January 28, 2010, - 5:11 pm

“Tolerance”: Vanderbilt Muslim Professor Says Gays Must Be Executed

By Debbie Schlussel

Kudos to brave, smart, patriotic Vanderbilt University student, Devin Saucier, who heads up Youth for Western Civilization.  He is an example of citizen activism that we all must undertake to expose the savage threat we face in this country.  And I hope we see more of him and others who emulate what he’s done.  Saucier confronted Vanderbilt Professor Awadh A. Binhazim and asked him if he approves of the Islamic requirement for executing gays.  Dr. Awadh responded that he must agree with all the dictates of Islam, including that one.  Watch the video, below.

awadhbinhazim

As we all know, if Dr. Binhazim was a White, Christian professor, he’d be out of a job by now and gay and lesbian activists would be staging sit-ins for this or that new emolument from the University.  Of course, as with all things Islamic, that’s not the case here, and Dr. Binhazim remains a treasured version of “diversity” and “tolerance” on the Vanderbilt faculty, in the Vanderbilt Divinity School, no less.

I think it’s hilarious that Dr. Binhazim tries to worm his way out of the fact that virtually all Islamic countries outlaw homosexuality and punish it with death. That includes Egypt, where gays have been beheaded for participating on a gay cruise.  Plus a recent study conducted by the U.S. military has bad news for Dr. Binhazim, as it shows that homosexual behavior is unusually common among Afghani men (all of ‘em Muslims, pretty much).  That’s a lotta executin’ to do.  And he better get cracking.

Again, congrats to Devin Saucier for this excellent work. He is the embodiment of the saying that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

68 Responses

The more educated a Muslim, the more extreme his views. Secular and ex Muslims are unlikely to be infected by this garbage. But you should begin to worry if they are “born again.” Needless to say, the consequences of a recrudescence to jihadism will be far from pleasant.

NormanF on January 28, 2010 at 5:56 pm

    “Secular and ex Muslims are unlikely to be infected by this garbage.”

    That is very wishful thinking. You must remember that a Muslim has this stuff hardwired into them from an early. Even if Muslim is lax or not observant,the foundations for a revival of militant belief still exist. A personal crisis or loss are often triggers for such people. Unless the faith is formally repudiated and replaced by another, a void will remain.

    sorrow01 on January 28, 2010 at 6:36 pm

It is pretty amazing. Where are the gay activists who were wlling to storm churches to protest Proposition 8’s passage in California? I would assume that a professor’s acceptance of the execution of gays for being gays would be at least as problematic as a gay marriage ban. Apparently, this is not the case.

sorrow01 on January 28, 2010 at 6:00 pm

    Hi Sorrow1,

    I believe the reason “they” were not out in full force protesting this Muslim professor, is because “they” were afraid of him, because he is a Muslim.

    This maybe due to the fact, that it is only Muslims who cut off people’s heads and send the video’s out to be posted on internet sites around the world.

    Jews and Christians don’t do that. Only Muslims do that.

    And so I believe “they” were afraid to protest against the Muslim professor, because he is a Muslim.

    Israel 4 Zion on January 28, 2010 at 10:00 pm

It’s simple. Radical leftists, gays and feminists have a bond with Islam. That bond is stronger and more powerful than anything. More powerful than women’s rights, gay rights, or any rights. That bond is a mutual hatred of Christianity, Judaism, capitalism, western civilization, and freedom.

Spiffo on January 28, 2010 at 6:44 pm

    Also, when Islam no longer needs such allies, they will be disposed of. Leftists discovered this to their horror in Iran after the revolution.

    sorrow01 on January 28, 2010 at 7:41 pm

    There is a reason everybody hates those people you mentioned ;)

    Fay Fay on January 29, 2010 at 12:17 am

    Dude, calm down. Gays don’t have a bond with Islam, or a hatred of freedom. They are mostly concerned with cock.

    JDG on March 8, 2010 at 4:15 pm

sorrow, the Iranian Tudeh collaborated with the Khomeinists in the Islamic Revolution. They were promptly liquidated after the Khomeinists seized absolute power. The Left is led by useful idiots.

NormanF on January 28, 2010 at 8:10 pm

What we have here is a present day faith, religion, what have you; that believe they have the right to take someone’s life because they do not like their behaviors.
Can you say “stuck in the Dark Ages”.

stewburner on January 28, 2010 at 8:20 pm

    Yes, however this site is helping people remain in the dark ages

    Fay Fay on January 29, 2010 at 12:18 am

      Why not go enjoy the brilliant light of Islam. You will find a great deal of compassion there, if you are gay. Also, what are you doing about Dr. Binhazim? Do your acrid remarks fly away when you are confronted with a real enemy? Why don’t email Dr. Binhazim, and share your thoughts, such as they are. Do you even have the bravery of a gerbil?

      sorrow01 on January 29, 2010 at 12:52 am

Let’s take a bit deeper look at this shall we? We should pay attention to whose memes of social terror are souding identical, and who are now openly revealing very old ties. Whatever you vote for about gay marriage, we all know that California’s PROP 8 was killed due to massive Mormon funding; extremist Mormons hold same the views as this “proterrorfessor”…we know that Saudi “Arabs of money” hold that “Women are for babies, Men are for Love”… and we know that arch-uber-terror financiers, e.g., K Bin Mahfouz (male), of Yemen/Saudi, had highly placed US political male lovers, and I shall repeat this, 9/11 counter-terror head John O’Neil couldn’t get visas to get his FBI team back into Yemen to dig out the 9/11 plot in early 2001, when a Mormon film team got in. There is a belief-movement within Mormonism to identify with not only Islam (muslimmormon.com), but also Aryans, sound familiar? What do you think these “one world” ppl are up to? Why don’t we just Ask Harry Reid? And please remember it is not polite to ask Barry if he ever was a card carrying member of some local chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood, after you elected him president of the United Saudi States of America.

