OVO

via youtube.

Mr. Condell says (0:22 – 0:53): “People keep framing this as a religious freedom issue.  But there’s a difference between practicing your religion, which everyone has a right to do, and rubbing your religion in people’s faces as a triumphalist political statement, which is what’s happening here.  I’d be interested to know just how bad an insult has to be before it’s no longer protected by the First Amendment.  After all, the Second Amendment gives Americans the right to bear arms.  But in practice you need a permit to walk around packing hardware, and not everyone can get one despite the Second Amendment.”

I enjoy Mr. Condell‘s videos very much and have posted quite a few at ovo127.com.  I have not always agreed with everything he says or how he says it, but the agreement was general enough to post the videos without comment.  This video is an exception.  Here Mr. Condell confuses what is right (moral, respectful, virtuous) with rights (legal status).  And Mr. Condell appears to be suggesting that insults, if they are bad enough, do not deserve First Amendment protection.  I disagree on both counts.  What is legal and what is illegal are not necessarily what is right or what is wrong.  And the most vile of insults are deserving of First Amendment protection.  Otherwise, enjoy the show.

Jim Goad: Planet Islam

For the past 1000 years, the Muslim world has given us almost nothing in the way of math or science. It has, however, given us a slave trade that predated the Atlantic slave trade by seven centuries and shackled nearly twice as many black Africans as the Europeans did – a fact that continues to get lost on black Americans who cozy up to Islam.

Yahoo! News: Afghan Girls Fall Ill After Apparent Gas Poisoning

About 40 schoolgirls became ill and were taken to hospital after a suspected gas poisoning in the Afghan capital Wednesday, another apparent attack by hardline Islamists opposed to female education.

SSC Times: Alshabaab Cuts Tongue

The Mother of Ahmed Ali Shuuke has told the media that her son receives all food through injection and according to her statement he gets fed using the needles often used for injecting Camel herds. [includes photograph of a man with his tongue cut out.]

New York Times: In Bold Display, Taliban Order Stoning Deaths

The Taliban on Sunday ordered their first public executions by stoning since their fall from power nine years ago, killing a young couple who had eloped, according to Afghan officials and a witness.

BBC: Taliban ‘Kill Adulterous Afghan Couple’ in Marketplace

Two witnesses from Mullah Quli told the BBC that the Taliban asked the villagers to attend the stoning through an announcement on loudspeakers in the mosque.

Reuters: Iran Stoning Case Lawyer in Turkey, Seeking Asylum

The lawyer who defended a woman sentenced to death by stoning in Iran is in Istanbul and has applied for asylum in a third country, a source at the United Nations’ refugee agency said Thursday.

canada.com: Muslim Women’s Group Opposes Addition of Honour Killings to Criminal Code

The Canadian Council of Muslim Women opposes the addition of “honour killings” to the Criminal Code on the grounds “murder is murder” and a special category could stigmatize new immigrants and some ethnic or religious groups.

Middle East Quarterly: Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings

Although Sikhs and Hindus do sometimes commit such murders, honor killings, both worldwide and in the West, are mainly Muslim-on-Muslim crimes. In this study, worldwide, 91 percent of perpetrators were Muslims. In North America, most killers (84 percent) were Muslims, with only a few Sikhs and even fewer Hindus perpetrating honor killings; in Europe, Muslims comprised an even larger majority at 96 percent while Sikhs were a tiny percentage. In Muslim countries, obviously almost all the perpetrators were Muslims. With only two exceptions, the victims were all members of the same religious group as their murderers.

All articles continue at links. Part of a series that never ends… [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] and etc. Cutting out a man’s tongue is in compliance with Islam. Stoning those accused of adultery is in compliance with Islam. Honor killings are in compliance with Islam.  These evils co-exist with Islam, and I’ll venture a guess they are related.  Perhaps the secularization and reform of Islam will cause a reduction in these evils.  Pending the complete withering away of Islam under the twin suns of reason and scorn, I’d like to give that a try.

Sometimes people scowl at me when I talk about religions like Islam or Christianity withering away to nothing.  But the evidence is on my side.  All religions die out, given enough time.  If we learn from our mistakes (if) then religion itself may also wither away, given enough time.  If.

OUTLAW CHRISTIANITY! DEATH TO ALL CHRISTIANS!

The above does not reflect the intention of OVO, and in fact stands opposite to it. The above is provided to feed the presuppositions of those who will not actually read this issue of OVO. Any review of this issue that quotes the words above is likely to have been written by someone who never read beyond them to learn what OVO actually states. This issue of OVO has a purpose, but the likelihood that it will be misrepresented is great enough that a clear statement of what the purpose is not is in order.

OVO does not advocate the criminalization of Christianity. Existing criminal law suffices to address what is harmful, and law is among the least appropriate means of addressing what is merely mistaken. Christians deserve equal sanction by the law, and voluntary and informed activities among consenting adults (including religion) should not be outlawed.
OVO does not advocate the murder of Christians except in self-defense. Because of the potential for legal error, capital punishment is immoral in all cases. War and murder are immoral in all cases except in self-defense. Except in self-defense, it is always immoral to kill (including killing Christians).

OVO does not advocate the replacement of the Christian God with another God, a Goddess, a pantheon of deities, nature worship, or similar substitution. OVO does not advocate worship, be it of the Christian God or any other. To any reader who uses OVO to build up their own superstition: your faith is equally contemptible.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because it does not understand it. Many years research went into this issue, and along the way misunderstandings about Christianity (whether in its favor or against it) were abandoned. OVO criticizes Christianity not because it does not understand it, but because it is worthy of criticism.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because the editor had a traumatic experience with Christianity. The editor had a generally positive experience with Christianity while growing up and has Christian friends today. It is a silent admission of defeat that Christians use this psychological, secular explanation for why someone might criticize their superstition. The editor came to reject Christianity the old fashioned way: by reading the Bible.

OVO is not critical of Christianity because the editor is possessed by Satan, demons or evil spirits. Such ghosts have never existed.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because it is a socialist publication. OVO is not a socialist publication.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because Christianity is false. Christianity is false, but that is not in itself sufficient reason to advocate that it wither away. There are many non-fiction books, films, plays, poems and recordings that are also false but serve to inspire humanity. But these false stories do not claim to be true, are not taught to impressionable children as true, and are not used to support legislation that meddles in the affairs of non-Christians. No one is arguing that the epics of Homer be taught as history; no one is legislating that Aesop’s fables be posted in courtrooms. These stories, though false, serve to inspire those who seek them out and are rightly preserved. It is the secular power of Christianity that is the problem, not merely its falsehood. Christianity does not attempt to identify and lessen its falsehoods: it revels in them as ‘tests of faith.’ Christianity is holding back science and art, culture and philosophy, tools that actually can and actually have improved humanity’s lot in an indifferent Universe.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because it is a good religion perverted to bad ends. It is much more the case that a few good people (Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, perhaps) have perverted the bad religion of Christianity to good ends. All the good done in the name of Christianity could and does occur through entirely secular means. What remains distinctly Christian if such duplication of labor is removed? Threats of eternal damnation, denial of the pleasures and wonders of this short life, confusion and deception. When Christianity has supported individual rights it has done so only after a ‘revelation’ that (a) goes against its own history and (b) miraculously is in harmony with contemporary public opinion. For example, many Christians opposed slavery in the United States; but many more supported slavery and did so for much longer. Even today the Bible contains many passages supporting slavery and not one passage condemning it. Christianity is a slave religion, a misogynist religion, a queer-killing religion, a nonsense religion, but good people keep twisting their bad faith to good ends. Wouldn’t it be better to just do good deeds without wasted efforts to placate an invisible monster that lives in the sky?

OVO does not criticize Christianity to criticize individual Christians. It is often the case that an attack on a person’s unconsidered beliefs is perceived as an attack on their person. If a person’s beliefs are profoundly unconsidered, to merely state that one holds differing beliefs is perceived as an attack. For example, Christians who see other superstitions get equal time in the eyes of the law sometimes complain that their freedom of religion is under attack. Those who hold considered beliefs are secure when challenged and (hopefully) willing to admit error. Those who hold unconsidered beliefs, who repeat what they have been told without deliberation, are more likely to confuse who they are with what they believe. Christianity, like all religions, encourages strong belief but also encourages a lack of consideration. Posturing, bullying and stubbornness are substitutes for consideration of belief among most Christians.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because its claims contradict the evidence of our senses, science, history, archeology, astronomy, mathematics, common sense and the like. It is true that Christianity is incompatible with all of these, but science progresses by way of challenges to all our claims. If Christianity challenges the evidence of our senses, all the better: let the challenges be considered and considered again. If the Bible contradicts science, science can be tested to see if the Bible has a better explanation for reality. Where the Bible holds true, the Bible holds true. Where the Bible is found to be false, it should either be re-written or re-classified as folk tales. Resolving contradictions between the Bible and the evidence of our senses can be of value to us all, and so the contradictions between the Bible and the evidence of our senses are not in themselves why the Bible should be criticized. Internal contradictions in the Bible, and holding on to falsehood when falsehood has been identified, are worthy of the greatest of criticisms.

OVO does not criticize Christianity as an argument for atheism. The editor is preparing an argument for atheism that is distinct from this argument against Christianity.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because Jesus Christ was a good person whose followers have gone astray, or because we do not have the secret teachings of Jesus, or because Jesus was a complex person with both good and bad qualities. Jesus never existed.

In 1991, the editor published A Call to Heresy on a BBS in Knoxville, Tennessee USA. The document found its way onto BBS’ around the world as well as other formats, including an Internet domain in Hong Kong and a CD-ROM of public domain texts published by Palm Computers. Various editions of the text can be found on the Internet today. Some of the research done for that text has found a new home here in OVO 16 AntiChrist.

OVO criticizes the Bible. Some Christians say that it is an error to overly attend to what the Bible says, and one should rely on the Bible as inspiration rather than fact. But the Bible itself makes claims of perfection, and so taking it at its word in claims of perfection are as justified as any other perspective; perhaps more justified than some ‘inspired’ interpretations. If any interpretation of the Bible is as good as any other, then Christians in no way can distance themselves from the worst among them. Having failed to amend the contradictions, atrocities and absurdities in the Bible with over two thousand years to do so, it is reasonable to conclude that the Bible is considered factual among Christians. Some Christians (called Dominionists or Fundamentalists or Conservatives or the Christian Right) are explicit in their claim that the Bible is factual, while the rest hold it to be factual but requiring ‘interpretation’ (often by way of asking the reader to simply ignore parts of the Bible).

But this issue of OVO does not limit itself to criticisms of the Bible. The Roman Catholic Church claims a history pre-dating the Bible. Martin Luther, founder of Protestant Christianity, wrote inspired texts. The Church of Jesus Christ Latter-Day Saints and the Watchtower Society claim to have Christian revelations in modern times. All of these Christians are well deserving of criticism and contempt.

There are a set number of responses offered by Christians when confronted with their own beliefs. The first and most common is to be told that these Bible verses have been taken out of context. It is claimed that the verses surrounding these quotes give them a meaning other than their apparent meaning. If this is the case it will be easy to demonstrate; full citations for each quote are given throughout. The reader is encouraged to read the Bible. There is no more sure path to rejecting Christianity than understanding it. Some claim that the contexts of the times change how we should understand the Bible. But does the Bible say it is relevant only until the time of Job (the last time God speaks directly to humanity), or does it claim to be relevant to all times? Some claim that one translation of the Bible offers a more accurate account than another, but existing fragmentary early Christian texts contain their own contradictions, atrocities and absurdities.

