Three people in Scotland have been jailed for attacking a mosque with strips of bacon. The judge ruled that there was no way to deal with this except by imprisonment.
Bacon does no harm. You can drop it on a carpet, but the carpet is not ruined. The smell of it is not harmful, although a lot of Muslims may pretend otherwise. It may not have the most pleasant smell, but air fresheners can be purchased in pretty well any grocery store.
By contrast, I have known of churches and church halls having their windows smashed, but the police take little interest. Even if the vandals are caught, they are rarely sent to prison.
I am not condoning bacon attacks on mosques, but surely the Muslims don't have to make such a big deal of it, and neither do the courts.
There is currently a civil war in Iraq, and Muslims are busy killing other Muslims. I am not aware of anything in Islam which requires Muslims to kill other Muslims, and there is certainly nothing in The Koran which could realistically explain what is happening in Iraq. Nevertheless, The Koran is a book which incites to violence and murder. Is it too much to argue that Muslims would be less likely to kill each other if they were less inclined to commit acts of violence in the first place?
Let's face facts. Anyone who is a Muslim is part of the problem. If you consider it acceptable to base your world view on a belief system which is founded on a book which says what The Koran says, then you are effectively encouraging people to commit acts of violence or even murder.
Even if you believe that all of the belligerent passages in The Koran should not be taken seriously, then you cannot be certain that another Muslim will not take those passages seriously. Let me give this example: Fight those who do not believe in Allah (9:29). One imam could tell you that this text actually means that Muslims should live at peace with non-Muslims, while another could tell you that it actually means that Muslims should slaughter other Muslims. Is either one of those interpretations more or less logical than the other?
A lot of Muslims from Britain have gone to Iraq to join in the carnage, and it appears that most or all of them are fighting against the government of Iraq. While I will not condone what they are doing, I cannot be entirely displeased at the sight of Muslims from this country going abroad.
I would appreciate it if Muslims living in Britain would admit that sending people to prison for bacon attacks on mosques is excessive. Surely a twenty pound fine would be more appropriate.
I would appreciate it even more if Muslims living in Britain would condemn the fact that for many years Muslim paedophile gangs operated in many parts of England while the police took no action against them, and while the Muslim community failed to condemn what the gangs were doing.
If I remember rightly, the government only started to take serious action against Muslim paedophile gangs in the summer of 2009 - at about the same time as two members of the British National Party were elected to the European Parliament. The British National Party now has no MEPs and very few councillors. Will the authorities now stop prosecuting Muslim paedophile gangs?
Let me ask the question another way. If the authorities now stop prosecuting Muslim paedophile gangs, then who among us could be trusted to campaign for prosecutions to resume?
Bacon is for the breakfast table. If you object to what Islam is doing to this country, then join a political party which seeks to tell the truth about Islam. I doubt if many people will, but feel free to prove me wrong.
Update: I have since discovered that certain remarks made above about Islam are incorrect, and I have corrected them in the post entitled Emma and Chris are veritaphobic.
Related previous posts include:
Communists hate Christianity
Islam and dogs
Now study Islam
Communists please explain
No comments:
Post a Comment