DiamondRing on January 28, 2010 at 8:46 pm

I meant killed Gay Marriage, Prop 8 was an amendment to protect marriage as between a man and a woman and it passed. Thta being said, no healthy society has ever dictated that gays should be killed for being gay. Only terroristic psychopaths like the Mormons and Muslim extremists believe that. I maintain that one may hold differences about legal marriage options, but to kill? That professor should be Terminated for holding that belief.

DiamondRing on January 28, 2010 at 8:57 pm

    “Whatever you vote for about gay marriage, we all know that California’s PROP 8 was killed due to massive Mormon funding; extremist Mormons hold same the views as this “proterrorfessor.”

    Sorry, I do not know that. Please spare us the silly assumptions. That proposition passed by over 52% of those who voted on the issue: ^ “Statement of Vote: 2008 General Election” (PDF). California Secretary of State. 2008-12-13. http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2008_general/sov_complete.pdf.
    I do not think that they were Mormons or Islamists for the most part. Also, I do not see Mormons hijacking planes, doing suicide bombings, etc. So, whether you like them or not, Mormons are really not comparable to Islamists. By making such a comparison, you really trivialize the whole issue.

    Worry01 on January 28, 2010 at 10:12 pm

As D-D-Debbie would say…HUH?!

troutmaskreplica on January 28, 2010 at 9:08 pm

“Tolerance”: Vanderbilt Muslim Professor Says Gays Must Be Executed
————————————————-
So does Leviticus in the Torah. So the question really is why doesn’t Israel execute homosexuals if their God commands them to do so?

Norman Blitzer on January 28, 2010 at 10:04 pm

Debbie, you have a post something like, “Feuds you wish would never end” Well this is one I wish would never end. HOMOSEXUALS VERSUS MUSLIMS. They are both enemies of Americans and in some respect I have more respect for Muslims. At least Muslims will say they will destroy in your face. HOMOSEXUALS will lie, cheat and manipulate to destroy you literally behind your back.

Also this Dont Ask Dont Tell is Crap. Just ban the damn HOMOSEXUALS. I dont get it. HOMOSEXUALS will have the ability to shower with other men in open a manner. IS THIS F**CKING INSANE? What the hell will it do to morale. O.K. Let’s have men shower with women and see how the women like it. DUHH? It’s about showering with someone who has an open sexual attraction to you that you don’t want. HOMOSEXUALS profess a desire for other men and they will be in the same showers and close quarters. WTF?? In High School all the HOMOSEXUALS were forced by other kids to be in their own aisles. Or they would get bashed. TOO F**CKING bad if you don’t like how we dealt them. How in the hell do you think they are treated in jail or prison? They are segregated for their own safety.

Beware of the PINK SWASTIKA!!

CaliforniaScreaming on January 28, 2010 at 10:23 pm

[CaliforniaScreaming on January 28, 2010 at 10:23 pm]

Thanks for exposing yourself as the hateful bigot you are. Conservatives love conservatism but not America.

Norman Blitzer on January 28, 2010 at 10:39 pm

    You should remain calm so your caregiver does not have to change your diaper again.

    sorrow01 on January 29, 2010 at 12:54 am

Norman Blitzer you are whiner. Guys like you zip their pants in the back and sit when they piss. I grew up in a tough neighborhood. We laugh at you guys and called you Maricons.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=maricon

No I am American of Mexican decent and every group of people (by race and religion) know one thing HOMOSEXUALITY is an abomination in any culture and society. Has nothing to do with America and conservatism it is universal. There is a street code and if you want to survive don’t give unwanted advances to those of the same sex.

It is ok and accepted for a women to resort to violence when a woman gets an unwanted sexual advance from a male. But when a man gets an unwanted sexual advance from a male you think we have to put up with it. We aren’t tolerant. We should have to shower with HOMOSEXUALS to prove that our society is tolerant. I bet you think it is ok for Male Gym teachers to be HOMOSEXUAL?

CaliforniaScreaming on January 28, 2010 at 10:56 pm

Gays for Palestine will no doubt feel the Prof doesn’t have true Islamic creds. For that matter, they will surmise that Muslims don’t have true Islamic creds.
There are a couple regular commenters here that are true haters and somewhat delusional. The usual anti-Christian few now espouse on Mormonism and its professed beliefs that gays should be thrown of tall buildings, be beheaded or something. I would prefer a bit of evidence for this assertion.
Or is this the usual drivel that is used to turn this blog into a discredited hate site in order to detract from the real news service it provides?

pat on January 28, 2010 at 11:00 pm

    Since when is this not a discredited hate site?

    Fay Fay on January 29, 2010 at 12:20 am

      Since when is your opinion of any value whatsoever? Do you have anything to say, or are you just doing middle school taunts right now?

      sorrow01 on January 29, 2010 at 12:56 am

Liberal left wing progressive Muslims like DarthNader who troll me on twitter always STFU when I bring up the executions of gays in virtually all Islamic countries. Of course, the religion of peace also has a Koran that says all infidels should be killed in the name of Allah. All Christians, Jews and other non believers are infidels. Political correctness concerning Radical Islam is going to get all of us killed.

“I WILL CAST TERROR INTO THE HEARTS OF THOSE WHO DISBELIEVE. THEREFORE STRIKE OFF THEIR HEADS AND STRIKE OFF EVERY FINGERTIP OF THEM. THIS IS BECAUSE THEY ACTED ADVERSELY TO ALLAH AND HIS MESSENGER; AND WHOEVER ACTS ADVERSELY TO ALLAH AND HIS MESSENGER – THEN SURELY ALLAH IS SEVERE IN REQUITING (EVIL). THIS – TASTE IT, AND (KNOW) THAT FOR THE UNBELIEVERS IS THE PUNISHMENT OF FIRE. O you who believe! When you meet those who disbelieve marching for war, then turn not your backs to them. And whoever shall turn his back to them on that day – unless he turn aside for the sake of fighting or withdraws to a company – then he, indeed, becomes deserving of Allah’s wrath, and his abode is hell; and an evil destination shall it be. So you did not slay them, but it was Allah Who slew them and you did not smite when you smote (the enemy) but it was Allah Who smote, and that He might confer upon the believers a good gift from Himself;” (8:12-17)

Bonzer Wolf on January 29, 2010 at 12:29 am

Debbie,
We now have the Unions (those are the best to have), the Judges and we now have the President. Debbie, We are bigger than U.S. Steel.