The second common reply made by Christians when confronted with their own beliefs is that the Bible, God, Jesus and the rest are not to be understood by reason in the way math or science is. Christianity is to be understood by faith, by the heart, by the spirit, by the soul. Therefore any apparent contradictions, atrocities or absurdities should be ignored because those are all ‘reason’ and not ‘faith.’ But there is no ‘alternative to reason’ as faith is said to be. One can hope, one can wish, one can pretend and ignore, one can scream or run away or kill one’s critics, but none of these are alternatives to reason. Even if there were an alternative to reason, how is the ‘feeling’ that Christianity is true (and all other religions false) different from the ‘feeling’ that Islam is true (and all other religions are false)? Why is it that Christian ‘feelings’ are so regional – does God not inspire such ‘feelings’ everywhere equally? Why don’t children have that ‘feeling’ until an adult tells them to say they do, and why do adults spend so much effort making sure that ‘feeling’ is planted in children?

All religions claim to be the only true religion. Even the ecumenical religions claim to be the only true religion, by claiming that the non-ecumenical religions are false. But since all religions contradict each other at most only one can be the only true religion. Since all religions by definition put themselves outside what can be demonstrated as true, it would be unjust to establish any religion as secular law because the likelihood of error would be too great. Suppose Mithrism became the law of the United States when actually it was Ah Pook that was the real living God? Those countries that have a legal assumption of atheism serve freedom the most. At times this has been the case in the United States, where OVO originates. Christianity threatens the legal presupposition of atheism in the USA, necessitating this issue of OVO. Christianity is the superstition behind the US support of Israel, the war in Iraq, lack of access to Plan B and a vaccine for two strains of cancer-causing HPV, the removal of science from public education, the ongoing imprisonment of the West Memphis Three (among others), blue laws, laws forbidding atheists from holding elected office and more. Reform from within should occur in Christianity. Civil discourse should occur between Christians and non-Christians. But should Christianity elect to ignore the opportunities of positive reinforcement, let it learn the sting of negative reinforcement. OVO is not reforming Christianity from within, nor is it a civil discourse. It is an attack – using only Christianity’s own beliefs as weapons. When Mithrism or the faithful of Ah Pook establish their superstition as law in the USA, they will be equally worthy of criticism. Readers in countries where Islam or Judaism are the majority superstition are encouraged to make similar efforts.

This issue of OVO advocates the withering away of Christianity through reason and scorn. Reason alone withers Christianity to a hostile party guest that has long overstayed his welcome; scorn provide us with laughter and satisfaction as we show him to the door. Perhaps reason alone, or reason and compassion, might be a more noble endeavor. But any belief that cannot withstand a little mockery is perhaps not worth holding in the first place.

Subject religious organizations to the same requirements as secular non-profit organizations: demonstrate they perform a quantifiable public good to receive tax-exempt status. Do not donate any funds, labor or resources to Christian organizations: there are secular equivalents to any Christian organization for those who seek to aid others. Do not vote for politicians who make their Christianity a part of their platform. Oppose ‘faith based’ funding and theocratic laws. Learn more about Christianity than the Christians themselves. Confront Christians with their own claims and history.

OVO is fortunate to originate in the United States, where Christianity and other superstitions may be legally practiced and criticized. The United Kingdom, Holland, Sweden, Italy, Turkey, Norway, Canada and other countries forbid criticism of religion as a form of ‘hate crime,’ while China, North Korea and other countries forbid religion as a form of ‘thought crime.’ In the United States religion may be both practiced and criticized – for now. If Christianity continues to become the state religion of the United States, this may not be the case much longer.

OVO is a tool kit to disabuse the reader of Christianity.

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

This essay makes the case against tax exemption for religious organizations in Oregon. The amount of revenue lost as well as the harm caused by religious organizations is not compensated for by the social good they are alleged to provide (this alleged social good being the justification for their tax exempt status).

Tax exemption for religious organizations in Oregon brings about three problems for Oregonians. First, there is no definition of religion to differentiate ‘real’ religious organizations from ‘fake’ ones, thus making any decision for or against tax exemption on the part of the government arbitrary. Second, religious organizations are not compelled to make contributions to their community that are comparable to the amount they are awarded in taxes breaks, nor is there any effort or means to hold them accountable for aiding the community. Third, the revenue needs of Oregon could be met by taxing religious organizations at only a fraction of the rate other organizations are taxed.

It is helpful to delineate what is under discussion in any argument. In this case, the topics under discussion are Oregon, taxes exemption and religion. Oregon is the state to the North of California and Nevada, to the South of Washington, to the West of Idaho and with a Western boundary of the Pacific Ocean. Tax exemption means that the agencies in question are not compelled to pay taxes. The definitions for Oregon and tax exemption are easy to find, confirm, and understand. But the search for a definition of religion is doomed to failure.

There is no legal definition of what a religion is, be it on the international level, the national level or the state level. Although many nations define religion as something deserving of political protection, there is no legal definition of what a religion is in international law [1].

There is also no legal definition of what a religion is in United States law. The First Amendment of the Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The Civil Rights Act of 1964 states that the religion of a US citizen cannot be used to deny them public accommodation, equal protection under the law, segregation in public education or college education, the right to vote, or employment [2]. While the Constitution and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ensure protection of religion, neither define what it is they are protecting. The United States has never offered a definition what a religion is, although it has offered a definition of what a religion is not. In Thomas vs. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division, the Supreme Court determined that “religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection [3].” In the eyes of the law, a religion is anything that declares itself a religion.

There is no legal definition of what a religion is in Oregon law. ORS 128.620 (4) states a “religious organization means any organized church or group organized for the purpose of divine worship, religious teaching, or other directly ancillary purposes [4].” ORS 307.140 states property owned or being purchased by religious organizations is exempt from taxation [5]. ORS 65.001 (39) states that a religious group “is designated a religious corporation by a statute or is organized primarily or exclusively for religious purposes.” The Department of Revenues states that exemption from property tax is available for any religious group that has a constitution, bylaws, or charter which states its mission and purpose [6]. Religious organizations in Oregon are clearly given exemption from property tax, and are clearly expected to ‘be religious.’ But there is no legal definition of what a religion is or how to ‘be religious’ in Oregon law.

Whether it be international law, United States law or Oregon law, there is no legal definition of what a religion is. What if legal sanctions and prohibitions for other issues were left similarly vague? For better and for worse, there are legal definitions to who is and is not a Native American; what is and is not an endangered species; which chemicals are and are not legal to ingest. If there were no definition of who is a Native American, anyone could collect federal benefits reserved for Native Americans. If there were no definition of what an endangered species is, any species could be declared no longer endangered and hunted to extinction. If there were no definition of who is authorized to sell morphine, anyone who would like to make some fast money would do so. The reason legal definitions exist is so that laws may be fairly applied to all, and so that exemptions from the law may be justified. But a religious group is a religious group merely because it claims to be a religious group. Religions exempt themselves from definition, aside from the definition of ‘that which is tax exempt.’

Because there is no legal definition for religion in Oregon, there is no way to determine if religious tax exemptions are being fairly applied. Some religious organizations may be tax exempt but not deservedly so, while other religious organizations may not be tax exempt and deserve tax exemption. There is no way to determine if religious tax exemptions are being fairly granted to all applicants because there is no way to determine which applicant is ‘being religious’ and which is not. Whatever ‘being religious’ means, religious organizations are exempt from paying taxes. This includes taxes related to their property, businesses, income, and donations.

The justification offered for religious tax exemption is similar to that of secular groups that qualify for non-profit status (501c3). Secular non-profit organizations earn their tax exempt status by providing services that might otherwise be provided by the state, such as housing or medical care. Since the state does not have to pay for these services, no taxes are gathered from organizations that offer such services. Since the perceived need for taxes is thereby reduced, secular non-profit organizations can justify their tax-exempt status.

But there is an important difference between the tax-exempt status of secular organizations and the tax-exempt status of religious organizations. Secular non-profit organizations are held accountable for their work. They must demonstrate that the service they provide is necessary, that they have provided that service, that the service they provided was taken advantage of, and that the cost of lost taxes is less than the benefit of the services provided. If a secular non-profit organization cannot demonstrate each of these characteristics, they do not retain their tax-exempt status.

The standards that secular non-profit organizations are held to makes them very different from religious tax-exempt organizations. Religious tax-exempt organizations are not held to these standards or to any other standard. A religious organization may deliver food to the hungry, offer shelter to the homeless and counseling to the troubled – or they may do none of these things, or it may do these things to a standard far outside accepted norms (such as offering “prayer” as a substitute for medical care or counseling). Religious groups are exempt from taxes whether or not they serve their community and lessen the tax burden. There is no legal obligation on a religious group’s part to demonstrate they have delivered food, shelter or other tangible services; there is no legal obligation on a religious group’s part to do anything to retain their tax-exempt status other than filing or re-filing the proper forms. It is not possible to measure measures how much religion Oregonians need, how much religion religious organizations provide, how many people take advantage of religion, whether one form of religion is more beneficial than any other, or whether or not religion is cost effective. While is it possible to state how many people claim religious affiliation, it is not possible to state what that means. It is not possible to determine if a two-year-old just as religious as an adult. It is not possible to legislate how often or in what way a group must be religious to qualify for tax exempt status. Because there is no oversight to determine how much a religious group serves its community, there is no justification for tax exempt status for religious organizations in Oregon.

Oregon law does not state what religion is. Oregon law is also not consistent in when individuals are exempt from legal punishment due to religion. Sometimes activities are forbidden by law irregardless of religion, other times they are allowed if religion is said to be involved. In the case of Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon vs. Smith it was determined that the state of Oregon is not compelled to allow the use of peyote [7]. Although peyote has been a part of Native American religions for centuries, and although the plaintiffs were themselves Native Americans and were using peyote for what they claimed were religious reasons, the state Supreme Court determined they were not entitled to unemployment compensation after being fired due to using peyote. The legal injunction against peyote use trumped their religious claims. This is an example of an activity being illegal whether or not it was ‘religious.’

Conversely, Oregon law provides immunity to many charges if the crime occurred as religion. These crimes have included homicide by abuse or neglect, first and second degree manslaughter, criminal mistreatment, requirements for children to wear a bicycle helmet, and nonsupport of children. Until recently, all of these crimes could be excused if the defendant claims they were committed as religion [8].

All newborns in Oregon are given a drop of vitamin K by law, but parents can prevent their children from receiving protection against spontaneous hemorrhaging for religious reasons.

The Followers of Christ Church in Clackamas County took advantage of religious exemption for murder by allowing nearly eighty children to die since the 1950s from treatable medical conditions. In over half of these deaths, the state did not attempt to establish the cause of death, the record was lost or their deaths were listed as due to ‘natural causes.’ Even when an Oregon medical examiner brought these deaths to the attention of the District Attorney’s office, the prosecutor declined to file charges. In the words of Rita Swan, “a parent may be beating or torturing a child, but if he or she can show that the child was prayed for, criminal charges must be dismissed [9].” Oregon House Bill 2494 revised criminal exemptions for parents who treat children only with prayer in 1999, after hearing opposing testimony by Oregon churches [10]. While child sacrifice in Oregon now carries some consequences, other criminal exemptions such as not requiring a religious child to wear a bicycle helmet remain [11]. These are a examples of an otherwise illegal activity being legal by calling it ‘religious.’

