Tag Archives: morality

The Assault Continues

Posted on by
3

King, NC, used to have a war memorial on its property—funded by private donations—that consisted of a statue of a soldier kneeling before a cross. Americans United for Separation of Church and State considered the memorial inappropriate, and they sued the city.

Last week, in abject surrender, the city not only settled by agreeing to remove the memorial, they agreed—agreed, mind you, no court outcome dictated this—to pay AUSCS $500,000 for AUSCS’ trouble and to pay the plaintiff represented by this atheist organization $1 for his trouble.

Both sides in this matter wish to avoid further costs,

the city said in making its excuses.

No. There’s no moral equivalence here. There’s none at all between atheists and memorials to those who’ve been killed or maimed defending the rights of the likes of Americans United for Separation of Church and State to behave as they do.

Timidity lost. And the cost to religious freedom is grievous.

Punishment of Terrorists

Posted on by
1

There is a strong view that terrorists should be executed for their acts. In the main, I don’t disagree. Capital crimes desperately want capital punishment: prompt execution.

However.

Many of these terrorists are doing their deeds in order to become martyrs and to live in Allah’s heaven. For these, execution is a reward, not a punishment; for such as these, execution is a goal devoutly to be wished, not a deterrent.

Instead, I suggest, expensive as it would be, that wherever possible, those terrorists who are acting for martyrdom should be taken alive and allowed to die of old age in a prison cell. Here is punishment for the terrorist, and here is the possibility of deterrence: the price of failure being to live a long life in a cage, to be denied death except through the senility of old age.

Free Speech and Imagery

Posted on by
Reply

French film industry body ARP, made up of writers, directors and producers in France, reacted to the tragedy by praising the publication’s “historical courage” and declaring that threats will not “interfere with freedom of expression and freedom of creation.”

How many images of Mohammed are you printing today, guys?  AP?  New York Times?  Anyone?  At least the National Journal has the courage.  Such things are going up on social media; why are you guys not participating? What is it you fear so badly? Your responsibility? Or your loss of comfort?

Here are a couple, courtesy of Charlie Hebdo. Because, as Charlie says

Parce que le crayon sera toujours au dessus de la barbarie…

Parce que la liberté est un droit universel…

Or,

Because the pen is always above barbarism…

Because freedom is a universal right…

And because they now call themselves “le journal des survivants,” or “the newspaper of survivors.”Mohammed_1Mohammed_2

Maybe

Posted on by
Reply

Maybe it’s a start. Regarding the terrorist attack on the satirical publication Charlie Hebdo in Paris that was carried out by Islamic terrorists, President Barack Obama issued this statement:

I strongly condemn the horrific shooting at the offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris that has reportedly killed 12 people. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this terrorist attack and the people of France at this difficult time. France is America’s oldest ally, and has stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States in the fight against terrorists who threaten our shared security and the world. Time and again, the French people have stood up for the universal values that generations of our people have defended. France, and the great city of Paris where this outrageous attack took place, offer the world a timeless example that will endure well beyond the hateful vision of these killers. We are in touch with French officials and I have directed my Administration to provide any assistance needed to help bring these terrorists to justice.

Missing from this, though, is any reference to the terrorists as being Muslims or any oblique reference to that by noting that among the things those Islamic terrorists shouted during their rampage, was “We’ve avenged the honor of the prophet!” and the usual Islamic terrorist shout of “Allahu Akbar!”

Still, also missing from the statement is Obama’s usual moral equivalence temporizing by suggesting that Charlie Hebdo shouldn’t have provoked the Muslims in the first place.

Hey, it’s a new year. Maybe Obama is…changing. Condemn me for an optimist.

Separately,CharlieHebdo

Terrorists in the Courtroom

Posted on by
Reply

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said late Tuesday that the state of Palestine will join the International Criminal Court on April 1, a high-stakes move that will enable the Palestinians to pursue war-crimes charges against Israel.

That’s what the AP is reporting (I’ll elide the AP’s cynicism in referring to this organization as a “state”).

Keep in mind, which Ban seems to have chosen not to do, that the terrorist gang based in Gaza, Hamas, merged with the Palestinian Authority into a Unity Government to “govern” both Gaza and areas of the West Bank under the PA flag. Shortly after that merger, the PA last summer launched its 50-day terror war against Israel.

Now, courtesy of Ban and the UN, we’ll have terrorists in the ICC, not as the defendants they should be, but as parties whose opinions actually are taken seriously.

It’s one more reason not to take the International Court seriously.