For the most part, those of us in the sane world divide the political spectrum into two rough but unequal parts: Conservatives, and normal people. The difference being, among normal people a diversity of opinion is generally accepted, good-faith debate encouraged and ideas fluid. You know, stuff that’s usually true among normal people. That’s certainly true when it comes to discussing Muslims and terrorists — especially when you’re discussing those two things, plus President Obama.
In this segment, Maher addresses one of the biggest sticking points between himself and Obama, who he rightly observes practically quotes from the Book of Wayne LaPierre in regard to Islam and terrorism.
On February 28th, Obama made news on both sides of the debate when he said
“No religion is responsible for terrorism. People are responsible for violence and terrorism.”
Which is true, at least in the sense that (as Maher points out) “Guns don’t kill people; people kill people.” Maher has always been a plague-on-all-your-houses atheist, a point he spent hours making in his documentary film “Religulous.” But Maher has long maintained that Islam, above all others, is violent by inherent design. Or at least that it’s a breeding ground fo terrorists, on the basis that the violence they commit is absolutely justified by “coherent and even learned interpretations” of their own “infallible” holy book.
Obama for his part has observed that all religions have committed atrocities, including Christianity. And not nearly as far back as the Crusades, as many would like to argue. And that’s a fair argument, one worthy of discussion. Apparently not up for discussion though is the religious motivation of Islamic terrorists, and the possibility that the root cause of that violence is the religion itself. Maher:
“This idea that we cannot even call it ‘Islamic terrorism’ seems Orwellian to me. It seems like we’re paying a very high price for this. Which is, we can’t discuss it even rationally. Can’t we at least say that there are a number of factors involved, and the religion is certainly one of them?
He presented this idea that poverty and education. It is poverty and education also, but why are they impoverished and uneducated? It’s mostly because of the religion. That’s mostly why.”
That might be true — it certainly is worthy of discussion.
But, we might advise this: If you’re going to say someone else’s position comes straight from The Book of Wayne LaPierre, you might want to check your own isn’t on The Chalkboard of Glenn Beck.
Just saying. Bill.