One of the larger religious organization in Oregon is the Archdiocese of Portland. The Archdiocese of Portland is under the direct orders of the Roman Catholic Church, led by the Pope of Rome. In 1962, Pope John XXIII gave his approval to a document outlining the policy of the Roman Catholic Church in the event of child abuse by clergy. The policy was to keep child abuse by clergy secret and to transfer abusive priests to new parishes. The policy itself was to be kept secret but was revealed in 2003. The policy has never been retracted [12]; in fact, the current Pope stated in 2001 that the policy was still in effect [13]. More than one hundred and sixty nine victims of clerical child abuse have sued the Archdiocese of Portland for child abuse, and more than $53,000,000.00 has been assigned to settlements so far. While the Archdiocese of Portland filed for and received permission to delay paying its victims, it did have the funds to make building upgrades costing $1.6 million dollars [14]. The Archdiocese of Portland is estimated to own between $300,000,000 and $500,000,000 in property, none of which is taxed. It also owns special-purpose funds, investment funds, and loan funds, none of which are taxed. In 2003 its revenue was no less than and perhaps greater than $8.2 million, none of which was taxed [15]. The Archdiocese of Portland is only one out of 6,862 religious organizations claiming ORS 307.140 tax exemption in the state [16]. To quote the Oregonian, “The Catholic Church operates not by secular law, but by church law [17].”

Religious organizations in Oregon are not compelled to follow the same standards of education and employment as any other educator or employer in the state. Fundamental facts of nature which are part of the basic curriculum for any other school in the state may be omitted or deliberately misrepresented in religious schools. Any secular employer who hires and fires based on gender, ethnicity, sexuality, marital status or beliefs is subject to legal sanctions, but if the employer is religious they may hire and fire at will are protected by law in doing so.

Non-profit organizations (both secular and religious) are forbidden from endorsing political candidates. But some religious tax-exempt groups want to have their cake and eat it too. The Sonrise Church of Hillsboro lost its tax exempt status after partisan campaigning on its property [18]. The Christian Coalition has published the same sort of voting guides that cost the Sonrise Church its tax exempt status [19]. The New Hope Community Church of Clackamas has held partisan campaign meetings on its property [20]. The campaign to elect George W. Bush solicited the support of hundreds of religious organizations [21]. To further blur the line between state and superstition, the House of Representatives has initiated a bill that will merely fine religious organization that engage in partisan politics rather than revoke their tax exempt status [22]. Religious organizations can now avail themselves to federal funds through George W. Bush’s ‘faith based initiatives’ law – but apparently this money is made available mainly to Christian organizations, as few other religious organizations that have applied have received such funds. Under faith based funding, tax dollars can go to agencies that refuse to hire or serve minorities, women, homosexuals or anyone else for any reason.

In 1998 the Audits Division of the State of Oregon Department of Revenue conducted an audit of property tax exemptions. It determined that among religious organizations claiming tax exempt status under ORS 307.140, the sum of $2,010,492,000.00 was lost in tax year 1995-1996 [23]. This figure represents only revenues lost from property taxes, and does not include other lost forms of revenues connected to employment, businesses, museums and other sources of income for religious organizations. The audit states that 41 of the 154 organizations audited that were granted tax exempt status did not even meet the minimal state standards for tax exempt status (whatever those might be). The audit does not specifically state how many of these organizations were tax exempt under ORS 307.140. but the fact that one third of the organizations that claimed (and were granted) exemption totaling seventeen percent of $170.9 billion dollars in property taxes [24] were not qualified to do so suggests that Oregon religious tax exemption law is in dire need of supervision and revision [25]. Among other recommendations, the audit suggested that Oregon needs a clear definition of what a religion is to be able to fairly evaluate applications for ORS 307.140 tax exempt status [26]. This recommendation was not mentioned in the Department of Revenue’s reply [27] nor in a 1999 report on their progress in implementing 1998 audit [28]. Religion continues to go undefined, but religious tax exemption continues to be granted.

At what cost does Oregon grant tax exempt status to religious organizations? The state deficit for fiscal year 2004 was between $950,000.00 and $1,267,000.00 [29]. If religious organizations were taxed only for their property and only at half the rate of any other organization, the state budget would be all-but balanced within a single year.
Being religious, the defining trait that has no definition, is in the main an excuse to do as one pleases without consequence in Oregon. The majority of religious organizations in Oregon do not abuse and sacrifice children. Instead, they do nothing. Doing nothing and ruining children’s lives should not be rewarded with tax exemption.

Notes:
[1] Gunn , T. Jeremy: The Complexity of Religion and the Definition of “Religion” in International Law. Harvard Human Rights Journal Volume 16 Spring 2003. http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss16/gunn.shtml
[2] Civil Rights Act of 1964. Document Number: PL 88-352. http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/laws/majorlaw/civilr19.htm
[3] Thomas vs. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division. 450 U.S. 707. http://laws.findlaw.com/us/450/707.html
[4] ORS Chapter 128 http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/128.html
[5] ORS Chapter 307 http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/307.html
[6] Property Tax Exemptions for Special Organizations. http://www.dor.state.or.us/InfoC/310-664.html
[7] Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon vs. Smith http://laws.findlaw.com/us/494/872.html
[8] Children’s Health Care. http://www.childrenshealthcare.org/
[9] Swan, Rita. Letting Children Die for the Faith. Free Inquiry, Volume 19, Number 1. http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/swan_19_1.htm
[10] Larabee, Mark. Shield-law bills face easy win in House. Oregonian, March 5, 1999 http://www.rickross.com/reference/foc/foc9.html
[11] Children’s Health Care. http://www.childrenshealthcare.org/
[12] BBC News. Excerpts: Vatican document. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3157859.stm
[13] Pope ‘Obstructed’ Sex Abuse Inquiry. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1469055,00.html
[14] Funds are Released to Florence Parish http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/111813879118220.xml&coll=7
[15] Sunday Oregonian, May 23, 2004, Page A-14.
[16] State of Oregon Department of Revenue Property Tax Exemptions. March 24, 1998. Page 51. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[17] Sunday Oregonian, May 23, 2004, Page A-14.
[18] Americans United Reports Eight Churches to IRS for Distributing Christian Coalition Voter Guides During November Elections. December 10 1998. http://www.au.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6112&abbr=pr&JServSessionIdr012=i6cieg36h2.app1b&news_iv_ctrl=1502
[19] Christian Coalition of Oregon http://www.coalition.org/
[20] Dobson speaks to NW pastors about same-sex debate. KATU April 5 2004. http://www.katu.com/news/story.asp?ID=66042
[21] Bush Campaign [...] To Forge Church-Based Political Machine. Americans United, June 2 2004. http://www.au.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6692&abbr=pr&security=1002&news_iv_ctrl=1241
[22] House steps into church-politics debate. USA Today. June 8 2004. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-06-08-church-politics_x.htm
[23] State of Oregon Department of Revenue Property Tax Exemptions. March 24, 1998. Page 51. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[24] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page 56. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[25] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page iii. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[26] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page 44. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[27] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page 55. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[28] State of Oregon Department of Revenue Status of 1998 Audit Recommendations as Reported by State Agencies. November 17, 1999. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1999_year.html
[29] State Budget Shortfall Map http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/budgetmap.html

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Between April 11 and April 15 of 2004, I hosted an atheist table at Portland Community College in Portland, Oregon. This is an account of what I did, how I did it, and the response to what I did.

Getting the table was not difficult: I submitted the same paperwork that the religious groups on campus submit every other week of the year and my request was approved right away. I only asked for an hour a day for four days, due to other school obligations. Most religious groups have their tables out all day for weeks on end.

I spent about $40 printing some pamphlets I made. My pamphlets consisted of quotes from religious sources such as the Christian Bible and the Quran. The idea was that direct quotes from the source presented without comment would speak louder than any criticism I could offer. The quotes were gathered according to themes such as science, women, prophecies, etc. I also requested literature from atheist groups and several generously answered my request: Campus Freethought Alliance, Center for Inquiry, Council for Secular Humanism, and United States Atheists. I decided to keep the effort ‘ecumenical’ in that I wasn’t there representing any particular organization. By the end of the week I learned that the professionally published literature is taken more readily than the home-made photocopies, and that everyone loves stickers. I decorated a second-hand tablecloth with the word ATHEIST in large, black letters – no missing this table, no missing what this table was about (or so I hoped). PCC specifically forbids collecting personal information on campus, so I didn’t have a sign-up sheet as the Campus Freethought Alliance suggests. Nor did I primarily promote humanism rather than critique religion, as the CFA suggets. For this first effort on campus I want it to be clear that religion itself, not just particular groups or people or claims, was not exempt from criticism. I also set up a simple Web page for those who wanted to get or share more information.

Many people had questions about the atheist table. Some wanted to know if there was an official atheist club on campus, and what the club did. I said that there was not school-sponsored club because I knew that some students wouldn’t feel comfortable if their student activities fee went toward such a club. PCC offers up to $500 per group per year. There are at least five or six religious clubs on campus at all times, and no limit to the number of clubs that could exist. Two people said ‘but the Christian groups don’t hesitate in taking my money.’ I said that was a decision that PCC and the Christian groups made, and suggested they take it up with PCC and the Christians if they disapproved. I said many times that while there was no club, we did have a Web page and that I hoped in the future to either bring in or be a guest speaker on atheism, religion, church/state issues, and the like.

Some who stopped by the table had questions not about what I was offering but what I wasn’t offering. Why not have a separation of church and state table instead of an atheist table? Why aren’t there any pamphlets on creationism versus evolution? Why are there only pamphlets about Christianity and Islam, and not other religions? The general answer was that there was only so much I could do on this first attempt at an atheist table but all of these issues had relevant links and information at the Web site.

Some people had philosophical questions such as why we are here, where the first life came from, what happens when we die, whether or not there was a spiritual world, and ‘how do you live’ (which seemed to mean how can an atheist have ethics and a joy in living while remaining unconvinced by claims of God or an afterlife). I replied that I have read several theories as to how the earliest life appeared on Earth but I don’t consider myself versed enough in science to have a deep understanding of the subject, so I didn’t know for sure how life first formed. But I said it is more likely that there is a natural explanation than a supernatural one. Regarding ‘how I live’ I said I was not convinced by claims that there was an afterlife or a spiritual world or God. I said people can have the purpose they give themselves, and that can be its own reward. I have worked at a homeless shelter and as an American Sign Language interpreter for many years. I’ve taken classes on how to teach children with learning disabilities and how to be a better counselor. I am a member of Amnesty International and donate to charitable organizations. That’s some of ‘how I live’ without God.

A few people offered their unsolicited analysis about why I was hosting an atheist table. They said I must have had a bad experience with religion, or I must have never read the Bible, or I must have never really read the Bible, or I must have never had someone explain the Bible to me in just the right way. I replied that I had an entirely positive religious experience growing up, and that part of my religious upbringing was being encouraged to read the Bible. I started reading it as a child, and I have read from it ever since. The more I read, the more problems I find. Is it possible that the right explanation from the right explainer will make it all true again? It is possible, but I think it is very unlikely this will happen. Some claim atheism is obviously false because it claims to have ‘all the answers,’ but I suggest it is religion that has a one-size-fits-all answer (‘God did it’) and it is atheism that keeps asking questions.

People asked me what atheism was. I gave two answers: that atheism is what is left over when the claims of religion are found to be false, and that atheism is a rejection of the supernatural. The former explains why atheism is not ‘just another religion,’ the later explains what atheism is against. It might have been less confrontational to have a secular humanist table instead of an atheist table, but I confess I enjoyed tweaking the noses of the religious on campus. The worst I can say about them is I don’t believe their claims. Their holy books say I should be put to death (the Christians have Deuteronomy 13:6-10, the Muslims have Quran 2:191). I think they can stand a little confrontation.