Karen on January 29, 2010 at 12:32 am

So does Leviticus in the Torah. So the question really is why doesn’t Israel execute homosexuals if their God commands them to do so?

Norman Blitzer on January 28, 2010 at 10:04 pm

At present, the State of Israel’s legal system is for the most part not based on Jewish law.

But to your point, indeed Judaism views homosexual behavior as a capital crime.

Shy Guy on January 29, 2010 at 1:24 am

What I find amazing is a Muslim Professor believes gays should be executed and the comment section if filled with “Debbie is a hate site” and Conservatives are hate mongers…..Nothing about how Muslims are the hate mongers and intollerant to anyone….
Like Debbie said, Why is it Muslims get a pass on everything?

perception of truth on January 29, 2010 at 8:13 am

The debate is over. Muslims have overachieved, overreached, and the time for affirmative action is over!

Muslim Achievement Society on January 29, 2010 at 8:15 am

So why don’t all Jews and Christians call for exucution of gays since the bible and Torah call for it. They are the word an all loving god.

Nak on January 29, 2010 at 8:19 am

Nak, what is your *ucking point? Are you telling us that Islam is better because they follow their death cult more than Christians and Jews do? If that’s the case than I’m all for following by Bible to the letter. Executing people like you will be on the top of the list.

perception of truth on January 29, 2010 at 8:31 am

    [Nak, what is your *ucking point? Are you telling us that Islam is better because they follow their death cult more than Christians and Jews do?
    perception of truth]

    No, dumbass. The point is the Koran and the Torah/OT has the same stuff in it so how can one be better than the other?

    Norman Blitzer on January 29, 2010 at 11:43 am

      My appologies dumbass. According to you, then neither is better than the other one. Come back and spew your crap when Christians and Jews start blowing up airplanes and mass murdering those they don’t agree with.

      perception of truth on January 29, 2010 at 12:23 pm

Perception of truth, the difference is Muslims will execute HOMOSEXUALS, the rest of us will rail against HOMOSEXUALS. HOMOSEXUALS have an agenda. You think we are naive. Their agenda is to destroy the family unit. They want more people to be like them so legislation is drawn to fit their deviant lifestyle. It is a deviancy. They have the right to life, liberty and prosperity. So do we. We don’t need our Constition shredded to fit their lifestyle. HOMOSEXUALS want freedoms I don’t have. They want to be in the same showers as the people they are sexually attracted to. Hey I bet a lot heterosexual men would like to shower with a bunch of women. You know those women should just tolerate it and quit hating on us heterosexual males. Heterosexual women are just haters of heterosexual males. This is same logic HOMSEXUALS put on heterosexuals.

Muslims see us a weak, I don’t blame them. Hell if I was Muslim and I saw this rammed down others people’s throats, don’t you think they would see us a weak society?

Diversity–>Tolerance–>Acceptance–>Affirmation–>Mandate–>Subjugation

That is how the HOMOSEXUAL agenda is spread. Be diverse “because we must learn something from everyone”. Then “we must tolerate this behavior because we must tolerate things you don’t like”. Then “we must accept them because they are everywhere”, it is spread on images through MSM and Hollyweird. Then “we must affirm their lifestyle through HOMOSEXUAL marriage”. Then “we must mandate that it be through in public schools and instituted in the military and through Hate Crime legislation”. Hey we got Harvey Milk Day in California. Let’s indoctrinate our kids in the pleasures of a deviant lifestyle. Finally subjugation through fascism, people will eventually be imprisoned for having views different than theirs.

CaliforniaScreaming on January 29, 2010 at 8:47 am

    I agree with you completely on all counts. My question to the Muslim facists is: Is Islam a better religion and are Muslims more rightous because they follow the Quran to the letter? Execute gays, and infidels alike, kill women who have been raped, children and women have no rights…etc. If they believe themselves above and better than the rest of us then I will stick to my flawed Christian and Jewish faith.

    perception of truth on January 29, 2010 at 10:15 am

    I also wanted to add that once the homosexual agenda is completed, which IMO it will be..Then the peodophile agenda will be next. We already have a dominate religion that views peodophilia as normal, and we have many other countries that traffic this behavior to rich elitists from this country.

    This is the sole reason why liberals and Hollyweird want to do away with the values of Christianity and Judism. When they can eliminate Christian values, then it opens up the “Do as you like, feels good” mentality.

    perception of truth on January 29, 2010 at 10:24 am

Mama Mia! Those Afgans, they are-a some twinky terrorists! Es disgracia! They probably all turned gay b/c Pauly D fist pumps all night long with ALL the hot tomatoes in celebration of my Italian heritage.

Pauly D on January 29, 2010 at 9:21 am

What’s that you say? The U.S. Army is saying that the fearsome and warlike Afghan warriors, when they’re not trying to kill Americans (bad) or each other (not so bad) are also having sex? With each other?? Are Afghan women that ugly??? Maybe this is why they seem to be so fond of RPG’S, you know that old saying, “Walk softly and carry a big dick”. LOL…well maybe it’s just that the winters in Afghanistan are just so darn cold..and they are pretty flashy dressers.

kenny komodo on January 29, 2010 at 9:26 am

So why don’t all Jews and Christians call for exucution of gays since the bible and Torah call for it.

Nak on January 29, 2010 at 8:19 am

———————————-

In general Christianity does not believe it has to abide by the vast majority of commandments stipulated in the Torah. Ask your local Christian how they decide what’s in and what’s out.

