American Media’s Dangerous Fixation With All Things Muslim and Homosexual
Now that the dust is finally beginning to settle, most people like myself have had some time to process the deranged (but thankfully thwarted) terrorist act of violence and the ensuing Muslim uproar sparked by what initially began as a not-so-highly publicized Muhammad drawing cartoon contest sponsored by Pamela Geller, President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), and Jihad Watch at the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Texas. The thing about this entire incident that should strike everyone as most appalling is the mainstream media meltdown subsequent to the murderous rampage that was carried out against the event on May 3rd by two ISIS-supporting madmen. A countless throng of our nation’s “talking heads” were spinning in overdrive, and like some sort of rapid response team or pro-Muslim war room, they promptly and predictably sprang into damage control mode in an effort to placate and pacify the apoplectic adherents to the ostensible religion of peace who apparently hold to a faith so fragile and easily offended that it can’t even withstand the slightest modicum of scrutiny. However, since mocking the beliefs of non-Christians usually proves counterproductive when it comes to winning them to the Christ, the primary focus of this column will therefore be to shine a light upon the flagrant hypocrisy of the Left-slouching American media as demonstrated during the cartoon controversy.
Wasn’t it refreshing to see how promptly reporters, pundits and the press dutifully rushed to the defense of the followers of Islam when someone upset and provoked them, even to the point of blatantly overlooking the savage actions of the AK-47 wielding radicals in their ranks? Just like they were similarly incensed and protective of Christians when entertainer Madonna engaged in a sacrilegious re-enactment that included herself posing as a crucified Christ-like figure on a mirrored cross while wearing a crown of thorns during a performance of the song Live to Tell…and when our hard-earned tax dollars were used to fund irreverent pieces of “artwork” such as Andres Serrano’s Piss Christ or Chris Ofili’s The Holy Virgin Mary (a collage of elephant dung and pornographic images), each of which were given the illusion of respectability by being shockingly displayed at highly respected art galleries and museums…and when Tom Ford released his cross-shaped penis pendant necklace for sale….and when Terrence McNally’s vile theater production entitled Corpus Christi depicted a “gay” Jesus? Remember their indignation? Oops, we almost forgot, the media instead celebrated each of these offensive, anti-Christian displays as avant-garde expressions of free speech – talk about an unmistakable double standard and selective outrage.
What if a Christian had responded violently to any of the aforementioned blasphemous attacks upon our matchless Savior? Would the media have been as gracious? Would they have been as quick to pin the blame on the creators, organizers and participants who were responsible for any of the above anti-Christian displays for inciting the attack?
Rather, all Christians would have certainly been smeared and slandered with the same broad brush they use every single time the Westboro Baptist goons show up to protest at a military funeral. And more than likely, they would have also exploited such a hypothetical attack to turn the anti-Christian sentiment up a notch. The same standard of due deference will simply never be countenanced by the Leftists when it comes to the followers of Jesus Christ, who will instead be coerced to personally and directly violate their faith and consciences. Or else! Just ask leading Democrat presidential contender Hillary Clinton about that.
That brings the discussion to a very telling contrast…
Pamela Geller didn’t force any Muslims to violate their faith during the first annual “Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest.” The inaugural American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) event was not held at a Mosque, but at a facility owned by the Garland Independent School District. She didn’t legally compel a Muslim printer to make T-shirts or posters with an image of Muhammad on them. Geller didn’t demand that a Muslim caterer supply food for her contest. Nor did she threaten a Muslim baker with a costly, livelihood-damaging lawsuit if they refused to provide a cake or other baked item for the event. But we all know full well that these are exactly the kinds of activities that Christians are repeatedly being forced to do these days under the threat of prosecution and personal, economic destruction when it comes to participating in, or promoting, a fake same-sex “marriage,” and where is the mainstream media when this kind of religious oppression is occurring? They are busy doing exactly what they always do best: furiously piling on the ad hominem attacks and heaping their malicious misrepresentations upon those “terrible,” “discriminatory” Christians.
