Monday, October 02, 2006


By Robert Halfhill

A number of problems created by Theofascists of various kinds attempting to force their beliefs on everybody else have recently been covered by the press. The STAR TRIBUNE has written, for at least the second time, about Muslims who have become the majority of cab drivers providing transportation from the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport, refusing to serve anyone carrying alcohol.
Excuse me, but it is my impression that federal and state as well as local Minneapolis and St. Paul antidiscrimination laws have been in effect since sometime in the 1960's. Antidiscrimination laws do not attempt to control your thoughts; you may remain as bigoted as you like and have a whites only policy when inviting people over for parties and other social events. But when you enter the realm of public commerce and start renting out rooms in your home, the law says you MUST rent to all races, genders, religions, sexual orientations, etc equally and that there WILL be legal sanctions if you don't. It is legal to carry alcohol on either private or public transportation as long as the alcohol is in unopened bottles. So how come Muslim cab drivers are allowed to refuse to serve people engaged in a legal activity. The boom must be lowered and Muslims engaged in the commercial activity of providing taxi service must be informed immediately and in no uncertain terms that they MUST serve everyone engaged in any legal activity or THEY CAN NO LONGER BE CAB DRIVERS!
The media have also reported on an even more severe problem caused by Theofascists in Europe with the cancelation of the Mozart opera Idomeneo in Germany because of fears of Islamofascist violence. Consequent public outrage over this capitulation to threats of religious violence has resulted in the possible rescheduling of this opera. Since most Muslims ban all representational art, and this taboo is even stronger when pictorial representations of the founder of Islam, Mohammed, are involved, and since it invoves a depiction of the severed head of Mohammed, this is the ultimate blasphemy for Muslims. But it also involves a depiction of the severed head of Jesus. Does this mean we should also allow violence from the Christofascists?
Modern freedom of opinion and speech means that you can say anything you want but you cannot resort to violence against people who say things you don't like. The Reformation and Enlightenment have attenuated the violence of Christofascism, although this violence is still latent and potential. Globilization has led to the immigration into Europe of many adherents of a religion that has not yet had its Reformation. Previously this Islamaniac form of religious violence was kept on the other side of the Mediterranean Sea. Here again, we must explain in no uncertain terms to anyone willing to resort to violence when others offend their religious sensibilities that we will not allow it and that we will use whatever force is necessary to stop them.
Holland experienced the most outrageous instance of this Medieval religious violence when an Islamaniac murdered the great grandson of Nicholas Van Gogh for speaking unfavorably of his religion. When he was sentenced to life in prison for his crime, he tried to make it seem like HE was the martyr, saying he would endure whatever sentence he must for killing someone who spoke against his religion.
Very well then, we cannot prevent you from thinking YOU are the martyr. But we can neutralize you by locking you up for life. And if that s not sufficient to curb your Medieval religious violence, and there too many of you resorting to violence so that you make it impossible to live with you in this world, we will have to DELETE you from this world. And any Islamaniac immigrant who is unable or unwilling to understand and abide by the concepts of freedom of speech and belief prevailing in modern, post enlightenment society should be deported forthwith to the other side of the Mediterranean. Holland has been the leading country among adherents of freedom and enlightenment and this transMediterranean Islamaniac brought in this virus of religious violence!
The Europeans showed a willingness to stand up to this Theofascist violence with the widespread reprinting of the satirical cartoons about Mohammed from a Danish newspaper. It looked like Europe might backslide with the cancellation of Mozart's Idomeneo but public outrage has resulted in a stiffening of backbones. And the Europeans have no choice but to stand up to this theocratic bullying if they don't want to be forced back under Medieval religious tyranny.
But I by no means want to make it seem like I am picking exclusively on the Islamofascists. The Christofascists have been making renewed trouble for the rest of us also. The Christofascists have been demanding the right to refuse to fill prescriptions for medicines they disapprove of, primarily births control agents at this time. The ONION ran a sartirical piece on Christian Scientist pharmacists demanding the right to refuse to fill any prescriptions. This satire about the most extreme case makes it obvious how we should respond. A Christian Scientist who demanded the right to be a pharmacist and refuse to fill all prescriptions would have to be told that he could not be a pharmacist. Again, we have had antidiscrimination laws since the mid 1960's so how come people are being allowed to refuse to serve people who want to purchase a legal product? As a first step, we should be demanding that our local and state human rights departments explain why they are permitting people engaged in public commerce to refuse to serve people who want to purchase a legal product.


Post a Comment

<< Home