As for Judaism, capital punishment was abolished some 2000+ years ago for several reasons:

1. Collapse of the Jewish judicial system in Israel.

2. Collapse of moral code among many in Jewish society. To quote this article:

“Where sin is rampant within every rank, where society has become so clueless of the far-reaching negative influence of sin, Beth Din (a Jewish court) cannot achieve this goal. Thus, where the loss of sanctity cannot be meaningfully reinstated, capital punishment would obviously prove an ineffective solution. In such circumstances were a Beth Din to kill once in 7 or 70 years (see Babylonian Talmud, Mishnah, Tractate Makkot, 1:10) without a direct consequence of this having a positive, beneficial influence of the Jewish people, such an institution was termed a “murderous court”.”

In addition, in order to try and convict someone in Jewish law – for any crime – there have to be very accurate witnesses and pre-criminal warnings, which were extremely difficult to actually occur under most circumstances.

All that being said, homosexuality and other immoral behaviors are shunned by observant Jewish communities around the world.

Most of what I’ve said holds true for observant Noahides as well.

They are the word an all loving god.

As an observant Jew, I don’t know what that means. This is not the G-d of the Tanach. A simple example will have to do for the moment:

“The LORD preserveth all them that love Him; but all the wicked will He destroy.” – Psalm 145:20

Must run. The Sabbath begins here in Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the nation of Israel. Shabbat Shalom, Debbie, and to all my fellow Jews.

Shy Guy on January 29, 2010 at 9:45 am

Nak writes, “So why don’t all Jews and Christians call for exucution of gays since the bible and Torah call for it. They are the word an all loving god.”

I can’t speak for the Christian attitude. But the Jewish tradition has always relied on interpretation and commentary. We’ve used both as a means of restricting problematic directives – for example, capital punishment for adulterers, rebellious sons, and Sabbath breakers – turning them effectively into admonitions and exhortations. The directive to “wipe out” Amelek, to take another example, is made moot by declaring “no certainty” as to his true identity. And means of dealing with economically crippling restrictions on, say, taking of interest or consuming agricultural produce during the Jubilee year, have been derived from such creative interpretation. I summarized this mechanism years ago as involving principle, precedent, and process.

Islam, by contrast, closed the door to such reinterpretation – ijtihad – some 1,000 years ago. That pretty much closes the door to any “reform” of Islam. Those that might manifest such a reform process are automatically deemed apostates, and we all know what that means.

Raymond in DC on January 29, 2010 at 10:12 am

Another interesting point overlooked.
This professor states that he must and is required to believe in all tenants of Islam. So he must be one of those moderate Muslims we keep hearing about. If he believes that gays should be executed, then he must also believe that all infidels should be executed. As this is a tenant of Islam as well. Hmmm, perhaps this is why we never hear from the Muslim community when one of their own commits an act of terrorism.

Also, if the military deems that homosexuals can openly serve, and shower with heterosexual males, then the heterosexual males should and be required to shower with the women. You can’t impose a distinction upon one, and not the other.

Lastly, why not have homosexual males serve openly, the military have Muslims serving openly and well… we have already seen how that has worked out for them.

perception of truth on January 29, 2010 at 11:18 am

[Nak, what is your *ucking point? Are you telling us that Islam is better because they follow their death cult more than Christians and Jews do?
perception of truth]

No, dumbass. The point is the Koran and the Torah/OT has the same stuff in it so how can one be better than the other?

Norman Blitzer on January 29, 2010 at 11:44 am

[Also, if the military deems that homosexuals can openly serve, and shower with heterosexual males, then the heterosexual males should and be required to shower with the women. You can’t impose a distinction upon one, and not the other.
perception of truth on January 29, 2010 at 11:18 am]

perception of truth, you are a total idiot. Do they ban homosexuals from showering with heterosexuals in colleges or at the Y? They’re already in the military now!

Norman Blitzer on January 29, 2010 at 11:48 am

    Thanks blitz, you’re the f-ing idiot…
    I know gays are in the military now…DUH asswipe. But as Jarhead points out…Openly serving will be detrimental to their well being.

    Guys showering at college or at the gym don’t carry weapons as they do in the military. And for the most part the Men in the military are not pussy’s and have a deeper sense of “muchismo” then other men. Get a clue you tard.

    Also, by your reasoning, then men and women should shower together at the Y and in college. Make it universal for all.

    perception of truth on January 29, 2010 at 12:33 pm

Here’s another reason why gays should not serve in the military. Our culture is not at a point to accept this perverted behavior as something normal, and I really hope it never is.

Not having gays in the military is also for their safety. Do you realize how many of them would be subjected to some not very pleasant confrontations? When I served, there was some guy that was being discharged for being gay (how they found out I don’t know) and the word spread around the barracks about this very quickly. Nobody saw him after that, he was just gone. For those of you who don’t know, being discharged from the military takes a few days or weeks. But this guy just disappeared. Someone higher up in the chain of command knew what would happen.

Jarhead on January 29, 2010 at 11:56 am

So which religion is the right and just one? Judaism or christainty? It can’t be both since they are not compatible since you have to accept Jesus or go to hell, some people say the NT voids the OT, Jews reject jesus as some false prophet.

Nak on January 29, 2010 at 2:09 pm

    And, what does that have to do with Dr. Binhazim’s belief that Islam requires the execution of gays? Would you care to address that directly, rather than running away from it? There are no mainstream Jewish or Christian groups that condone such a thing today, but Islam still apparently does. Dr. Binhazim is not simply some whacky imam from up in the hills.

    Worry01 on January 29, 2010 at 4:39 pm

And, it’s not just gays who would be executed (following Islmaic laws), it would also be any woman accused of adultery.

there was a notorious case here in Canada — it was the first Pakistani to receive a law degree in Canada. And, his eventual “beliefs” and what he advocates? Well, of course, he never endorsed Western legal concepts. Instead he began advocating for the implementation of Sharia law in Canada — including the execution of women by stoning (based on Sharia law). That’s executing women by stoning, here in Canada. (That’s what the “progressives” must, no doubt, all be clamoring for, whenever they endorse their cherished Islamists…executing women and gays and dissidents. Is that Liberalism as we know it today? btw, there was another poster who had earlier exclaimed that 13-year-olds accused/convicted of rape would also be executed under Sharia law (and apparently thought that that was a grand thing. It’s clear that certain — ahem — “individuals” have not been properly acculturated into Western values — they haven’t a clue. And the ultra-Leftists don’t help matters…also have to laugh, Bin Laden is now a greenie! All right!)

