MORE PREJUDICE IN THE NAME OF ANTI-PREJUDICE

It has happened again.

The Obama administration, in an effort to “prove” it holds the high ground on being against prejudice….has, again, shown its prejudice.

As you are aware, a radical Islamic lunatic drove into a group of people on the Ohio State University campus, then got out of his car and slashed them with a knife until a police officer shot and killed him.

And how does the Obama administration characterize this?

Here’s your answer, via the following excerpt from Dave Boyer’s article in the Washington Times:

President Obama’s spokesman acknowledged Tuesday that an attack by a Muslim student at Ohio State University may have been motivated by extremism, but he cautioned against blaming it on radical Islam — a phrase he carefully avoided, in keeping with Mr. Obama’s practice.

“Our response as a country to this situation matters,” said White House press secretary Josh Earnest. “If we respond to this situation by casting aspersions on millions of people that adhere to a particular religion, or if we increase our suspicion of people who practice a particular religion, we’re more likely to contribute to acts of violence than we are to prevent them.”

I keep trying to understand what in the world this is supposed to mean…and keep coming up dry.  So let’s try and figure it out together.

If I use the term “Islam”, I am referring to all Muslims, regardless of which part of Islam they belong to.

If I use the term “radical Islam” I am not referring to all Muslims, I am referring only to Muslims who commit what we consider radical acts (such as random acts of violence) in the name of Islam.

Therefore, if I call abdul razak ali artan a radical Islamist, I am not associating him with all Muslims, I am associating him only with radical Muslims.

But if I say that calling him a radical Islamist is casting aspersions on millions of people that adhere to a particular religion or increasing suspicion of people who practice a particular religion, it means I do associate radical Islam with all of Islam.  It means that I do not distinguish between radical Islamists and the Muslim family who lives down the street and peacefully goes about its business.

Now:  tell me which of these positions is the one that displays prejudice.

Or, more importantly, tell Barack Obama and his paid liar, Josh Earnest, which one it is.  Because it is clear they don’t have a clue.

1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *