Skip to main content

"Godless" Liberals?

That's the most recent garbage spewed out by this neocon hatemonger, Anne Coulter. I can't stand her and her racist, bigoted rantings, and neither could any liberal or centrist for that matter... that is, provided that the centrists like myself lean more towards liberal values. I was surfing today on the net, just to find a loud of quotes from the rightwing femme fool.

Let's just take a look at some of them. Regarding her comment about John Kerry's anti-war position, she said,
"By 1973, John Kerry had already accused American soldiers of committing war crimes in Vietnam, thrown someone else's medals to the ground in an anti-war demonstration, and married his first heiress."
Ok... the last part was uncalled for. It has to do with Kerry's personal life, so no politics there. The Vietnam War was in my opinion one of America's biggest losses, morally and materialistically, and the army has committed a grave number of war crimes against the Vietnamese. The throwing of medals on the ground was probably a way of saying that medals are not given to war criminals, though I doubt that most soldiers in that war committed something worthy of a war crime. Yet, Coulter shuns such opposition, like most rightwingers do when their policies and views are being met with legitimate criticism.

Here's another gem of a quote:
"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."
Wow... I can't believe that she wants more people to die. It's just that these short-minded neoconservatives want to polarize one's thinking into supporting them. This is evident in the last quote on the bottom of the page:
"Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant."
It's that she's repeating the supposed rhetoric that Bin Laden and his crazy bunch spout out. Coulter, Pat Robertson, Bin Laden and loads of other extremists, I believe, are two sides of the same coin: extremists who just want war.

Now, when you take a look at the quotes above, do you believe that it comes from someone who seriously believes in Godly values? Does "carpet-bombing" and "convert" sound like tolerance and peace? Does criticizing someone for speaking out what he considers a mistake that his country's former presidents have committed make someone a traitor? Does it show compassion and respect towards those who oppose your views? Does making everyone else who does not support American policies an "enemy" who should be killed represent any ounce of humanity?

Granted, a lot of you who read this don't believe in God in the first place, and I respect your beliefs. But frankly speaking, if anything, it's the neoconservative rightwing extremists who hold such vile views who are seriously Godless. In that sense, I, a liberal, believe in more freedom, and a seriously strict policy of non-aggression against sovereign nations, even when they're being ruled by dictators. I am of the opinion that a multicultural society with absolutely NO discrimination can succeed. I am also against gun control, like a lot of liberals are, and am also against big government in general. Abortion should be of moral question, but that's a topic I will talk about later. As a believer in God, freedom of religion shouldn't be brought up for debate: it should be taken as a default. Also, such policies like affirmative action and (gag sounds) "positive" racism should be stamped out, because they are a precursor to discrimination.

So, tell me: who's Godless now?

Salaam, from
Saracen


Coulter, if you read this, I hope you come to your senses.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What "Culture Clash"?

I hear this all the time, and yet I still have yet to not only materialistically comprehend this prospect, but to philosophically grasp it. There are so many cultures and races that dot this earth, and yet we have seen them come and go as well. But how can cultures themselves clash? To answer this question, one should take a look at the definition of culture. The word culture , from the Latin colo, -ere, with its root meaning "to cultivate", generally refers to patterns of human activity and the symbolic structures that give such activity significance. Different definitions of "culture" reflect different theoretical bases for understanding, or criteria for evaluating, human activity. Note the definition: patterns of personal activity. Patterns by themselves are immeasurable and also immaterial. However, the only material object encountered in the definition is the set of "symbolic structures" that represent these patterns and give them significance. Cult

حول قرار حماس تشكيل قوة مشتركة من الفصائل

هذا النص يتحدث عن التشقق في الحكومة الفلسطينية, وكيف استغلوا القوات الصهيونية على التفرق بين حماس ومنظمة التخريب " فتح" التي خانت الفاسطينيون لخدمة نفسها ولخدمة "إسراءيل". تأليف د. إبراهيم علوش قرار وزير داخلية السلطة الفلسطينية، القائمة على مرجعية اتفاقية أوسلو، بتشكيل قوة مشتركة من الفصائل العسكرية الفلسطينية المقاومة، وقرار محمود عباس رئيس سلطة أوسلو بشطب قرار وزير الداخلية سعيد صيام بتشكيل تلك القوة المشتركة، أثار الكثير من التكهنات واللغط حول مغزى تلك الخطوة وأبعادها. ومثل كل قرار سياسي، هناك دائماً واجهة خارجية وأجندة خفية، خاصة عندما نتعامل مع قوى قررت أن تكون جزءاً من الواقع السائد بدلاً من الانقلاب عليه. فالانضمام لركب أوسلو، على أساس مشروع "تغييره من الداخل"، يترك المرء بالضرورة أسير مساومات لا يمكن إلا أن تمس بالثوابت وبالمرجعيات التاريخية لصراعنا مع الحركة الصهيونية منذ أكثر من قرن. وبالمقابل، فإن قرار محمود عباس بشطب قرار وزير الداخلية يرتبط بدوره بحسابات التنافس الداخلي، ليس فقط على الصلاحيات، بل على كل دوره التاريخي هو وفتح. المهم، يمكن أن ت

Book Review: "The Crusade through Arab Eyes" by Amin Maalouf

The bulk of modern history regarding the Crusades has an unashamedly Western slant to it. Even a cursory search of the word "crusade" on Amazon Books reveals a plethora of books written by authors from the U.K., the U.S., and elsewhere in the Western world, but a severe (emphasis) paucity of books from a more Arab perspective. One book that stands out is Amin Maalouf's "The Crusades through Arab Eyes", a book I believe is much-needed given the overall bias inherent in the gestalt of Western history books on this topic. The gold standard for history on the Crusades is currently the "The Oxford History of the Crusades", another book I will review in the not-so-distant future (and expect comparisons to this book given that I have completed reading it). The too-long-didn't-read version of this review is the following: if you're interested in history, buy it, read it, and keep it. Nevertheless, my full review follows. For those who are un