Republicans think of a brilliant way to get back at Muslims


by Sunny
11th August, 2010 at 9:07 am    

Conservatives in the United States are very happy that a Mosque is being built in the loose vicinity of ‘Ground Zero’. Hence the Ground Zero Mosque ‘controversy’. So yesterday the wingnuts thought of a brilliant way to get back at Muslims.

They’d build a gay bar next to the Mosque! LOLZ! ROFL!!!!1! etc

What a great idea! Even libertarians like Megan McArdle think its “brilliant”. Muslims hate gays right, so why not test their tolerance? It’s not like Republicans have anything against gays… *cough*. Fox News loved it. They invited their host Greg Gutfield – who came up with the plan – to talk about it all over other shows.

There’s only one problem, which hasn’t quite penetrated the wingnut world yet….

there are already three gay bars right close to the Muslims centre being built.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Humour,United States






46 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. sunny hundal

    Blog post:: Republicans think of a brilliant way to get back at Muslims http://bit.ly/9FrNNi


  2. Philip Evans

    RT @sunny_hundal: Blog post:: Republicans think of a brilliant way to get back at Muslims http://bit.ly/9FrNNi


  3. Greg Eden

    RT @sunny_hundal: Blog post:: Republicans think of a brilliant way to get back at Muslims http://bit.ly/9FrNNi


  4. Benito Aramando

    RT: @sunny_hundal: Blog post:: Republicans think of a brilliant way to get back at Muslims http://bit.ly/9FrNNi


  5. ‘Uncle Ted’ Stevens helped shape Alaska North Capitol Street

    [...] Pickled Politics » Republicans think of a brilliant way to get … [...]


  6. Lee Woodruff: College Advice Blog, Part II: Drop-Off Day North Capitol Street

    [...] Pickled Politics » Republicans think of a brilliant way to get … [...]




  1. Reuben — on 11th August, 2010 at 9:43 am  

    Owned!

  2. AJ — on 11th August, 2010 at 9:47 am  

    Sunny,

    the majority of new yorkers oppose the centre, and i’m sure an even larger majority of americans outside new york oppose it.

    are they all “wingnuts”?

  3. Sarah AB — on 11th August, 2010 at 10:14 am  

    Sunny – the overarching reason for supporting (or not opposing) the mosque, for me, is the fact that it would be completely legal. I’d support (or not oppose) the bar for the same reason then I guess! I think this ‘gay bar plan’ involved catering for gay Muslims by having alcohol free zones which made it distinctive from the area’s other gay bars.

  4. Bored in Kavanagasau — on 11th August, 2010 at 12:12 pm  

    There are about 100 mosques in New York. One extra mosque whose planning permission is either declined or accepted will not make a significant impact on judging America’s tradition and practice of religious pluralism which is vastly superior to most, if not all, other nations in the world. In London, there are about 120 mosques for ~600,000 Muslims. How many churches are there in Saudi Arabia which has a similar number of Filipino christians as there are Muslims in New York? It is zero. I believe they may be the largest single population in any country without a related house of prayer (China may have a few candidates) and so they are surely more worthy of attention than New York’s Muslims who are relatively knee-deep in mosques. As I believe you have an interest in religious freedom and pluralism in other countries, why don’t you test the commitment of British Muslims to religious pluralism and tolerance by asking them to boycott Hajj until a decent number of churches are built in KSA for working-class Filipinos, not just a token one to provide photo oppportunities of the royal family with foreign dignataries. It would also make a nice change for the gradient of Islamic influence to go from Britain to Saudi Arabia.

  5. joe90 — on 11th August, 2010 at 12:51 pm  

    post #4

    your comparing new york city to saudi arabia which is a dictatorship style monarchy.

    There are over 6000 churches in new york, should we close some of them down and prevent new ones because Christians are knee deep in churches?

  6. platinum786 — on 11th August, 2010 at 1:15 pm  

    ^^^ Well said Joe.