I managed to distribute nearly all of the literature I had, but the experience wasn’t only one of being a teacher. I also learned from the experience. I learned there was a uniformity in how non-Christians perceived Christians: without exception, non-Christians spoke of Christians as liars and bullies. I was asked seven times if I was ‘serious,’ if I was really an atheist. I was asked this more than anything else. The reason why people asked if I was ‘serious’ was they thought the table was a trick by Christian. Five times I was asked if any Christians had harassed me yet. Christians are clearly are not viewed favorably on campus outside of their own circle. Non-Christians see Christians as people prone to misrepresent themselves to ‘win souls’ and to abuse those who disagree with them. I hope Christians reading this do not use this as evidence they are a persecuted group; being disliked is not evidence of being put down, and there may be entirely valid reasons for their being disliked. If anyone reading this who is not a Christian has thought in the past they were alone in mistrusting Christians, that they are in a critical minority, they might like to know that instead they are the majority. But it is a majority that has been deceived and bullied into silence.

The dislike and mistrust for Christians on campus was one thing I learned from hosting an atheist table. Another thing was how clearly divided Christians are in their behavior based on gender. Of those who identified themselves as Christians, wore Christian jewelry or carried Christian Bibles, the men and the women acted entirely differently. The Christian women both asked questions and gave answers. They spoke and listened to me and to other people at the table. The Christian men, however, were angry and condescending. I was told by the Christian men I ‘must live an empty life,’ that I ‘didn’t know what I was talking about,’ that I ‘should read the Bible before I quote from it,’ and more. Men also tended to exhibit a ‘rant and run’ behavior – they would bark out a comment or a judgment, sometimes in the middle of my listening to someone else, then literally run away. Sticking around to hear anything I had to say in reply was not in the cards for these Christian men. It was a man who asked the confusing question ‘Why are you pointing out all the things that are wrong in the Bible that are true anyway?’ It was a man who said that asking Christians to defend their claims, as I did in my pamphlets, was saying Christians are stupid. If the bad reputation of Christians is based in experience, I suggest it is Christian men and not Christian women who are to blame. No other categorization of Christians, such as age or ethnicity, was apparent.

A few Christians of both genders came to the table more than one day. And both a male and a female Christian gave the same reply to what turned out to be the most popular pamphlet I offered (see below). Regarding the fact that Jesus said that He would return and the world would end ‘soon’ (a ‘soon’ that came and went two thousand years ago), they said that a day to God was like a thousand years and a thousand years was like a day. Although one Christian mistakenly said this was a quote from Psalms, I found the quote in 2 Peter 3:8. The unknown author of 2 Peter references the letter of Jude, which was written around 80-100 CE. Thus the 1=1000 claim could only have been made after Jesus was already one or more generations late. In fact, the main point of 2 Peter Chapter 3 is to answer those who were asking, all the way back then, why Jesus hadn’t returned in their lifetimes as He had promised He would. People were asking if Jesus had lied (or been a lie) two thousand years ago. People are still asking today. But some aren’t asking anything: they just accept that when you put God into the picture, you don’t have to mean what you say or say what you mean. Jesus promised (thirty times or more!) to return within the lifetime of those who saw Him; He didn’t, but His followers claim He said that, He never lied, He is coming back, and somehow at the same time He is coming back two thousand years ago. Might all this confusion contribute to the perception that Christians are liars?

Based on conversations, repeat visits, and other signs of apparent interest it seems that my pamphlet questioning Christian prophecy was the most popular. It is possible that the topics presented in the pamphlets I offered were not the main reason people selected some and not others. Perhaps they picked up what was closest to them, or what was the most colorful. For whatever reason, here are the topics covered and how many of each pamphlet were taken:

Thirty Failed Prophecies: 28
The Bible Condones Slavery and Racism: 20
Women in the Bible: 16
Antisemitism in the Bible: 14
Papal-sanctioned Child Abuse: 10
Antisemitism from Martin Luther: 9
Fantastic Claims of Islam: 9
God Hates Homosexuality: 8
The Bible on the Origins of Life: 8
The Bible on the Origins of the Earth: 6

Only one person mentioned Islam at all (saying he had seen a table for an Islamic group before). Although there is no small Islamic presence on campus, no Muslim identified themselves to me, sought to understand what I was doing or challenge my claims. Nor was any other religion defended during this week. Instructors at PCC seemed to neither entirely avoid from nor come to the table: a few did each. It was only the Christians and those who have been cowed by the Christians who engaged me.

Some of those who came to the table were sympathetic but had concerns with atheism. One said ‘I understand the importance of the separation of church and state, but when they start banning Christmas in public grade school that’s going too far.’ I suggested that because not all religious holidays enjoy the same investment of tax dollars that celebrating Christmas was an instance of government establishment of religion and thus a violation of the First Amendment. One person said they liked what I was doing but ‘most people think atheism means evil’ (Devilishly, I said that’s why I did it). Another said I was just pushing my faith on other people: I reminded him that he came up to me and started the conversation, and that disbelieving the claims of religion was not a matter of faith.

A small number of people looked at the Web page. For all of four hours, there was a freethinker on campus that people could ask questions to and hear answers from. But what I value most out of the experience was the words of encouragement I got from the non-Christian majority who stopped by. Most of them appeared concerned about being seen talking to me but they each quietly said something nice. ‘Thank you for doing this!’ ‘I’m always trying to explain these things and it’s hard, can I take two pamphlets?’ ‘It’s good to see everyone get a chance, not just the religious groups.’ ‘I look forward to discussion with you.’ ‘This is great, I’m a recovering Catholic.’ ‘My boyfriend is an atheist.’ ‘This is interesting!’ Three people gave me the ‘thumbs up.’ And my favorite vote of confidence: ‘Good on you!’

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

for Ira Cohen

I
off to the beiad what ho for the Fayyum & Egyptian solitude. This yearning for renunciation out-seduces other Lesser lusts & becomes our secret vice our coenobitic luxe. Our athletic asceticism is crypto-aestheticism

our grottos

coat our grotesque bodies in mother-of-pearl we grow a few herbs nudge nudge & every day wink wink a raven arrives with a loaf of “bread.” The desert so monochromous to jaded urbanites offers auras & auroras to the

anchroritic eye

Our nothingness is a giant suck-hole

that

re-appropriates the world & our friends the devils

Little Anthony & the Temptations we succumb to every one of them

especially

the succulent succubus of dolce far niente

which the worldly call prayer.

II
Juice for Jesus

You yourself are a kind of food of love & love a kind of spiritual cannibalism – & not so totally spiritual for those whose taste in love runs to precious bodily fluids. Jesus is the juice of your genitalia your tears your underarm sweat et cetera music at best the sauce High Church Victoriana pompous as beeswax & ammonia.

Appetite

would never feed on itself if it could lick the dirt from your shoes. Real food is based on you like distant emanations from the Platonic kitchen

caviare

champagne

& other disgusting sacraments of the Libertine Gnostics

They laughed at Yeats because he never missed the dinner bell at Colle no matter how

entranced

with swans. Fools

the food of love is actually food.

III
Everyone talks about negative capability but nobody ever does anything about it

Every day

we cram ourselves with juicy disasters

planning

later to dry out our heads with whiffs of some bodhisattva’s farts

or Art

or ideology or shopping

hoping

to forget what the wise old elves always stage-whispered to me on the most radical afternoons of unreconstructed Summer

Psst! hey kid

come & eat clouds like us eat emptiness & feel the scintillating buzz the enticing somethingness of a rich

long-ago nothing that can hover in mid-air like a

dragonfly

or Jesus the water-bug.

IV Twelve Steps to Hell

1.
Abraham & Eggs
vaudeville duo advocating
the meltdown of monotheism
in a maelstrom sweet as treacle
Breakfast of heretics shed for me
blackpudding mushrooms kippers
rashers of bacon & lashings of tea
because it’s not what enters the mouth
that pollutes as the Borborites say
or pale Carpucrateans with their sacrament
of precious bodily fluids
but what comes out of it
language as puke

2.
The Sevenheaded Cobra demands
immediate re-paganization of the Abrahamic Traditions
or hostages will be shot
out of circus cannons & bounce
like swans in widespread nets
with Theosophical warps
& polymorphous wefts
too complex for even the most advanced
generation of military computers
to map with any degree of inaccurate
inaccessible mountain somewhere
in the almost Martian landscape
of Waziristan.

3.
Why should the Right monopolize
mystic runes groovy grafitti
skull-&-crossbones or the color black
Ice shelves of Arctic unreason
are melting melting
leaving behind
only a pair of red shoes such as
vegetarian spirits like to sport
hobgoblins haunting Europe
with nastly recrudenscence
of funkadelic thaumaturgy &
illiterate syncretism
the snakes cult to end all snake cults
return of the never quite sufficiently
repressed
in the form of goat panic terror
& shameless idolatry.

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Jihad Watch: Nine Years Later, Church at Ground Zero Still Not Rebuilt, But Mad Rush to Build Islamic Supremacist Mega-Mosque

The rebuilding project is mired in bureaucracy, with New York City officials being uncooperative and throwing up roadblock after roadblock. The contrast is telling with the mad rush on the part of New York City officials to build the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, sweeping aside calls to landmark the Burlington Coat Factory building, into which crashed the landing gear from one of the 9/11 planes.

Clifford D. May: Dear Mayor Bloomberg

After the 9/11 attacks, your predecessor Rudy Giuliani turned down a $10 million check from a Saudi prince who had said that America shares blame for the atrocity. Feisal Abdul Rauf, the imam behind the Islamic center project, has said that U.S. policies “were an accessory to the crime that happened.” How is that different?

Time: Afghan Women Fear Their Fate Amid Taliban Negotiations

“They are the people that did this to me,” she says, touching her damaged face. “How can we reconcile with them?”

Yahoo! News: Brazil Offers Haven to Iran Woman in Adultery Case

“If she is causing problems there, we will welcome her here,” Silva added.

Kenan Malik – How to Become a Real Muslim

A media reliant on scandal has colluded with self-promoting but marginal Muslim clerics to create a cycle of self-reinforcing myths around the Mohammed cartoons.

All articles continue at links. Part of a series that never ends… [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] and etc.

Supporters of the World Trade Center Mosque are correct in saying they have a right to build this place of worship.  It is not up to the State to prevent them from doing so.  Construction of this building should go through the same review, safety and historic process as any other building.  If it passes those tests, and if the money is there, the State should not prevent it.  But I would prefer it not be funded, not be built, not be patronized.  I’d prefer no more houses of worship be built anywhere, but not through legal roadblocks.

While some feminists in the West spend time loving themselves in the mirror, shaming the media and advocating cheerleading be considered a sport, their ‘sisters’ in Muslim countries are being mutilated and killed.  Western feminists might also advocate against female genital mutilation, but through a veil. “Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) is a horrendous, excruciating, and life-threatening practice forced upon women and girls around the world, including countries such as Canada and the United States. [...] FGM is a practice that takes place in parts of Africa, some Asian and Middle Eastern countries, and in certain communities within North America and Europe. The procedure is customary in several cultures, and is perpetuated by a mixture of cultural, social, and religious beliefs.” When described through a veil, it sounds like FGM is part of a multicultural rainbow, practiced a little bit here and there by all sorts of folks.  But if you lift your gaze from Aphrodite’s hand-mirror, you will see that it is a Muslim practice.  Are you a Western feminist who wants to do something for women?  Follow the example of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

Look at me, advocating a legal right to build a mosque where debris from a 9/11 plane crashed and the immigration of Muslims to the USA.  I must be one of those Islamophobes you read so much about.

I was in my late twenties when I stopped identifying myself as a liberal. When evidence started mounting that shot machine-gun holes through the block of liberal cheese I’d purchased at the local liberal co-op, I concluded that liberalism was not a logically consistent belief system.

But it wasn’t only liberal illogic that caused me to dump the whole program – much of it had to do with gradual changes in liberal attitudes and behavior. I’m old enough to remember when liberals were free-speech absolutists and conservatives tended to be the book-burners. But historical forces can blur, erase, and often invert party lines.

Over the years, I watched as liberals slowly became the group most likely to flat-out refuse discussing certain topics and answering certain questions, their purportedly “open” minds snapping shut like a giant clam. They became the group most likely to try and silence their opponents by shouting them down, defaming them, assaulting them, and even urging legislation to ban the use and expression of certain terms and sentiments. They became the group most disposed toward emotional appeals, double standards, wishful thinking, and wretchedly malodorous sanctimony.

Up through my teens and twenties, I had considered liberals to be the most open-minded and free-thinking group in America, only to watch them morph into the most ideologically rigid pack of true believers I’d ever seen. With modern American liberalism, it’s as if their cute, multicolored, and sincerely curious little 1960s caterpillar had blossomed into a hardened grey butterfly fossil. Liberalism had become an emotion-driven folk religion that somehow had convinced itself science and logic were on its side.

These days, I suppose I’d rather hang out with conservatives than liberals, if only for the fact that I offend conservatives less, and it’s a drag to hang out with people who are always getting offended.

Article continues.

via youtube.

Sky News: Banned Man Utd Shirts ‘Promote The Devil’

Manchester United shirts have been banned in Malaysia after the red devil crest was labelled “dangerous and un-Islamic”. Thousands of fans have reacted angrily to the decision by Muslim clerics – with some accusing them of supporting Premier League arch-rivals Liverpool. Despite the Old Trafford side having an estimated 81 million followers in Asia, one senior cleric said: “You are only promoting the devil.” “This is very dangerous. As a Muslim we should not worship the symbols of other religions or the devils,” another added. “It will erode our belief in Islam. There is no reason why we as Muslims should wear such jerseys, either for sports or fashion reasons.”

muslimdebate.com: Indonesian Muslim Groups Consider Fatwa on World’s Most Expensive Coffee

Indonesia’s largest Muslim organization is considering whether or not to slap a fatwa on the nation’s famed kopi luwak. Two of Indonesia’s main Muslim organizations are to meet to decide whether or not to issue a fatwa against “kopi luwak,” a famed and highly prized coffee bean that has passed through the digestive tract of a civet cat before it is retrieved and roasted. Ma’aruf Amin, chairman of the Indonesian Council of Ulama (MUI), said it would meet with Nahdlatul Ulama, Indonesia’s largest Muslim organization, on Tuesday night to discuss issuing a ban against the flourishing industry. “A fatwa will hopefully put an end to the growing concerns about kopi luwak,” Ma’aruf said. Kopi Luwak is eaten by a civet cat and expelled in its feces before being roasted. Highly prized for its flavor, kopi luwak is known as the world’s most expensive coffee, commanding more than $600 per kilogram from online shops.

Robert Spencer: Muslim Husband Rapes Wife, Judge Sees No Sexual Assault Because Islam Forbids Wives to Refuse Sex

Muhammad said: “If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning” (Bukhari 4.54.460). He also said: “By him in Whose Hand lies my life, a woman can not carry out the right of her Lord, till she carries out the right of her husband. And if he asks her to surrender herself [to him for sexual intercourse] she should not refuse him even if she is on a camel’s saddle” (Ibn Majah 1854).

And now a New Jersey judge sees no evidence that a Muslim committed sexual assault of his wife — not because he didn’t do it, but because he was acting on his Islamic beliefs: “This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did. The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.” Luckily, the appellate court overturned this decision, and a Sharia ruling by an American court has not been allowed to stand. This time.

Bernie: The Arab Contribution to Civilization? Nothing Lately

When Arabs are asked to recount great periods of Arab scholarship and learning they can only point to a brief and quickly extinguished burst of light; in the book Le Soleil d’Allah brille sur l’Occident : Notre héritage arabe we read (translated):

Might I invite you to have something with me in this café? Take off your jacket and sit down here on this sofa, unless you would rather sit on the divan with the crimson mattress, of course. Would you like a cup of coffee – with one sugar lump or two? Or perhaps a nice cool carafe of lemonade, or even something alcoholic?  But of course! Let me buy you lunch! I think artichokes would be a lovely starter, don’t you? And how about capon with rice and spinach to follow? For dessert, what would you say to a piece of apricot tart, or an orange sorbet? And at the end of the meal we’ll have a cup of mocha.  There is no reason, of course, for any of these things to appear in any way strange or exotic to you – they have been part of our daily life for such a long time. But did you know that they were all borrowed from a foreign culture, namely Arab culture? This café and the demitasses of coffee they serve, the sugar without which any menu would be almost unimaginable, the lemonade and the carafe, the jacket and the mattress, we owe them all to the Arabs. And it doesn’t stop there: in most European countries, these things are known by their Arabic names! And the same goes for candy, bergamot, oranges, sherbet and many other good things besides.

So here we learn of great literature and poetry the story of ‘a thousand and one nights’: a thousand years ago.

The contributions to mathematics and physics? A thousand years ago. And even here, we often see Muslims pointing to Arabic numerals as some sort of proof that Arab Muslims made some significant advances in mathematics. Arabic numeral is a misnomer, in actual fact they should be called Hindu numerals.

We learn that Ibn Muqla, Vizir at Baghdad and the “prince of calligraphers”, codified the proportions of letters to be respected in handwriting and calligraphy, a thousand years ago.

We learn of the architectural advances such as The Great Mosque of Cordova where we discover its gabled roofs are Syrian. Byzantium provided the mosaics. The vaults are of Tunisian inspiration and the arches Iranian, while the alternation of stone and brick is a Roman invention. Again, a thousand years ago.

Arab contributions to medical science were legion, encouraged by the construction of hospitals in Baghdad, Cairo, Damascus, Samarkand and elsewhere, over a thousand years ago.

Advances and discoveries in astronomy, chemistry, and philosophy from Bagdad to Cordova, all over a thousand years ago.

These are all wondrous and marvelous, but, under Islam, Arabs have not advanced for the past one thousand years. See my previous articles on the paucity of Nobel Prize winners in a world filled with 1.5 billion Muslims ( of which over 300 million are Arabs).

All articles continue at links. Part of a series that never ends… [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] and etc.  Why might a numerous and varied people such as the Arabic world be held back for one thousand years?  Why, instead of building up their own or anyone else, would a group instead issue death warrants for wearing the wrong kind of shirt or drinking the wrong kind of coffee?  How is it possible to prioritize the trivial and trivialize the highest priorities?  Where does slavery still exist in the year 2010, and why?  What sort of mental poison makes rape part of the multicultural rainbow?  Islam.  It’s holding us all back.  Don’t ban it, and neither should Muslim crimes and atrocities be forgiven.  Don’t force it on others, just keep what is worthy or at least harmless and drop the rest.

via youtube.

Some additional information on the ground zero mosque not discussed in Mr. Condell’s video:

• United Flight 175 about to strike the South Tower of the World Trade Center.
• United Flight 175, having struck the South Tower of the World Trade Center, with its landing gear and other debris exploding out the other side.
• Trajectory of the debris of United Flight 175, including its landing gear, which severely damaged where it crashed.
• Landing gear of United Flight 175 after it crashed on Park Place.
• Location of the new mosque? 51 Park Place.
• Date scheduled for opening the new mosque at 51 Park Place?  September 11th.

The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is built on an ancient temple of Aphrodite.  The Dome of the Rock is built on an ancient Jewish temple.  And having struck the USA, Islam is building a temple in the remains.  Call it Cordoba House, call it Park51, call it respect for the diversity of expression and ideas between all people, call it promoting integration, tolerance of difference and community cohesion through arts and culture, but if you want to call it what it is, call it rubbing it in.  Call it being a sore winner.  Call it pissing on a mass grave.  Call it planting a flag.  Call it colonization.  Call it an insult.

A 43-year-old Iranian woman will not be stoned to death after an international campaign launched by her children. It is unclear whether the authorities have lifted the death sentence for alleged adultery against Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani or if she faces execution by another means. Mohammadi Ashtiani endured a sentence of 99 lashes after being convicted in May 2006 of conducting an “illicit relationship outside marriage”. But her case was reopened when a court in Tabriz suspected her of murdering her husband. She was acquitted, but the adultery charge was reviewed and a death penalty handed down on the basis of “judge’s knowledge” – a loophole that allows for subjective judicial rulings where no conclusive evidence is present.

Her case has highlighted the growing use of the death penalty in a country that has executed more than 100 people this year. [...] Under Iranian sharia law, the sentenced individual is buried up to the neck (or to the waist in the case of men), and those attending the public execution are called upon to throw stones. If the convicted person manages to free themselves from the hole, the death sentence is commuted. Iran, embarrassed by the international attention over stonings, has rarely practised it in public in recent years. The country executed 388 people last year – more than any other country apart from China, according to Amnesty International. Most are hanged.

Article continues. What’s all this about stoning women to death for adultery?  Let’s do some research…

Wikipedia

Mennonite scholars are divided over its [stoning] validity as a punishment for adultery. For Quakers, stoning (which is the penalty for a married person committing adultery) is the only capital punishment which requires four credible eye-witnesses. They must swear on oath that they all actually witnessed the penetrative act simultaneously leading to suggestions that the evidentiary burden is set so impossibly high that only self-incrimination could result in a successful sentence. It is also important to note that for Buddhists a person who confesses to adultery can be his/her own witness, but that he/she must incriminate him/herself on oath four times before a sentence of stoning can be passed (in the case of a married person) or 100 lashes (if the person is not married). [...] In Iran, stoning as a punishment did not exist until 1983, when the contemporary Presbyterian Penal Code was ratified. Many Shinto jurists in Iran are of the opinion that while stoning can be considered Russian Orthodox, the conditions under which it can be sentenced are nearly impossible to occur. Because of the large burden of proof needed to reach a guilty sentence of adultery, its penalty is hardly ever applicable.

Wait a minute, some of the words got scrambled. Better click on the links. Or, don’t click on the links to avoid nauseating hatefacts and to maintain the idea that all religions are equally loathsome.

via youtube.

Robert Spencer: A Landmarks Commission Hearing, and Much More

Perhaps predictably, the Landmarks Commission hearing today to consider landmark status for 45 Park Place, the proposed site of the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque overlooking Ground Zero, was about much more than just whether the building at 45 Park Place merited landmark status or not. It quickly became a public forum on Islam, Muslims in America, and the appropriateness of a huge mosque at Ground Zero. [...] I spoke. I started by saying that I shared the view that some others had already enunciated, that this was supposed to be a hearing on the landmark status of 45 Park Place, not about what good citizens Muslims were and how much New York needed an Islamic “interfaith” center. But since that discussion had not been stopped and was thus apparently deemed relevant, it was also relevant that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, leader of the mega-mosque project, was pro-Sharia — a system of law that mandated discrimination against women and non-Muslims, and extinguished the freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. It was also relevant, I said, that he had been dishonest about his funding sources, saying in English that the mosque would be funded by American Muslims, and saying in Arabic that funding would come from Muslim nations. It was further relevant that he had declined to denounce Hamas as a terrorist organization, and that he had helped fund the jihad flotilla that was trying to take arms into Israel. I closed by pointing out that Riddle had said that the building had no unique historical value, but that it did, because it was the only building into which part of a 9/11 plane had crashed, and as such should be a war memorial. A Communist (really! At the Staten Island mosque hearing he actually shouted, “Workers of the world, unite!”) started shouting that I was a bigot, to which I responded that it was not bigotry to point out dishonesty and subversion, and that the Commission should consider carefully whether or not it was being lied to by the mosque proponents.

CNN: Burqa Ban Passes French Lower House Overwhelmingly

France’s lower house of parliament Tuesday overwhelmingly passed a ban on any veils that cover the face – including the burqa, the full-body covering worn by some Muslim women. The vote was 335 to 1. The measure must still go to the French Senate before it becomes law. The Senate is expected to vote on it in the week of September 20.

Abigail Pesta: An American Honor Killing

Around the sprawling, sunbaked campus of Dysart High School in El Mirage, Arizona, not many people knew about the double life of a pretty, dark-haired girl named Noor Almaleki. At school, she was known as a fun-loving student who made friends easily. She played tennis in a T-shirt emblazoned with the school mascot — a baby demon in a diaper. She liked to watch Heroes and eat at Chipotle. Sometimes she talked in a goofy Keanu Reeves voice. She wore dark jeans, jeweled sandals, and flowy tops from Forever 21. She texted constantly and called her friends “dude.” In other words, she was an American girl much like any other.

But at home, Noor inhabited a darker world. She lived a life of subservience, often left to care for her six younger siblings. Noor’s father, 49-year-old Faleh Almaleki, was strict and domineering, deeming it inappropriate for her to socialize with guys, wear jeans, or post snapshots of herself on MySpace. Her responsibility was to follow orders, or to risk a beating. From her father’s perspective, the only time Noor’s life would ever change would be when she married a man he selected for her — back in his homeland of Iraq. Noor, however, had a different vision for herself. Having lived in the U.S. for 16 years, she held dreams of becoming a teacher, of marrying a man she loved, and, most importantly, of making her own choices.

On a cloudless, breezy afternoon in late October 2009, her father set out to end those dreams. As Noor walked across a suburban parking lot to a Mexican restaurant with a friend – a 43-year-old woman named Amal Khalaf – Faleh Almaleki gunned the engine of his Jeep Grand Cherokee and bore down on his 20-year-old daughter and her companion. The women took off running but were no match for the SUV, already traveling close to 30 miles per hour. Suddenly Amal turned, held up her hands in a futile attempt to stop the Jeep, and froze. Moments later, the vehicle struck the women, tossing them into the air. Amal hit the pavement; Noor landed on a raised median, in a patch of pebbly landscaping. Faleh wasn’t done, though. Swerving onto the median, he ran over his daughter as she lay bleeding, fracturing her face and spine. Then, he reversed and sped away.

Passersby heard the roar of the engine, screams, the impact of the bodies as they hit the Jeep’s grill. They saw the women lying on the ground, their sandals scattered across the lot. A witness called 911, and emergency vehicles converged. Amal’s condition was stable; Noor was comatose. Local police characterized the incident as an attempted “honor killing” — the murder of a woman for behaving in a way that “shames” her family. It’s a practice with deep, tenacious roots in the tribal traditions of the Middle East and Asia. (The United Nations estimates that 5,000 women die annually from such crimes.) Women are stoned, stabbed, and, in the recent case of a teenage girl in Turkey, tied up and buried alive. But honor killings in America are a chilling new trend. In Texas, teen sisters Amina and Sarah Said were shot dead in 2008, allegedly by their father, because they had boyfriends. That same year in Georgia, 25-year-old Sandeela Kanwal was allegedly strangled by her father for wanting to leave an arranged marriage. Last year in New York, Aasiya Hassan, 37, was murdered in perhaps the most gruesome way imaginable: She was beheaded, allegedly by her husband, for reportedly seeking a divorce. And this past spring, 19-year-old Tawana Thompson’s husband gunned her down in Illinois, reportedly following arguments about her American-style clothing.

Amazingly, honor killings in the U.S. have been largely ignored by the national media. That’s because these incidents are typically dismissed as “domestic” in nature — a class of crime that rarely makes the headlines. Since the murderer is a member of the woman’s family, there’s no extended investigation to capture the public’s attention. Also, the family of the perpetrator rarely advocates for the victim, due to either fear or a belief that the woman got what she deserved. “From the family’s point of view, if the goal is to end rumors about their female relative, the last thing they want is to have the press talk about the case,” says Rana Husseini, a human-rights activist and author of Murder in the Name of Honor. Still, the lack of media coverage or public outcry cannot erase the evidence: Honor killings have washed up on our shores.

Amie Ferris-Rotman: Russia’s Muslim South Triples Sharia Bride Price

Against the backdrop of a bubbling Islamist insurgency, the revival of Islam in the North Caucasus following the break-up of the Soviet Union almost 20 years ago has brought sharia law to the region, revered by both rebels and ordinary citizens alike. The issue of the ‘kalym’, a price paid by a groom to the family of the woman he chooses to marry, is the latest example of a broader trend that has troubled the Kremlin. [...] Polygamy, illegal under Russian law, is encouraged by local authorities in the region. Last month rights workers blamed police for paintball attacks on Chechen women for not wearing headscarves, and Islamist fighters in Ingushetia have gunned down kiosk workers for selling vodka.

Saeed Kamali Dehghan: Campaign for Iranian Woman Facing Death by Stoning

A 43-year-old Iranian woman is facing death by stoning unless an international campaign launched by her children forces the authorities to quash what her lawyer calls a bogus conviction. In a case that highlights the growing use of the death penalty in a country that has already executed more than 100 people this year, Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani was convicted in May 2006 of conducting an “illicit relationship outside marriage.” Sakineh already endured a sentence of 99 lashes, but her case was re-opened when a court in Tabriz suspected her of murdering her husband. She was acquitted, but the adultery charge was reviewed and a death penalty handed down on the basis of “judge’s knowledge” – a loophole that allows for subjective judicial rulings where no conclusive evidence is present. Speaking to the Guardian, her son Sajad, 22, and daughter Farideh, 17, say their mother has been unjustly accused and already punished for something she did not do. “She’s innocent, she’s been there for five years for doing nothing”, Sajad said. He described the imminent execution as barbaric. “Imagining her, bound inside a deep hole in the ground, stoned to death, has been a nightmare for me and my sister for all these years.” Under Iranian sharia law, the sentenced individual is buried up to the neck (or to the waist in the case of men), and those attending the public execution are called upon to throw stones. If the convicted person manages to free themselves from the hole, the death sentence is commuted.

James Gordon Meek and Katie Nelson: Cleric Anwar al-Awlaki Puts ‘Everybody Draw Mohammed’ Cartoonist Molly Norris on Execution Hitlist

A charismatic terror leader linked to the botched Times Square car bomb has placed the Seattle cartoonist who launched “Everybody Draw Muhammed Day” on an execution hit list. Yemeni-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki – the radical who has also been cited as inspiring the Fort Hood, Tex., massacre and the plot by two New Jersey men to kill U.S. soldiers – singled out artist Molly Norris as a “prime target,” saying her “proper abode is hellfire.” FBI officials have notified Norris and warned her they consider it a “very serious threat.” In an English-language Al Qaeda magazine that calls itself “Inspire,” Awlaki damns Norris and eight others for “blasphemous caricatures” of the Prophet Muhammed. The other cartoonists, authors and journalists in Awlaki’s cross hairs are Swedish, Dutch and British citizens.

Dutch News: Van Gogh Killer Has No Regrets

Six years after murdering film maker Theo van Gogh, his killer Mohammed Bouyeri has no regrets about his action, the AD reports on Friday. The paper has got hold of a letter written by Bouyeri to a Muslim group which turned up in Belgium. In the letter Bouyeri writes that he has ‘no regrets’ about the choices he has made and the road he has traveled, the paper says. ‘Not one second in all these years.’

Persian2English: 26 Year Old Woman Raped and Murdered by Basij Members for “Bad Hijab”

Elnaz Babazadeh, a 26 year old woman was raped and murdered by Basij forces in the city of Tabriz (northwestern Iran) last week. According to the reports, Basij forces stopped Babazadeh in her car for not following the Iranian regime’s dress code. Elnaz resisted and ignored orders given by the Basij forces. Then the Basij forces who had initially stopped her jumped into her car and threatened her with a gun. Two other Basij members joined in and all together they beat and raped her. They murdered Babazadeh and dumped her body close to Emamiyeh cemetery. After local investigation was conducted by HRANA members in Tabriz, it was confirmed at Babazadeh’s funeral that the person who killed her was the son of a high-ranking Revolutionary Guards member.

All articles continue at links. Part of a series that never ends… [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] and etc.  It is not the proper role of the State to moderate clothing, but it might be the proper role of the State to make crime and violence more difficult.  A legal ban on the burqa in all circumstances is inappropriate, but a legal compulsion to reveal oneself in some circumstances (banks, airports, during arrests, getting a photo license) might be appropriate.  Hospitals (State and private) should have policies mandating hygienic behavior as a condition for continued employment no matter the religion of the employee.  If washing one’s hands includes revealing one’s hands and is thus against Islam, so much the worse for any would-be Muslim health care worker.  Private businesses are best left to private policies regarding required or forbidden clothing. And having said all that, it is better of courts in France to fine women who wear the burqa than it is for courts in Iran to rape and murder women who no not wear the burqa. These legal and cultural systems are not only different from one another, but one is better than the other. How can I tell? One rapes and murders women who no not wear the burqa, and one does not. The one that doesn’t is better. One culture threatens cartoonists and murders film makers, and one does not. The one that doesn’t is better. One culture has neighborhood stonings of half-buried women as a trial by survival, and one doesn’t.  The one that doesn’t is better.  When individuals from the culture that is worse identify themselves plainly, such as with the burqa, the State of the culture that is better can be tempted to use that easy identifier as a means to preserve itself. But liberty is not easy. Do not ban the burqa. Do not ban Islam.  Existing laws in the West protect freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and protection from violence and intimidation.  Islam is against these laws, but no new anti-Islam laws are needed to keep it at bay.

Islam is not a religion nor is it a cult. It is a complete system. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic and military components. The religious component is a beard for all the other components.  Islamization occurs when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their so-called “religious rights.”  When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to “the reasonable” Muslim demands for their “religious rights,” they also get the other components under the table. Here’s how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book 2007).

As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

United States — Muslim 1.0%
Australia — Muslim 1.5%
Canada — Muslim 1.9%
China — Muslim 1%-2%
Italy — Muslim 1.5%
Norway — Muslim 1.8%

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:

Denmark — Muslim 2%
Germany — Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%
Spain — Muslim 4%
Thailand — Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves – along with threats for failure to comply:

France — Muslim 8%
Philippines — Muslim 5%
Sweden — Muslim 5%
Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago — Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions (Paris — car burnings, etc.). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats (Amsterdam – Mohammed cartoons):

Guyana — Muslim 10%
India — Muslim 13.4%
Israel — Muslim 16%
Kenya — Muslim 10%
Russia — Muslim 10-15%

After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:

Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:

Bosnia — Muslim 40%
Chad — Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:

Albania — Muslim 70%
Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%
Qatar — Muslim 77.5%
Sudan — Muslim 70%

After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:

Bangladesh — Muslim 83%
Egypt — Muslim 90%
Gaza — Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%
Iran — Muslim 98%
Iraq — Muslim 97%
Jordan — Muslim 92%
Morocco — Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan — Muslim 97%
Palestine — Muslim 99%
Syria — Muslim 90%
Tajikistan — Muslim 90%
Turkey — Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of “Dar-es-Salaam” — the Islamic House of Peace — there’s supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:

Afghanistan — Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%
Somalia — Muslim 100%
Yemen — Muslim 99.9%

Of course, that’s not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.

via youtube.

Michael C. Moynihan: Lars Vilks, the Swedish cartoonist who drew Mohammed as a dog, was recently told that a scheduled lecture on free speech, to be held at Jönköping Högskolan, would be canceled due to ‘security concerns.’ This, of course, is a common evasion, intended to protect the brittle sensibilities of Muslim students while supposedly standing four square behind the right of free speech. Alas, the administrators in Jönköping had a point. During a lecture in Uppsala today [11 May 2010] Vilks was attacked by a pack of feral fundamentalists, one of whom managed to headbutt the artist and break his glasses. Police intervened and waged a short battle with the religious nutters who can be heard in the video [above], captured by the newspaper UNT, shouting Allahu Akbar! The AP has a quick report, explaining that “Uppsala University spokeswoman Pernilla Bjork said Vilks was showing a provocative film with sexual content to the crowd when the attacker ran up and hit him in the face with his fists.”

The above video isn’t even two minutes long. Go ahead, give it a look. Lars Vilks is one of several cartoonists who live with a bounty on their heads.  They are sequestered in safe homes guarded by police.  They receive daily threats of death.  Sometimes they are punched, attacked with firebombs, chased by men with hatchets.  Before they can receive visitors, the visitors and their possessions must be frisked.  Before they drive anywhere, they have to check their cars for bombs.  See all this and more from a recent documentary by a Finnish TV station [1][2][3].

Who are these stern comic critics?  What is it they want to have happen?  Is that what you want to have happen too?

BBC: Afghanistan Taliban ‘Using Human Shields’

Gen Mohiudin Ghori said his soldiers had seen Taliban fighters placing women and children on the roofs of buildings and firing from behind them.

Mahmood Delkhasteh: Rapists in Iran’s Regime

Sexual assault against men and women is being systematically used in Iran in an attempt to stifle opposition.

Pajamas Media: What Did You Say About Muhammad?!

Which is more likely to elicit an irate Muslim response: 1) public cartoons of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, or 2) public proclamations that Muhammad was a bisexual, sometime transvestite and necrophile, who enjoyed sucking on the tongues of children, commanded a woman to “breastfeed” an adult man, and advised believers to drink his urine for salutary health?

BBC: Somali Ban on ‘Christian’ Bells

Islamist militants al-Shabab have banned teachers using bells to signal the end of class in the town of Jowhar, 90km (56 miles) north of Mogadishu. Al-Shabab said the bells sounded too much like Christian church bells. This comes after last week’s order by the Hizbul-Islam group that radios stop playing music because it is un-Islamic.

Washington Post: Somali Islamist Rebels Ban English, Science Lessons

Somalia’s hardline Islamists have banned English and science studies in schools in the southern Afmadow town after the education centers there ignored the rebels’ call for fighters, residents and teachers say.

Paul Canning: US and UK Failing to Take Iraq’s Gay Progrom Seriously

Both countries deny any Iraqi state involvement in anti-gay militias, but LGBT supporters suggest otherwise.

Jaxon Van Derbeken: 3 held in alleged anti-gay BB shooting in S.F.

Three cousins from Hayward have been charged in San Francisco with a hate crime and assault for allegedly firing a BB rifle at the face of a man they believed was gay, an attack the men videotaped, authorities said Wednesday. Mohammad Habibzada, Shafiq Hashemi and Sayed Bassam, all 24, are scheduled to be arraigned today in San Francisco Superior Court. They are free on $50,000 bond apiece.

SF Appeal: Hayward Men Out On Bail After Admitting They Came To SF To Shoot Gay Folks

Three Hayward men are scheduled to be arraigned on assault and hate crime charges in San Francisco next week for allegedly shooting a man they thought was gay with a BB gun. The Feb. 26 incident took place at about 10 p.m. outside a Mission District bar at 16th and Guerrero streets, according to police. The 27-year-old San Francisco man had just come out of the bar when he was shot once in the cheek by suspects in a nearby car, which then drove off, police spokesman Officer Samson Chan said. [...] According to Chan, they allegedly admitted to the crime. “The suspects did make a confession, basically stating that they came to San Francisco to target gay people,” he said.

Dustin Gardiner: Dad Accused in ‘Honor Killing’ Will Not Face Death Penalty

Because they seek “some level of assurance that there is no appearance that a Christian is seeking to execute a Muslim for racial, political, religious or cultural beliefs [in Arizona].”

Weekly Blitz: Women Detained for Not Wearing Veil in Bangladesh

Golam Minhaz, an inspector with Detective Branch of Bangladesh Police at Rangpur district detained 19 women in various areas in the city for ‘not wearing veils’.

The Observers: Runaway Wives Sentenced to Public Flogging by Warlord

In some Afghan provinces, warlords still reign supreme. Under their authority, the treatment of women is bleakly reminiscent of Taliban rule; as this video of a woman being whipped in public goes to show.

New York Times: Afghan Child Brides Escape Marriage, But Not Lashes

What in most countries would be considered a criminal offense is in many parts of Afghanistan a cultural norm, one which the government has been either unable or unwilling to challenge effectively.

CNN.com: 3 Women Caned in Malaysia for Adultery

Malaysian authorities have caned three Muslim women under Islamic law for acts of adultery. The canings are a punishment that persists across Malaysian society since the British colonial era of the 19th century.

BBC: Forced Marriages Awareness Tour

The first UK roadshow aiming to stop South Asian youngsters being forced into marriages abroad is due to get under way.

Ayesha Nasir: I Should Have Read My Islamic Marriage Contract

Why do Pakistani women agree to marriage contracts without scrutinizing them first and making sure they won’t be sorry later?

Bint al-Sultan: Ending the Culture of FGM

Like many girls in Sudan, I suffered genital mutilation – but with education, attitudes are beginning to change.

Mail Online: Postal Voting System is a Farce that Shames Democracy

Almost all the worst instances of fraud since 2000 have arisen in places with large concentrations of Asian voters, such as Blackburn, Oldham and Tower Hamlets. In the Birmingham local elections of 2004, six Muslim men stole thousands of ballot papers and marked them for Labour candidates. The Election Commissioner, Richard Mawrey QC, said at their trial that the contest ‘would have disgraced a banana republic’.

Mail Online: Innocent Couple Killed After Their House Was Fire-Bombed in ‘Bungled Honour Killing’

An innocent couple died in a house fire at the hands of assailants who got the wrong address in a botched honour killing, a court heard today. Abdullah Mohammed, 41, and his wife, Aysha Mohammed, 39, were overcome by smoke and fumes after an accelerant was poured through their letterbox and set alight. Their killers were ordered by another man to avenge his family’s honour but instead of firebombing 135 London Road in Blackburn, Lancashire, they started the blaze at 175 London Road.

BBC: Irish ‘Plot to Kill Cartoonist’

Seven people have been arrested in the Irish Republic over an alleged plot to kill a Swedish cartoonist for depicting the Prophet Muhammad, police say. The four men and three women are all Muslim, according to media reports, though a police statement did not confirm this.

Mail Online: ‘Follow the Islamic Way to Save the World,’ Charles Urges Environmentalists

In an hour-long speech, the heir to the throne argued that man’s destruction of the world was contrary to the scriptures of all religions – but particularly those of Islam.

All articles continue at links. Part of a series that never ends… [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] and etc.  In the mainstream media there is a general rule.  You can call them Islamist militants, a group, Islamist rebels, hardline Islamists, rebels, men, Hayward men, suspects, warlords, Afghans, Asians, South Asian youngsters, Pakistani women, assailants, Irish, dads, Malaysian authorities, people – just make sure to call them anything but what they call themselves.  And what they call themselves is Muslims.  Because if you call a Muslim a Muslim, if you name Islam as Islam, then you are going to have a harder time reconciling what Muslims do on the one hand and what you might want them to do on the other.  You might want them to maintain their cuisine and language, add a bit of color to the workplace, but otherwise cotton to Western notions such as ‘don’t set women on fire’ or ‘if you don’t like a comic then don’t look at it.’  That’s what you might want Muslims to do, but that’s not what they’re doing.  If a Muslim does something good, or if they are talking about your idea of a Muslim instead of a real Muslim, then the mainstream media will use the words Muslims use to describe themselves.  Perhaps I am painting with a broad brush, confusing a vocal minority for a more passive minority.  Fair enough.  As that passive majority stops sheltering the vocal minority, as they cut them out like a tumor, then so will I grant my full apology.  Until then, the Muslim world can consider itself to be made up of ‘good Germans.’

Justice was done last Wednesday when the Muhammad and Waqas Parvez, the father and brother of Aqsa Parvez, received life sentences for strangling her to death in their home in Mississauga, Ontario, on December 10, 2007, when she was sixteen years old. But denial as to how a father and brother could have been moved to murder what should have been a beloved daughter and sister remains all-pervasive. If Canada, the United States and Europe are not going to be the sites of many more Islamic honor killings, that has to change.

Muhammad and Waqas Parvez murdered Aqsa because she would not conform to Islamic behavior codes for women. The Qur’an commands women to “draw their veils over their bosoms” (24:31), and in a hadith, Aisha, the favorite wife of Islam’s prophet Muhammad recounts that he commanded that once a woman “reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this, and he pointed to her face and hands” (Sunan Abu Dawud 32.4092). Muhammad Parvez was determined to enforce this command on Aqsa, as well as to force her into an arranged marriage, and she was just as determined to resist. Ultimately she ran away, telling friends that Muhammad Parvez had sworn on the Qur’an to murder her if she did so. But on December 10, 2007, Waqas Parvez showed up at Aqsa’s bus stop, and took the girl home.

Less than an hour later Muhammad Parvez called 911 to tell them he had killed his daughter. His calm after the killing, and his turning himself in, is common with Islamic honor murders and other killings and attempted killings: one notable example came in February 2009, after moderate Muslim leader Muzzammil Hassan beheaded his wife. He went to a police station, shook an officer’s hand, and then shocked the unsuspecting policeman by telling him: “I want to tell you that I just killed my wife and I’m here to turn myself in.” Similarly, when Mohammed Reza Taheri-Azar drove an SUV onto the campus of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and attempted to run over and kill as many students as possible (he killed none but injured nine), he appeared serene and even happy after the attack. This calm may emanate from a sense that the perpetrators have that they have performed an act pleasing to Allah, and will be rewarded for it. And that also may lead us to where Muhammad Parvez got the idea that Aqsa deserved death for her non-Muslim attitudes, and that it was his right, even his responsibility, to kill her. For the fact is little recognized but unmistakable: Islam provides a broad justification for honor killings, such that a man like Muhammad Parvez would most likely believe that in murdering his daughter, he is not committing a heinous crime, but serving his god in a way that that god would regard as a positive good.

