially when they are aimed at the Church. They are fun for the butt of jokes, but the reality is that people who love to slam the Church with the whole priests pedophelia thing are showing a particular anti-Catholic bias that (almost) always is accompanied by a defense of Islam. I know that Islam has radicals who are not the main proponents of the religion. But the Church ALWAYS is forced by the media and left to claim its worst followers. And that accountability is a good thing, but it could not be escaped if the Church tried its damnest. But let’s make a distinction here, between Catholicism and its molesters and Islam and its suicidal zealots. No one believes touching little kids inappropriately is okay. No one is out there furthering the idea that touching kids in the name of Christ will get you to heaven. The core beliefs of the system vastly contradict the actions of the fully human priests that sin in such a disgusting manner. But that is not so with Islam and radicalism. Sure, maybe Islam doesn’t fully support suicide bombings, eradication of infidels, and the mistreatment of women. But it allows such belief to persist as okay in many societies, and does not fully contradict those beliefs in a way that meaningfully provides a deterrent to such dogmatic creations. It is belief versus behavior. None believe the Catholic molester’s behavior is okay. Islam has (I will be generous and estimate 1% of Islam is radical – which I have heard even 20% is) over 20 million radical zealots abusing women, seeking the death or conquer of all others on the planet, and generally wishing harm upon humanity that does not abide within its corrupt depth, all as [apparently] plausible belief. (Don’t believe me?)…
But I digress. Okay, so the mosque itself: I think building it is insensitive. I also don’t really buy the idea that “Islam is reaching out to the West” by doing this. If Muslims wanted to reach out to the West, they’d give money to build a social utility, fund a charity, or do something useful instead of trying to spread their religion further into the world under the guise of “reaching out to the West.” But it is a slap in the face, to the people of NY and to the whole country, especially since Islam has not claimed the radicals and attempted significant reform from within. That being said, I don’t think this should (or can) be struck down in court. The First Amendment should protect religions, and ensure that we all have the ability to worship as we will. But that doesn’t mean I don’t think many Muslims and Lefties are assholes for wanting this thing to be put up…
Finally, if Obama says “Let me be clear” one more time, I am going to scream.