J.S. on January 29, 2010 at 3:46 pm

I am til this day still stunned by the silence of the “progressives”. I did not hear a howl or series of howls of condemnations from them. The silence was chilling. Had the speaker been a conservative like Tom Tancredo, the lefty stormtroopers would have prtoests outside, block people from going in, and walk up to the speaker podium and take away the microphone, etc. Thats why I dislike leftist, progressives because they are HYPOCRITES to the nTH degree. Oh yeah where is the majority of the anti-war protesters that would gather every few months to protest the Iraq/Afghanistan War? At least Cindy Sheehan is consistant and is still protesting minus the media coverage. Her usefulness over, she is ignored like yeseday’s trash.

Mario on January 29, 2010 at 4:44 pm

[Also, by your reasoning, then men and women should shower together at the Y and in college. Make it universal for all.

perception of truth on January 29, 2010 at 12:33 pm]

Duh?!? Showering is by gender not by sexual orientation. perception of truth, you should change your name to perception of dumbass.

[Not having gays in the military is also for their safety.
Jarhead on January 29, 2010 at 11:56 am]

OK, homosexual men shouldn’t be in the military because heterosexual men are savages. Thanks for the insight, bonehead.

[Mario on January 29, 2010 at 4:44 pm]

Mario, doesn’t it bother you that some conservatives here to a small degree are agreeing with the Muslim prof?

Norman Blizter on January 29, 2010 at 10:37 pm

    Blitzer – There are way too many reasons why we should not let gays in the military to detail here, but here is another. I would rather have a straight guy’s blood splattered all over me than blood from a gay.

    You can go take long hot showers with your boyfriend, but I definitely prefer to never spend any time in a locker room with some gays.

    Jarhead on January 30, 2010 at 10:06 am

Conclusion: Christianity and Judaism are better than Islam, because Christians and Jews realize that their holy books are barbaric and useless as a moral guide, even if they don’t like to admit it.

Dan on January 30, 2010 at 11:28 am

Given some of these comments (especially from California Screaming), I am glad, once again, that we in the US have the Second Amendment.

The only way to take aim at the cult of Islam is to show how it opposes the beliefs of nearly everyone in the US. The most direct way to show that is to demonstrate that Islam is anti-freedom. This is not tough to demonstrate (“Islam” means “submission,” after all). But it seems that some tough guys here are much more passionate about gay men showering next to them than they are about Islam. Great way to build a coalition! Take a clue from Wilders, why don’t you? If you seriously think that you will build a coalition by trumpeting Christianity and attacking gay people, rather than advocating for freedom and individual dignity, you are misguided. Gays are the canary in the mineshaft for Islam. It might be prudent to make this case to gay leaders who are sympathetic to Islam, just as it might be prudent to let black leaders know about Islam’s love of black slavery.

Also, the level of the discussion in many of the replies here would fit in well at a leftist web site. The telltale signs are there, including juvenile insults and taunts and sloppy thinking. For example, one obvious reason men and women do not shower together in the military is because, most of the time, they are attracted to each other, and the result is pregnancy, competition among men for women, competition among women for men, and so on. Unless straight men are powerfully attracted to gay men (which would lead us to question our definition of “straight”), the shower scenario just doesn’t apply.

skzion on January 30, 2010 at 3:23 pm

skzion and Blitzer, you really don’t live in the real f**cking world. You live in a world of ‘what ifs and what should be’.

Let me spell out the birds and the bees and the politics of homosexuality.

1.) Sexual attraction is based on one having sexual desires for another, whether it be same sex or opposite sex sexual desires.

2.) Sexual arousal can occur when one sees the genitalia of the one they desire. i.e. when a heterosexual males sees the genitalia of a woman or when a homosexuality male sees the genitalia of a male.

3.) Whether or not someone else acts on their sexual desire doesn’t diminish the fact that one’s dignity is taken away because someone couldn’t or didn’t follow through with their act. Women feel they lose their dignity when someone invades their privacy. They weren’t raped or fondled, but feel rightly invaded.

4.) OK lets so go to basics. See if you can follow logic.

a)Heterosexual males are attracted to females.
b)Homosexual males are attracted to males.

If a) is true and the two shall not be grouped together because one groups doesn’t feel comfortable or feels they lose their dignity when exposed to those that may desire their genetalia then it must be true in the other all other cases. Based on the fact that sexual attraction or perceived sexual attraction will cause harm.

5.)Heterosexual men should not lose their dignity by having to be in showers with open homosexuals who they know have a sexual attraction to the gender they desire.

Now for Blitzer’s idiotic analogy, lets take it apart.

“Do they ban homosexuals from showering with heterosexuals in colleges or at the Y? They’re already in the military now!”

No they don’t ban homosexuals from the Colleges and they Y because it is voluntary. You can go to college and the Y and not have to shower. It isn’t compulsory like the military. Once you join the military showering with everyone else is compulsory. And homosexuals are kicked out if they state they are homosexual.

Now for skzion idiotic statement “Unless straight men are powerfully attracted to gay men (which would lead us to question our definition of “straight”), the shower scenario just doesn’t apply.”

Nobody said straight men are attracted to gay men. WTF?? No it is OPEN Homosexuals by definition who are the ones who have this attraction to other men. They will cause the problems. Heterosexual men take showers with others now and no problems, because they don’t feel invaded by someone attracted to them.

Now you know why everyone in the world has this thing against homosexuality either by culture or religion. Did you not learn the birds and the bees?

Remember pointing out logic is not bigotry.