    Some people need to decide whether they’re a democratic state or a monarchy/dictatorship.

    KSA has never claimed to be a secular country. It’s never claimed to be free and liberal and democratic. Change the constitution and become like them if you want.

    I support the right to open a gay bar next to the Mosque. You can’t catch gay from the air.

  7. alex the awesome — on 11th August, 2010 at 1:42 pm  

    Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, and a good number of people at HP would love to be able to emulate Saudi Arabia in an ultra rightwing Christian way. The Constitution isn’t for Muslims donchaknow.

  8. Refresh — on 11th August, 2010 at 1:49 pm  

    @ #7

    Part of the problem is Newt (and a broad spectrum of their political elite) like the Saudis and others to have the sort of constitutions that they have. Its a far more productive arrangement than democracy.

  9. Marie S — on 11th August, 2010 at 2:11 pm  

    “your comparing new york city to saudi arabia which is a dictatorship style monarchy.”

    Yes he is. So what? The fact that Saudi is a repressive and intolerant country doesn’t give it some entitlement to carry on being a repressive and intolerant country.

    “KSA has never claimed to be a secular country. It’s never claimed to be free and liberal and democratic.”

    Hitler never claimed he didn’t hate Jews. What’s your point? That repression is somehow less objectionable in a country if it doesn’t call itself a democracy?

    Riddle me this. Who’s worse:

    1. a man who claims to respect women but who cheats on his wife and laughs at crude sexist jokes.

    2. A man who makes no pretence to respecting women, and who rapes and murders one.

    You’re struggling with that, aren’t you? Never mind the women – leave them out of the equation, they are completely unimportant, aren’t they? It’s all about relative purity of motive for you, not about the effects of people’s actions on others. You have the narcissistic morality of a child.

  10. Kismet Hardy — on 11th August, 2010 at 2:13 pm  

    Why stop at a gay bar? Open up a strip club, and a gambling arena (called Mecca, obviously), and a crack house while they’re at it. But then everyday New Yorkers are used to those sights. The only answer is opening up another mosque. One shia, one sunni. Let them fight each other to the death

  11. Sunny — on 11th August, 2010 at 2:29 pm  

    I think this ‘gay bar plan’ involved catering for gay Muslims by having alcohol free zones which made it distinctive from the area’s other gay bars.

    A gay bar with alcohol free zones? Brilliant. I can see that lasting as a commercial business for about…. 1 week?

    It’ll be funny to watch Greg Gutfield loose money over this too. I can’t for these dumb wingnuts to go through with it.

  12. joe90 — on 11th August, 2010 at 3:22 pm  

    post #9

    Saudi arabia is a dictatorship in all but name, does not give it the right to oppress anyone. You missed the point completely but do carry on with your rant its quite amusing.

  13. boyo — on 11th August, 2010 at 4:50 pm  

    Why would anyone want to open a mosque at ground zero? Are Muslims particularly ill-served in that area? I appreciate that in our relativistic world whereby ‘feelings’ are deemed fundamentally reactionary it is absurd for me to posit this, but isnt it simply crass and insensitive, or actually designed to be provocative?

    I dont know the background so perhaps it is over-stated but there does seem to be a tendency for certain Muslim groups to call the West’s bluff, and perhaps this is a good example. Ask yourself this – when the West had a surer idea of itself say 50 years ago and had a similar thing happened would this even have been considered? But we’ve moved on from then, haven’t we. We are so much, much cleverer…

  14. Soso — on 11th August, 2010 at 5:14 pm  

    I do find it odd and quite hypocritical that the same Msulims constantly invoking islamophobia, and constantly invoking their sacro-sanct religious freedom say absolutely nothing at all about the fact their holiest shrines are located in a religious-apartheid hell-hole where apostasy is lunishable by death.

    How come this same gang that rings its hand about religious pluralism in The West refuses to organise a boycott of the haj until such time as Saudi Arabia allows the free practice of other faiths?

    The adherents to a religion headquartered in a religious-apartheid hellhole complain about a lack of spiritual pluralism in New York, a mere city, YET ONE THAT ALREADY COUNTS MORE THAN A HUNDRED MOSQUES.

    What shallow and superficial hypocrites they are.

  15. damon — on 11th August, 2010 at 5:14 pm  

    Boyo, objecting to an islamic center in the vicinity of ground zero is like someone objecting to having a christian center near the site of David Koresh’s mad Branch Davidian religious sect headquaters which imploded in Waco Texas in 1993.

    I do like the idea of muslims boycotting Mecca though – in protest at the sectarianism of the Saudi government.
    Maybe some muslims on Hajj could even go there and shin up some lampposts like people did during the Bejing olympics and unfurl banners calling for rights for religious minorities.

  16. sonia — on 11th August, 2010 at 5:23 pm  

    Heh good one

  17. boyo — on 11th August, 2010 at 5:36 pm  

    i dont get the koresh thing really. I think a better example is building a Serbian Orthodox Church at Srebrenica. Yay! I wonder what way PP would jump on that one?

    But like i said, feelings, are somehow no longer acceptable for Westerners, although apparently ok for everyone else. Its a very bourgeois snobbery, althoug you might feel altogether less sophisticated if you had lost a loved one on 9/11.

  18. Bill — on 11th August, 2010 at 6:10 pm  

    Muslims hate gays right, so why not test their tolerance?

    Indeed, why not?

  19. douglas clark — on 11th August, 2010 at 6:10 pm  

    boyo,

    Have you read Rachel North’s book “Out of the Tunnel”?

    If not, I’d recommend it.

  20. douglas clark — on 11th August, 2010 at 6:42 pm  

    boyo @ 17,

    Did you lose a loved one or a relative over 9/11?

    If so, you have my sympathy….

    If not, you are using the grief of other people for your own agenda.

  21. Nick — on 11th August, 2010 at 6:51 pm  

    What’s the definition of ‘close’? I believe State of New York licensing laws forbid establishments serving alcohol from being opened within 200 meters of any place of worship.

  22. joe90 — on 11th August, 2010 at 7:28 pm  

    post #14

    i think you will find performing the hajj is one of the obligations of being a muslim.

    But then with so much hatred to spread i wouldn’t expect you to research some basic facts like that.

  23. An Old Friend — on 11th August, 2010 at 8:02 pm  

    @Boyo

    The West was sure of itself 50 years ago that in the US it was denying blacks and other minorities certain constitutional rights. Fifty years ago was 1960s right? The Civil Rights Act wasnt passed until 1964 I believe.

  24. An Old Friend — on 11th August, 2010 at 8:07 pm  

    @boyo,

    ” I think a better example is building a Serbian Orthodox Church at Srebrenica.”

    Why not? If the stated aim of the Church was to eschew al feelings that lef up to Srebrenica and to work for a more cohesive society, I would deem it mandatory. Maybe south African blacks should have chucked out all of its white residents after apartheid ended. Instead they have a truth and reconciliation. Why cant this centre be about truth and reconciliation? These peoples are New Yorkers too. They too are mourning more so than you as a European should be. They were victims of Al Qaida too.

  25. An Old Friend — on 11th August, 2010 at 8:12 pm  

    @Soso,

    “How come this same gang that rings its hand about religious pluralism in The West refuses to organise a boycott of the haj until such time as Saudi Arabia allows the free practice of other faiths?”

    The same reason why people generally have very little to say about the goings on in KSA unless we are preparing for war. What goes on in KSA is far worse than what happens in Iran but Iran gets far more press about its human rights abuses. Why? KSA wasnt even on the axis of evil list. Iran, Iraq, and Syria were. Places that have far greater religious freedoms for its minorities, and women, than KSA.

  26. An Old Friend — on 11th August, 2010 at 8:14 pm  

    Anyway, forget opening up a gay bar, why not open up a gay wedding chapel. I know those people are the Cordoba House will not stand for that.

  27. KB Player — on 11th August, 2010 at 8:18 pm  

    http://www.slate.com/id/2263334/

    Good piece by Hitchens on the idiotic tactics of those opposing the Islamic centre.

    The dispute over the construction of an Islamic center at “Ground Zero” in Lower Manhattan has now sunk to a level of stupidity that really does shame the memory and the victims of that terrible day in September 2001. One might think that a mosque or madrassa was being proposed in the place of the fallen towers themselves or atop the atomized ingredients of what was once a mass grave. (In point of fact, the best we have been able to do with the actual site, after almost a decade, is to create a huge, noisy, and dirty pit with almost no visible architectural progress. Perhaps resentment at the relative speed of the proposed Cordoba House is a subconscious by-product of embarrassment at this local and national disgrace.)

  28. Ravi Naik — on 11th August, 2010 at 9:14 pm  

    But like i said, feelings, are somehow no longer acceptable for Westerners, although apparently ok for everyone else. Its a very bourgeois snobbery

    How does “feelings” work in regards to the most basic freedoms? The only way it can be offensive is if you believe that all Muslims are terrorists, and should be sanitised from that area. The most embarrassing fact for those who think like you, is that this Muslim centre is moderate (the name Cordoba was given for a time and a place where Christians, Jews and Muslims lived peacefully) and advocates the kind of things that Osama Bin Laden abhors.

  29. KJB — on 11th August, 2010 at 10:00 pm  

    Its a very bourgeois snobbery, althoug you might feel altogether less sophisticated if you had lost a loved one on 9/11.

    Um… you do realise that Muslims were among the 9/11 victims, right?

    And yes, I do realise that a Muslim woman has decried the building of the mosque, before anyone tries to pull that one out.

  30. boyo — on 12th August, 2010 at 6:55 am  

    Ravi, you surprise me! But your response encapsulates my point – you can only have a problem with this if you are a genocidal racist!

    Fan of free speech did you say? Like the GDR was democratic.

    I understand this Cordoba is different from the other, but yours is only one interpretaion. Cordoba also stands for Muslim domination of Europe, or am i, dreadful genocidal racist that i am, alone in seeing it that way? Was Cordoba instead some cuddly multi-confessional compound?

    In any case, i am not ‘opposed’ to it – really there are more important things – but neither do i refuse to ignore the complex responses and motivations involved. To pretend otherwise is to be deliberatey obtuse, or ignorant.

  31. damon — on 12th August, 2010 at 9:52 am  

    Boyo, if the David Koresh example didn’t work (they were a christian sect, so you could blame christians for it) – another might be someone objecting to a catholic church near the site where the IRA had set off a bomb that had killed innocent people.
    I presume you’d say that that was nonsense and you couldn’t blame catholics for the actions of the IRA.

    And I would oppose people rejecting an orthodox church in Srebrenica. That view endorses sectarianism.
    The same as I would of people who oppose the building of a mosque in Belfast.

  32. douglas clark — on 12th August, 2010 at 10:22 am  

    “How come this same gang that rings its hand about religious pluralism in The West refuses to organise a boycott of the haj until such time as Saudi Arabia allows the free practice of other faiths?”

    The same reason why people generally have very little to say about the goings on in KSA unless we are preparing for war. What goes on in KSA is far worse than what happens in Iran but Iran gets far more press about its human rights abuses. Why? KSA wasnt even on the axis of evil list. Iran, Iraq, and Syria were. Places that have far greater religious freedoms for its minorities, and women, than KSA.

    Point.

    The silence on the utterly abhorent tactics of the KSA seem to go by this site. I do not understand that…

    Perhaps Sunny or someone, could point me to a reasonably current criticism of the KSA. For I may be forgetting… I am a bear of very little brain.

    Until that evidence is provided, I will be of the opinion that we are all being useful idiots..

    For the KSA is a particularily obnoxious theocracy.

    I think.

  33. joe90 — on 12th August, 2010 at 1:46 pm  

    post#30

    Cordoba also became one of the most advanced cities under islamic rule but i guess you missed that one.

  34. douglas clark — on 12th August, 2010 at 1:49 pm  

    damon @ 31,

    Good point, well made…

  35. douglas clark — on 12th August, 2010 at 2:00 pm  

    Joe 90,

    Was the Muslim takeover of the Iberian Peninsula really seen as a threat to Christian Europe? It doesn’t seem to have been hyped up in quite the same way as, say, the possible fall of Vienna in 1529 or so. I wonder whether the latter is a ‘what if’ that exercises the mind more than the former, which actually happened.

    All quite odd, really.

    I don’t know if this is accurate, but it is interesting:

    http://www.daily49er.com/opinion/our-view-ground-zero-mosque-reaps-political-hypocrisy-1.2302595

  36. 5cc — on 12th August, 2010 at 2:10 pm  

    I love the way discussions about whether Muslims should be stopped from doing something or other quickly degenerate into some people trying to argue that actually two wrongs do make a right.

  37. Ravi Naik — on 12th August, 2010 at 3:02 pm  

    Ravi, you surprise me! But your response encapsulates my point – you can only have a problem with this if you are a genocidal racist!

    Don’t flatter yourself – plain old bigotry and ignorance is all it takes. I find astonishing that we are debating whether an Islamic centre should be built because it offends bigots who are incapable of understanding the difference between atrocious attacks by a terrorist group from a religion practised by a billion people.

  38. alex the awesome — on 12th August, 2010 at 4:00 pm  

    Douglas, comment 35, maybe Westerners (I hate that term but my vocabulary is limited) want to avoid bringing attention to what happened when the Christian rulers took over. Doesn’t really fit the narrative of us being great and them being evil. It’s easier to bring the doom when it involves hypotheticals of course.

    As for KSA there is a great deal of self interest involved. They’re dependent on the West unlike Iran. They don’t (officially) support terrorism to the degree Iran does. The Iranian regime overthrew a pro-Western regime that was a little better than the present one whereas the Saudis are a lot like the Shah was, completely dependent on Western military and diplomatic aid. It doesn’t surprise me governments give the Saudis a free pass considering all this, plus I think it’s easier to kick the Party of Ali than a Sunni power in regional terms.

    Why liberals don’t complain enough? Not sure, maybe we try too hard to save our breath for places where our outrage might register? That’s my take on why Israel cops so much shit in comparison to their much worse neighbours. Double standards are an inconvenient form of flattery? I get overlooking less strategically important states, Burma has minimal influence in the world for example, and on top of this I know that extended family members of mine keep pretty quiet about their homeland because they’re worried if they make a scene they might not be allowed back to visit family and see the important sights (I’m assuming as a non-Muslim being granted hajji status is pretty important to a devout Muslim but I can’t say much on that) so this might explain some reluctance to pick an unwinnable fight with KSA by the random Muslim bloke on the street. Just some disjointed thoughts..

  39. Bill — on 12th August, 2010 at 8:56 pm  

    Conservatives in the United States are very happy that a Mosque is being built in the loose vicinity of ‘Ground Zero’.

    I think you mean “unhappy”. And it’s not just conservatives who are upset, is it? A huge number of New Yorkers have been offended by these plans. Two out of three registered voters in NYC are Democrats.

  40. Bill — on 12th August, 2010 at 8:59 pm  

    Even libertarians like Megan McArdle think its “brilliant”. Muslims hate gays right, so why not test their tolerance? It’s not like Republicans have anything against gays… *cough*. Fox News loved it. They invited their host Greg Gutfield – who came up with the plan – to talk about it all over other shows.

    Megan McArdle and Greg Gutfield are not Republicans. Fox News is not an organ of the GOP. A little less haste in slapping together a partisan dig at GOP might have avoided this sloppiness on your part.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.