James R. White
Watching all the standard emoting going on this evening (expression of emotions without the exercise of rational thought), as expected. But seeing a lot of the standard "lump all the Muslims together, this guy was mainstream, he was just doing what Islamic law says to do," blah blah blah. Then the Steven Anderson video comes out and the same folks are, "Well, he sure doesn't represent me! He's a radical and..." blah blah blah, without anyone stopping to say, "Whoa...I just really engaged in a double standard there, didn't I? I mean, if I want the freedom to demand I be differentiated from Steven Anderson, then, by all logical standards (as if anyone concerns themselves about such things anymore), I need to extend that right to others, including Muslims who are horrified by a guy mowing folks down in a night club as if he were the hand of Allah or something." But hey, I'm a dinosaur and don't really feel very at home in today's Western society so please feel free to ignore me.
https://www.facebook.com/prosapologian/posts/1196108053747378?pnref=story
1. That's a very Obamaesque response. For White, like Obama, the problem isn't the attitude that Muslims harbor towards non-Muslims, but the attitude that non-Muslims harbor towards Muslims. Muslims don't need to change: non-Muslims need to change to accommodate Muslims.
2. Apparently, White's logic faculty is on the fritz. Hope it will be repaired soon.
Take the fallacious Steven Anderson comparison. I assume White is alluding to Anderson's statements about hating homosexuals, and advocating their execution homosexuals. It's similar to the Westboro cult.
i) On the one hand, White concedes that seminal, authoritative sources of Islam justify jihad. However, he thinks there's diversity in the seminal, authoritative sources of Islam. You can quote equally early, authoritative sources to the contrary.
ii) On the other hand, White presumably believes the Bible doesn't justify Anderson's position. White doesn't think there's diversity in Biblical teaching, which warrants Anderson claiming one side of the disparate and divergent Biblical witness.
Therefore, White's comparison is equivocal.
Unfortunately, White is now parroting the liberal establishment. He refuses to name the problem. Islam is not the problem. No, the problem is how non-Muslims view Islam.
3. Notice, too, that White has no recommendations about any domestic or foreign policy changes that public officials should consider to make us safer in relation to jihadist attacks on the home front. Instead, he diverts attention to alleged hypocrisy on the part of critics. It's just an attitudinal problem.
Keep in mind that White is a culture warrior. He doesn't hesitate to wade in on social policy issues regarding homosexuality and transgenderism. But when it comes to social policy issues regarding Muslims in America, that's not his priority. Homosexuality and transgenderism pose a threat, but the infiltration of Islam into American culture does not.
What do you think of White's take on Orlando on his most recent DL? http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php/2016/06/13/responding-to-orlando/
ReplyDeleteI'll listen to his DL presentation later, and comment if there's anything I wish to remark on.
DeleteHe commented on your brief post: https://www.facebook.com/prosapologian/posts/1196633833694800?pnref=story
ReplyDeleteHis reaction is so bizarre. I quoted him verbatim, then commented on what he said. He responds by claiming I did "long-distance mind-reading" by refuting him "before [he] ever said anything".
DeleteI replied to the content of public statements he made. His response is utterly at variance with reality.
He was under the impression that you were responding to the DL before it aired.
DeletePerhaps he was, but if so, that's very careless on his part since, in my post, I was explicitly responding, not to the DL before it aired, but to something he posted on Facebook.
Delete//That's a very Obamaesque response. For White, like Obama, the problem isn't the attitude that Muslims harbor towards non-Muslims, but the attitude that non-Muslims harbor towards Muslims. Muslims don't need to change: non-Muslims need to change to accommodate Muslims. //
ReplyDeleteWhat he's saying is that we must allow Muslims to define their beliefs the way they wish and not force them into some undifferentiated whole "Islam" any more than we would want Pope Francis, Reformed Baptists, and Jack Chick to be lumped together by Muslims.
That point is valid.
I've discussed that in detail in the past. Your comment in unresponsive to my prior analysis.
DeleteI really respect James White but he needs less yes men and more brothers who will be willing to tell him when he's wrong as is the case here with his debate with Steve Hays.
ReplyDelete"jihadist attacks on the home front"? You need to start doing your homework. The CIA has been creating jihadists for decades.
ReplyDelete