CaliforniaScreaming on January 31, 2010 at 12:02 am

CS, if you are so logical, why do you need to adopt the style and language of Daily Kos? You are not merely screaming: you are screaming hysterically.

Anyone who can compare the loss of freedom and individual dignity imposed on the non-Muslim when Islam triumphs with the discomfort of some straight men with gay men in the shower is not intellectually serious, however loudly he makes his point.

The major purpose of the military is to destroy the enemy, not to advance civil rights. Similarly, comfort is also not primary. It is not speculative that men and women showering together would seriously endanger fighting ability. Indeed, having men and women on the same ship creates problems, as more than a few women end up pregnant. The impact of discomfort in the shower, by contrast, is speculative.

It seems to me that the burden of proof would be on those who continue the ban, as we should not discriminate lightly. I am generally unsympathetic to those who say that because A is offended, B should be denied his rights. It’s just too bad about A. This is why I can say, very consistently, that the non-Muslim should not be expected to give special treatment and deference to a bunch of people whose “religion” is inherently at odds with Western values. I’m not a cultural relativist.

The broader point, though, is that your approach is inconsistent with building multifaceted coalition to confront Islam. THAT is a top priority for me, so you can understand my impatience.

skzion on January 31, 2010 at 1:46 am

Nak writes, “So why don’t all Jews and Christians call for exucution of gays since the bible and Torah call for it. They are the word an all loving god.”

I can’t speak for the Christian attitude. But the Jewish tradition has always relied on interpretation and commentary. We’ve used both as a means of restricting problematic directives – for example, capital punishment for adulterers, rebellious sons, and Sabbath breakers – turning them effectively into admonitions and exhortations.

Raymond in DC on January 29, 2010 at 10:12 am

———————————————

You can’t speak for Judaism, either. Only a revisionist interpretation of it.

The directive to “wipe out” Amelek, to take another example, is made moot by declaring “no certainty” as to his true identity.

——————————————–

But those are the facts on the ground. Show me an Amalekite and I’ll show you a bona fide Phoenician. Malta is close but no prize.

And means of dealing with economically crippling restrictions on, say, taking of interest or consuming agricultural produce during the Jubilee year, have been derived from such creative interpretation.

———————————-

Misleading. The sages used a legal contract, called a Heter Iska, literally a “business permit. It specifically uses existing Halacha – Jewish law – to strengthen another Torah obligation, lending, without violating a Torah prohibition of usury. Win-win.

As for the Jubilee year, we haven’t had one for about 2600 years, when the majority of Jews dwelling in the land of Israel were exiled.

Did you mean the Sabbatical year – Shmittah? In which case:

1. At present, Shmittah is a Rabbinic obligation and not a Torah obligation. This in itself, allows the potential for leniencies not applicable when the majority of Jews dwelled in Israel and the Temple existed.

2. The leniency your refer to is called a “Heter Mechirah”, a permit to sell the land to a non-Jew during Shmittah year, thereby exempting its produce from Shmittah laws. Indeed this is very controversial and is NOT accepted by a tremendous portion, perhaps a majority of Torah observant Jews. It is actually a very modern day legal invention, first being employed in Israel in the late 19th century. Personally, I don’t touch the stuff.

Your overall mistake is assuming any of this has to do with reinterpretation. Nothing could be further from the truth. Every example you gave is founded on the basis of existing Jewish laws. There is nothing new under the sun.

As for Islamic law and usury, there seem to be quite a few conceptual parallels in the application of Sharia law, some of which are similar to Jewish laws. As in Judaism, this is not reinterpretation, rather it is application of existing laws.

Shy Guy on January 31, 2010 at 2:14 am

skzion, For the record I think the Muslim faith is detrimental to our national security. It’s teachings openly strive for an Islamic (Sharia Law) imposed on non-believing Muslims. I don’t think Muslims should serve in the military either. I have posted before and will say it again, TO TRULY LOVE AMERICA IS TO TRULY HATE ISLAM. Given time Islam is about oppressing people to their religion. Either accept its teachings or die. Our Constitution is based on individual freedoms, self-determination. Contrary to what Islam espouses.

My first comment on this thread was “Debbie, you have a post something like, “Feuds you wish would never end” Well this is one I wish would never end. HOMOSEXUALS VERSUS MUSLIMS. They are both enemies of Americans and in some respect I have more respect for Muslims. At least Muslims will say they will destroy in your face. HOMOSEXUALS will lie, cheat and manipulate to destroy you literally behind your back.”

I do compare Muslims with Homosexuals. Muslims want to destroy from the outside and Homosexuals want to destroy us from the inside. A liberal effeminate nation (brought about by Homosexuals and liberals) will never stand up to violent Islam. Just look at Europe, the UK and France have so many Muslims they live in fear one day they live under the reign of the crescent moon of Islam. Our liberal effeminate policies will ultimately allow for us to be in the same situation.

You said, “It seems to me that the burden of proof would be on those who continue the ban,” The proof has been established and the only way they could ever serve openly is they have separate barracks or quarters. Homosexuals say they are different than heterosexuals. They should be treated differently when any sexual matters exists or concerns about sexual matters are confronted. But they will cry “separate but equal” They are segregated in prison for the same reasons. This consternation causes grief and also for the safety of the homosexual.

CaliforniaScreaming on January 31, 2010 at 11:26 am

    CaliforniaScreaming – I agree with you on most of the stuff you wrote with one hugh exception. You wrote “the only way they could ever serve openly is they have separate barracks or quarters” That is not a viable option. It would only work if they never went out in the field, which means they never went on training excercises or on any deployment. Out in the field, you sometimes sleep in a two man tent or in your fighting hole. How do we segregate then? Impossible, just like the chances that gays will ever be able to serve openly without repercussions of some kind throughout the U.S. military.

    I’ve got another reason why gays shouldn’t serve in the U.S. military. How disgusting would it be to go into the showers and find them having sex? How about surprise inspections creating the same situation? There are just way too many situations where this type of stuff can occur to allow gays in the military.

    Jarhead on January 31, 2010 at 1:04 pm

Well of course, if a million people agreed with CS it would not follow that he was correct.

(1) CS, Islam is a political-military doctrine with some Torah and Christian Bible ornamentation. Homosexuality is not a doctrine at all. Someone is “a good Muslim” if he diligently follows Islam. Someone is “a good homosexual” if he . . . well, uh, . . . I can’t complete that sentence. A good Muslim cannot be an American patriot. Gay people can indeed be patriots, just as Jews can be, just as women can be. Not every Jew is a wacky leftist, and not every woman is a radical feminist. When gay people start blowing up buildings (alongside Christians and Buddhists), I’ll be willing to rethink my position.

(2) CS, your comment that “a liberal effeminate nation will never stand up to violent Islam” is laughable on its face. Leaving aside that it is tautological (based on your apparent definitions of “liberal” and “effeminate”), we need only ask two questions. First, which European country has come the furthest in organizing against Islam at the grassroots level? Netherlands. Second, which European country is the most pro-gay? Netherlands.

(3) Leaving aside the absurdity of comparing Islam and homosexuality (see 1, above), it is silly for you to single out Muslims for praise because of their forthrightness. If you want to see scheming, dishonest, two-faced manipulation, you will find no group better demonstrating these traits than Muslims. This is because such behavior was exemplified by Mo and praised in the Koran. War is deceit, after all.

(4) (and this is to Jarhead as well) It’s just too bad that you are uncomfortable. I am sorry to repeat myself, but A’s rights do not depend on B’s comfort with A having such rights. This is Democracy 101, and I do not see why I have to keep harping on it. If it is true that gays could not serve openly in the military without destroying military effectiveness, the evidence needs to go far beyond your gross-out fantasies. You both remind me of whiny feminists who complain about being made “uncomfortable” by someone’s speech, and of whiny black racists who object to free speech as “hate speech.” Can you TRY at least to be intellectually consistent?

skzion on January 31, 2010 at 2:35 pm

    Yeah and not every homosexual person is a radical activist who imposes their sexual preference down everybody’s throats. That makes homosexuals look bad besides not standing up to radical Islam. So Radical homosexuality damages America besides Islam. Nevertheless, gay people should be treated with respect and shouldnt be treated badly. Having attraction towards members of the same sex doesn’t make somebody bad. But its a problem if they dress inappropriately in prades so everyone could see.

    Matthew on January 31, 2010 at 11:35 pm

skzion were you born a dumbass, or have you been working on it very hard for a very long time? Your leap in logic from comparing someone’s speach to gays serving in the military is absurd, to say the least.

Jarhead on January 31, 2010 at 4:11 pm

Jarhead, I will let others decide which of us is smarter.

There is no leap in logic whatsoever (if I understand your point). I think discrimination by government needs to be strongly justified, just as infringement on free speech needs to be strongly justified. One potential justification regarding gays in the military is military effectiveness, and this would be a justification only because the military really is different from other governmental entities. Your disgust with gay people and possible gay sex acts is not a justification, in my view, for depriving gay people of the opportunity to serve in a governmental entity. It is rather a reason for you to receive therapy for your dysfunction. I grant, though, that if the military could not kill people effectively because a sizable number of men in uniform had your same dysfunction, we really would need keep gays out. In that case, though, I would find it much easier to believe the stories of “atrocities” committed by our military, as I would think that many in the military were emotional cripples and disciplinary problems waiting to happen.

I have said before to radical feminists and black racists that their “issues” do not trump my free speech rights or any other of my rights. I say the same to Muslims. Not all rights are related to free speech. One does not have a Constitutional right to feel “comfortable” day in and day out.

In truth, I find this whole gays-in-the-military discussion a waste of time, except in showing that some people here hate Islam because they are consistent bigots, not because they care about freedom for anyone but themselves.

skzion on January 31, 2010 at 4:49 pm

P.S.: If I could edit my last reply, I would remove the “dysfunction” biz.

skzion on January 31, 2010 at 5:37 pm

skzion, if you don’t think HOMOSEXUALS and liberals don’t have an agenda you are politically naive, lying or a fool. I don’t know much about the Netherlands, however I believe if there is resistance toward Muslims it would probably be from the conservatives of the Netherlands. The effeminates or liberals of the Netherlands probably wouldn’t put up any resistance.

I have more respect for any enemy that will say they will do you harm up front than an enemy you can’t discern. HOMOSEXUALS want to destroy the fabric of of our country. They want no social structure so as to make sure their deviancy is accepted. A society without a moral foundation is where HOMOSEXUALITY thrives. So that is the framework they are achieving. In the guise of tolerance they are like snakes trying to take down our culture and inevitably our nation.

Jarhead, I don’t think HOMOSEXUALS should be in the military. My statements was based “on the only way they could ever serve”. I think Obama is playing the HOMOSEXUALS. He will go the congressional route and won’t get the votes in Congress. He will let it die on the vine. The HOMOSEXUALS will get upset but they will be under Obama bus. HOMOSEXUALS openly admit they are different than other men and should be treated that way. It is not a civil rights issue, it is a behavior issue. Liberals want the military to be a social experiment when the number one job is to defeat the enemy.

CaliforniaScreaming on January 31, 2010 at 11:41 pm

“skzion, if you don’t think HOMOSEXUALS and liberals don’t have an agenda you are politically naive, lying or a fool.”

May I suggest that you, CS, READ and THINK ABOUT my responses before pretending to reply to them? I realize that my suggestion requires you to have a nonzero IQ, so perhaps I am being unfair.

“I don’t know much about the Netherlands, however I believe if there is resistance toward Muslims it would probably be from the conservatives of the Netherlands. The effeminates [sic] or liberals of the Netherlands probably wouldn’t put up any resistance.”

Yes, you do not know much about the Netherlands, but that doesn’t stop you from “theorizing” about it. (I put quotation marks around “theorizing” because theory works with facts, but you have no facts.) I direct you to Bruce Bawer’s web site to show some HOMOSEXUAL resistance to Islam in the Netherlands:

http://www.brucebawer.com/

Bawer has now written two (2) books on this general subject in three years. He also happens to be a gay American conservative who moved to the Netherlands, only to find, eventually, that the Muslims there made screamers like you look pro-gay.

I do not expect anyone who takes _The Pink Swastika_ seriously to be able to wrestle with facts. (For those who ask, CS alluded to this book, available on the web, some time back. If you Google, you will find at least one carefully reasoned debunking of it, conveniently supplied as annotations to the book itself. _The Pink Swastika_ is basically a Holocaust revisionist type book, arguing that the HOMOSEXUALS in the Nazi party were really the ring leaders, and, by implication, that the good, normal Germans were not really so much to blame.) The idea, though, that a whole group of people who mostly don’t know each other, and who did not “join” the group based on any ideology, would somehow collude, ideologically, to undermine their government, society, and culture is preposterous. That gay organizational membership is so tiny also suggests what would be obvious to anyone who actually interacted with gay people: most gays are relatively apolitical and–surprise!–interested in living their lives.

If, however, you want to make sure that efforts against Islamic domination will be fragmented and ineffectual, I recommend that you continue in your errors. Whatever you do, please DO NOT try to peel off gays, blacks, etc., and make them allies, by pointing out that Muslims want to murder gays, enslave blacks, etc. No, that would be too logical for a coastal loudmouth.

skzion on February 1, 2010 at 12:20 pm

skzion, for you to think that HOMOSEXUALS are going to lead to defeat Islam because one gay guy comes out against is going to change my mind of the political agenda of HOMOSEXUALS? Give me a flipping break? Because ONE HOMOSEXUAL guy gets it doesn’t mean this changes the whole political agenda of HOMOSEXUALS. HOMOSEXUALS in America are out to destroy the moral foundations set by Christian Americans. Have you seen the hate at Pastor Rick Warren, Focus on the Family and the people who voted for Prop 8? Yes I collected 2000 signatures to get that initiative on the ballot. We are all hateful bigots according to the HOMOSEXUAL activists. In fact the man you quote is by YOUR accounts a “gay conservative American”. So you made my point. The HOMOSEXUAL agenda is liberal and one guy goes contrary to the prevailing HOMOSEXUAL agenda and he speak for them all? Please, brother, brother please!!

Ok my Theory. According to you, a theory has no basis. Oh fucking really? How does one come to a theory, shitbird? Why would people make a theory? Maybe after observations and seeing a cause and effect one can draw conclusions. Oh wow, critical thinking? Making an assessment on prior observations in one’s life can lead to drawing conclusions? So you make the assessment than hypothesize about a prediction. Based on prior information and conclusion you can hypothesize that a predicted outcome will occur. Once the hypothesis is true, you can theorize why things occur. So people can make educated theories on why things occur. We don’t live in a bubble and seeing the people resisting Islam around the world are Conservatives and not liberals then maybe one can theorize that the main people resisting Islam in the Netherlands are Conservatives. And wow, Geert Wilders seems to be on trial for condemning Islam. And he seems to be the most Conservative of the Dutch. The liberals in America don’t see eye to eye with them. So maybe my theory wasn’t wrong?

http://www.religionnewsblog.com/24045

“I do not expect anyone who takes _The Pink Swastika_ seriously to be able to wrestle with facts” Nice how you put words in my my mouth. You were alluding to book I never mentioned. I mentioned a phrase. A phrase. A phrase that I got from hearing the title of a book. Now I am a holocaust “revisionist”? I have used this phrase repeatedly because it fits HOMOSEXUALS. HOMOSEXUALS use the most fascist tactics in politics. Again anti Prop 8 people. Sorry if I don’t mistake an anus for a vagina.

I will use it again and again and again.

BEWARE THE PINK SWASTIKA!!
BEWARE THE PINK SWASTIKA!!
BEWARE THE PINK SWASTIKA!!
BEWARE THE PINK SWASTIKA!!

CaliforniaScreaming on February 1, 2010 at 11:19 pm

CS, you are an idiot. Like most idiots, you grab onto cliches and think you are being profound–you think you have latched onto Truth.

The truth is that the category “homosexual” does not require any particular ideology, although we can assume that homosexuals do not want to be dhimmis to Christians if they can avoid it. Muslims, by contrast, do have a particular ideology, and there is no good form of it.

“HOMOSEXUALS in America are out to destroy the moral foundations set by Christian Americans.”

You think I, as a Jew, am supposed to be worried about THAT? If you were not an idiot, you would also know that the moral foundations of America are NOT only Christian, and depending on how we think of it, are not even MAINLY Christian.

If you were not an idiot, you would understand that it makes sense to distinguish between mass and elites with regard to gay people. Most gay people just want to live their lives and only get political when a stupid militant Christian (what I call a Fishface) like you makes this difficult. Most gay political ELITES cannot possibly make alliances with FISHFACES because elites cannot see that FISHFACES are less evil than Muslims.

You are quite right that gay elites tend to be way-left. I never denied it. They are also faithful Democrats. That is why gay people need new elites, and THAT is why conservative gays need to be cultivated. There are black and female conservatives, and they get prominent roles in the Republican party. We need to do the same for gays.

As for Wilders, his support comes from across the spectrum. He is building momentum because he completely sidesteps the trap that Muslims set for him by INCLUDING “humanist” values along with Judeo-Christian ones as part of Dutch Values. All revolutions start small. If you weren’t such an idiot, you would have seen my point. Right now, in Europe, the anti-Islam “conservatives” are easily (and sometimes correctly) accused of being fascists. THIS is the kiss of death to the opposition to Islam.

You use the type of argument of a Holocaust Denier. This disgusts me.

BEWARE THE FLAMING CROSS!!
BEWARE THE FLAMING CROSS!!
BEWARE THE FLAMING CROSS!!
BEWARE THE FLAMING CROSS!!

skzion on February 4, 2010 at 1:19 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field