In other words, Christians will be stiff-armed and socially stigmatized into desecrating the sacred institution of marriage and engaging in actions that stand in clear contradiction to their deeply held religious beliefs. Muslims, on the other hand, will not only be protected from compelled faith-infringing conduct, but even non-Muslims must be publicly castigated and inveighed against by a politically correct media whenever they cross the line by making the Islamic citizens among us feel even remotely uncomfortable. Not only is it culturally impermissible for Muslims to be coerced into violating their faith, but no one else better risk invoking their ire as well or they will immediately incur the wrath of murderous Jihadi extremists and a Sharia-compliant media that provides them with all the ideological cover fire they need. If the exact same courtesy were afforded to Christians, then that would mean that bakers, florists, photographers, and every other wedding vendor would not be legally pressured into providing products or services for same-sex mock-rimony rituals, and furthermore, neither would non-Christian business owners be permitted to participate either for fear that it might be considered offensive or provocative towards those who do believe in the Bible. But what’s good for the Muslim goose will never be good for the Christian gander especially in our current anti-Christian climate.
Of further note, Christians are often mockingly and scornfully told, “You’re being silly. Why can’t you just bake a cake, take pictures or provide flowers for a “gay wedding?” If our Christian stance is of such a trivial nature, then why can’t those “silly” Muslims just ignore Pamela Geller and others who draw their frivolous little cartoons of the false prophet Muhammad. How come none of the politically correct types ever look down their noses at the Muslims in the same condescending way as they do when it comes to Christians? Why is the Muslim faith so sacred and worthy of respect that not even non-Muslims are allowed to besmirch the “Prophet” without expecting to take fire from the very real bullets of Islamofascist terrorists and the verbal strafing runs of a hostile media, but Christians themselves must be made to comply with the homosexual agenda or be fired, bankrupted, vilified, and attacked by LGBT lynch mobs and their virulent supporters? (We won’t be holding our breath for any rational answers to these and many more questions like them.) Perhaps the singling out of Christians for bitter ridicule should be considered an unintended tribute to the strength and vigor of our one and only true faith which has always been forged through the fire of persecution – while the Muslim faith obviously can’t handle the heat.
While liberals take great pleasure in trampling on the rights of Christians but walk on eggshells when it comes to the Muslims, most are mindlessly unaware of the actual origin of the Islamic injunction against the depiction of images of Muhammad. The anti-image mandate, which has inspired so much controversy and furor as of late, is not, in fact, founded upon any specific citation from the Qur’an, the Hadith (Sayings of the Prophet) or any other ancient writings by the forebears of Islam. Christiane Gruber, in a Newsweek article entitled The Koran Does Not Forbid Images of the Prophet, recently wrote, “There does not exist a single legal decree, or fatwa, in the historical corpus that explicitly and decisively prohibits figural imagery, including images of the Prophet. While more recent online fatwas can surely be found, the decree that comes closest to articulating this type of ban was published online in 2001 by the Taliban.” That’s right, this strict ban on images of Muhammad is a very modern conception which can be traced directly back to one of the most oppressive and barbaric fundamental Islamic regimes ever to emerge on the world scene. Although Christians are often accused of supporting the implementation of a Taliban-style Christian theocracy in America, it is actually the mainstream media that is shamelessly defending Taliban-concocted edicts upon our country whenever they hurl their invective at anti-Jihadists and free speech activists like Pamela Geller and her cartoon contest participants.
Liberals, Democrats and progressives somehow fail to realize that if the Muslims – whom they handle with kid gloves – are ever able to establish a considerable Sharia foothold in this country, they’ll be the first ones rounded up for execution! And that’s fast becoming a frightening prospect as the Obama Administration’s State Department recklessly floods America’s Bible belt with upwards of 100,000 unscreened Muslim refugees and, more specifically, an alarming 10,000 dangerous Somali Muslims in Tennessee during this year alone.
The members of the media better wake up fast before it’s too late and do their long-neglected job as the nation’s journalistic watchdogs, not the Muslim and homosexual lapdogs.
Top 6 on BarbWire.com
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.