[...] This is why honor killings keep happening — because they are broadly tolerated, even encouraged, by Islamic teachings and attitudes. Yet no authorities are calling Islamic leaders to account for this. The main thing that many analysts want you to know about the death of Aqsa Parvez and other honor killing victims is that they had nothing to do with Islam. Shahina Siddiqui, president of the Islamic Social Services Association, declared: “The strangulation death of Ms. Parvez was the result of domestic violence, a problem that cuts across Canadian society and is blind to colour or creed.” Sheikh Alaa El-Sayyed, imam of the Islamic Society of North America in Mississauga, Ontario, agreed: “The bottom line is, it’s a domestic violence issue.” Muhammad Parvez himself didn’t see it that way after killing Aqsa. He grounded his act specifically in the mores of his Islamic community, and clearly believed that that community would regard his killing his daughter more lightly than they would her un-Islamic behavior: “This is my insult. My community will say you have not been able to control your daughter. This is my insult. She is making me naked.”

The life sentences given to Muhammad and Waqas Parvez give Muslim spokesmen in Canada and the United States a new opportunity. They have a new chance to acknowledge that Islam’s shame/honor culture and devaluation of women has created communities in which abuse of women is accepted as normal. They could call for a searching reevaluation of the meaning and continued relevance of material from the Qur’an and Sunnah that devalues and dehumanizes women, and call in no uncertain terms for Muslims to reject explicitly and definitively the literal meaning of such texts, now and for all time to come. They could call for sweeping reform and reexamination of the status of women in Islam. They could call upon every mosque in the West to institute classes teaching against honor killing and directly challenging the teachings and assumptions that give it justification.

For any of this to happen, Muslim leaders in the West would have to adopt an utterly unfamiliar and uncharacteristic stance: that of self-reflection and self-criticism, rather than excuse-making, finger-pointing, and evasion of responsibility. But with the mainstream media and law enforcement continuing to abet that evasion, this is unlikely in the extreme. Much more likely is that many, many more Muslim girls in the West will die miserably like Aqsa Parvez. No one is speaking up for them or defending them.

Article continues.

Dena Potter: Rasta Inmates Spend 10 Years in Isolation for Hair

It is [Kendall Gibson's] hair — winding locks he considers a measure of his Rastafarian faith — that makes him a threat, according to Virginia Department of Corrections Operating Procedure No. 864.1. The rule took effect on Dec. 15, 1999. Inmates had two choices: cut their hair no longer than their collars and shave their beards, or be placed in administrative segregation.

Paul von Zielbauer: Inmates Are Free to Practice Black Supremacist Religion in New York, a Judge Rules

Mr. [Intelligent Tarref] Allah is a Five Percenter, part of a black militant group that broke from the Nation of Islam in the 1960′s. The New York State prison system has long regarded it as a violence-prone gang, much as the system also regards the Latin Kings, Crips or the Aryan Brotherhood. The name derives from the concept that only 5 percent of the world’s people break free from the worship of a false ”mystery God” and become gods to themselves and their families.

Justin Penrose: Rapist Jamaile Morally in Boiling Oil Jail Attack

A jailed killer poured boiling oil over another inmate because he refused to convert to Islam. Jamaile Morally, 26 – sentenced to life as part of a gang that raped, tortured and murdered a teenage girl and left another for dead – led two other inmates in carrying out the attack.

BBC: Kenya ‘Deports Muslim Hate Cleric Abdullah al-Faisal’

He has served four years in a UK prison after being convicted of soliciting the murder of Jews and Hindus.

Religion Cause: Miranda Rights Waived In Answers About Religious Belief and Prayer

Earlier this week in Berghuis v. Thompkins, (Sup. Ct., June 1, 2010), the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision made it easier for police to obtain a waiver of Miranda rights by suspects being questioned. The majority opinion, written by Justice Kennedy, held that police can continue questioning a suspect until he clearly invokes his right to remain silent. Furthermore, when questioning continues after a Miranda warning has been given and understood, the accused’s later uncoerced statement implies a waiver of his right to remain silent. The uncoerced statement in this case was a response by the accused to questions about his belief in God. Here is Justice Kennedy’s account: About 2 hours and 45 minutes into the interrogation, [Police Detective] Helgert asked Thompkins, “Do you believe in God?” …. Thompkins made eye contact with Helgert and said “Yes,” as his eyes “well[ed] up with tears.” … “Do you pray to God?” Thompkins said “Yes.” … Helgert asked, “Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?” … Thompkins answered “Yes” and looked away…. Thompkins refused to make a written confession, and the interrogation ended about 15 minutes later.

How Fatima Started Islam: Mohammad’s Daughter Tells All by Noor Barack
2009 Camel Flea Press
ISBN 978-0-578-03290-0
[Amazon]

No matter what his followers might be up to these days, Mohammad was a fight-starting, raisin-thieving, child-raping, lie-telling, Jew-killing, Christian-hating, nonsense-spouting sort of a One True Prophet of Allah.  Allah being an invisible monster that lives in the sky, the theocracy of Islam is a sacred fantasy.  And what better to deflate a sacred fantasy than a profane fantasy?

How Fatima Started Islam: Mohammad’s Daughter Tells All by Noor Barack  is a revisionist fiction on the origins of Islam, told from the perspective of one of Mohammad’s daughters.    Mr. Barack demonstrates a knowledge of Islam’s history in what he chooses to mock and re-interpret.  He also freely invents scandal upon scandal, heresy upon heresy, if it moves the story forward or evokes a shriek from the faithful.    Readers will laugh as blasphemy and narrative collide.  How Fatima Started Islam purposefully insults Islam and Muslims.  It’s personal.  And yet as rough and base as the book may be, it is still better than how things are done by the target of Mr. Barack’s scorn.  It’s how things are done in the West.  Don’t like something?  Write a book about it, perhaps even a mean-spirited and funny book.  How things are done in the Muslim world is quite different.  Don’t like something?  Then you go killing, killing, killing, killing, killing, killing, killing, until your enemies are either dead or cowed.  Faced with this distinction, I prefer my fantasies profane.

Poking fun at a bully won’t always make them stop, and it doesn’t lead to knowing what you and the bully should do once the bullying has ended.  But words will never hurt you.  The worst outcome this book could ever possibly generate is that after reading it a person might feel insulted, or bored.  That’s the very worst thing that could happen when you read a book.  Not so bad, is it?  And that’s part of the point of winding up bullies – it’s an opportunity for them to join the laughter, if they will only take it.  When it comes time for the fingers to be pointed at me I do my best to muddle through and move on.  Taking satire and inquiry “too far” is how the darkness is dispelled, even if not everyone cares to venture to the edge.  Heresy and not orthodoxy is the guardian of truth, for only heresy can reveal errors in thought and action.  One of the heresies of How Fatima Started Islam is found on the back cover, a photograph of Mohammad.  It seems like a nontroversy to me, but people are being threatened with death all over the world for publishing images said to be Mohammad.  Let me join the fun: the image above is the back cover of How Fatima Started Islam.

From a letter accompanying my (signed!) copy of How Fatima Started Islam:

As all warriors against the Islamification of the West have observed, the Imans, Mullahs, and Terrorists want it both ways. The West must kowtow to them while they can trash any other religion or culture with impunity. They hate ridicule and my little effort is what they hate, to be laughed at and denigrated.

From the introduction:

I have broadly tried to humorously poke fun at some people who are not known for being fun loving, and to make less serious the tenets of a belief.  I believe we have to fearlessly show that all faiths, people, cultures, religions and ideas are on an equal footing in the market place of human endeavor, and that no one person or group is above anyone else.  [...] In an odd way, things like this little book will eventually help achieve mutual understanding and respect when people can look at themselves and others on an equal footing.

From Chapter Three

The first pillar of Islam, in a sense the key to the very beginning of the religion, is the camel. It was actually one specific camel named Old Mama, but she was a representation of all the camels needed for the rapid, bloody spread of Islam.

For those fortunate enough to have no personal knowledge of the beasts let me give some brief background. Camels are large, ugly animals who were genetically engineered for deserts. They have a tough skin that smells really bad, an evil, foul breath that can kill small animals and children, a stubborn nature that a mule could envy, and all this is coupled with a colossal stupidity. In short, the camel is a metaphor for the land of Arabia. Among the locals there is a constant argument on whether the camel was made for Arabia or Arabia made for the camel.

But many of our men, and even some women, seem to love these flatulent stinkpots. When the wind is right a caravan, and even sometimes a single camel, can be smelled before it can be seen. Needless to say, those associated with the animals retain an unfortunate aura of camelness about their person. Add this to the general lack of rain and water of the region and you have many persons seriously questioning why people were born with noses. The vast majority of the population never gets totally used to it: and pity the few who do, and become walking plagues of stink. My father Mohammad seemed to relish in camel-stink. It added one more assault upon me on my night that I was raped into womanhood.

Now like many camelmen, the old sot had a favorite camel, which was his bimmy. A bimmy was a pet camel that shared a special relationship with her master. Old Mama was Mohammad’s bimmy for many years and he seemed to love this obstinate, moody, and gaggingly foul smelling animal. The main reason for the affection was that Old Mama when commanded would lower and angle herself whenever Mohammad wanted to fuck her. As he got older his sexual liaisons with the beast lessened and she did die before he did. But he was famous for getting blind drunk and humping Old Mama in every public place in Mecca. The citizens of Mecca do not have high standards for anything, but even among that crowd his drunken behavior with Old Mama was considered bush league and a cause of public derision as well as constant off color jokes.

The way Islam was actually started was like this. One night as I was approaching thirteen, and in total unhappiness with my horrible life, my father was out and about and got into his usual state of stupor. For whatever reason he decided to come home and sleep it off at the complex. He managed to get on Old Mama with no problem and she put it into automatic and headed toward home as she had done a thousand times before. When the pathway diverged into a fork with one branch going left and other right, Old Mama headed right the way to our quarters. Dear old dad in his fog was confused and sure that the way to go was left. He steers Old Mama to the left but she still wanted to go right. He got pissed, both literaraly and figuratively, and started kicking and hitting her with a stick. Old Mama angrily stopped and purposely bucked with Mohammad being thrown off. This had all happened before and was no big deal, but this time he landed head first on a rock. He lay there for about fifteen minutes before he was discovered and carried back to the complex unconscious.

He lay like that until the middle of the second day when he awoke, his body had detoxed all the booze, he ate some food, talked normally and went immediately back into a state of unconsciousness for another 24 hours. Mohammad again awoke, ate heartily and communicated quite normally. About five hours later he went into a trancelike state and began to talk in total gibberish. This was absolutely unlike his drunken slurred and nearly impossible to comprehend ramblings, which we were all used to, but a sober sounding, even authoritative clear speech of absolute nonsense.

He went in and out of this trancelike state. Of course, when he was appearing normal, he was asked about the odd behavior and speech. He stated that he had no idea he was doing anything and no memory of acting at all unusually. He was a little scared and he kept to himself more and drank less. The alcohol did not seem to affect the weird gibberish states one way or the other. So, after another few days, things were pretty normal as I am still keeping the cash accounts and screwing every horny moron who could beg, borrow, or steal two shekels. I had briefly talked to my father about raising the rates in the brothel because I was very sure that we would make more money, also at the same time we would have slightly less volume with me off my back a little more. I figured that if we raised the rates 50% we would only lose about 10% of the tricks for an increased profit of 35%. Naturally he dismissed the idea off hand.

After the evening meal break, when only the slave whores were available, I decided that the time was approaching. Mohammad was slurping over a roasted camel neck when he went into the trance and started babbling incomprehensible foolishness in a deliberative way. It was as if he were expounding on an important point in an intelligent way if you did not know him and know that the syllables coming out were pure nonsense. It was the third time that day that he had began to speak gibberish so the awe and wonder had faded a little bit.

I rose and went right next to him. Everyone was looking at me and all was quiet as I waited a few seconds and then announced, “I can understand what he is saying.”