Berkeley Students Call On University To Cancel Speech By ‘Bigot and Racist’ Bill Maher
Source: The Raw Story
According to The Daily Californian, students at the University of California, Berkeley are petitioning to cancel a Bill Maher speaking engagement in December over his recent comments about Islam.
Bill Maher is a blatant bigot and racist who has no respect for the values UC Berkeley students and administration stand for, the Change.org petition reads. The comedians public statements on various religions and cultures are offensive and his dangerous rhetoric has found its way into our campus communities, the petition continues. Too many students are marginalized by his remarks and if the University were to bring this individual as a commencement speaker they would not be supporting these historically marginalized communities
Marium Navid, an Associated Students of University of California Senator, told The Daily Californian that ts not an issue of freedom of speech, its a matter of campus climate. The First Amendment gives him the right to speak his mind, but it doesnt give him the right to speak at such an elevated platform as the commencement. Thats a privilege his racist and bigoted remarks dont give him. As of today, the petition has been signed by 1,500 people, but it is unknown how many of them are affiliated with the university itself.
Maher has come under fire in recent weeks, most notably for his fiery spat with Ben Affleck on a recent episode of Real Time with Bill Maher.
He claimed that Islam is the only religion that acts like the mafia, and that Muslims will f*cking kill you if you say the wrong thing, draw the wrong picture, or write the wrong book.
Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/10/berkeley-students-call-on-university-to-cancel-speech-by-bigot-and-racist-bill-maher/
pangaia
(24,324 posts)be open to question.
What I do think he is, is a loud mouthed narcissistic blow hard.
There ! how's them potatoes...
ladjf
(17,320 posts)Archae
(46,262 posts)He claims Pasteur made a "deathbed confession" about disease, saying "germs don't cause it."
This is a lie.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)is your funny bone broken?
pangaia
(24,324 posts)He is just an overblown, poop blowing blowhard.
A pompous ass with no timing whatsoever.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)seems many many people disagree with your assessment of his skill! Including many years of HBO!
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Numbers do not mean quality or talent..
Just because Kenny G sells out (double entendre intentional)doesn't mean he doesn't play elevator music.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Are you in casting? Do you write reviews? Are you an actual comedian...one that actually gets paid?
pangaia
(24,324 posts)..although, I have audition singers for operas and Broadway shows
Do I write reviews? Nope. Check.. Although I have had many reviews written about performances I have been involved in.
Am I an actual comedian. Nope check (I told you that already. I would be a terrible comedian. Put your specs on. )
So.. what's the point? I am not a politician, or in the military either, but I sure have my own opinion about invading Iraq! ( I was going to put in 'fucking opinion' but.. eh...)
I am not a poet, but I have a pretty good idea about what is good poetry and what is not, having worked with poets. I am not a dancer, but I have a pretty good idea about what constitutes quality in modern dance, having worked with the Martha Graham and Garth Fagan Dance Companies. I am not a photographer but I think I have a pretty good idea about balance and composition in photography, having been married to a photographer for quite a while.. And I believe I have valid opinions about comedians, having worked in pits with quite a few of them.
Now..Your opinions in those areas may differ from mine, and that is fine with me. But that does not mean mine are not valid.
Archae
(46,262 posts)So did Don Rickles.
And just before she died, Joan Rivers.
And David Spade.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)No fucking wonder!
Archae
(46,262 posts)Recently?
No.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)do either of the others have much of a career these days? No they don't...Bill has been working steady on television for what 20+ yrs straight now!
by the way...Rickles and Rivers are considered icons by OTHER comedians.
Oh and Redd Foxx was pretty acerbic too....you going to say he wasn't funny too?
Joanie Baloney
(1,357 posts)and still funny (if you like insult comedy). Whether one considers Maher funny, he is a public figure and brings up thought-provoking topics. Isn't that what universities are al about?
Let him speak..and then judge.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)I don't think anyone will blame you for mistaking him for a zombie.
savalez
(3,517 posts)demosincebirth
(12,518 posts)to Islamic terrorists and other brain-dead killers.
still_one
(91,966 posts)resistence are one of the biggest problems facing us
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Also a terrible actor, comic timing non-existent..
Remember his former show...forget the name,,'
had screamers from right and left just belching at each other...
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)your starting to sound like a disgruntled comedian yourself....envy is a cruel master!
pangaia
(24,324 posts)I can't even remember jokes.
Yes, my opinion. Millions of others are entitled to theirs.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)That I am not disgruntled, nor envious, nor a comedian?
or can not remember jokes?
That sure is true.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and still not a comedian...
Legalequilibrium78
(103 posts)Own opinion. Which means absolute diddly squat when it comes to assessing Bill Maher's comedic chops. If you are butthurt about his comments about Islam, then it's understandable, but to then elevate your disagreement with him by suggesting Bill Maher is unfunny then you just don't know comedy.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)1-My opinion is just what I said it was. My opinion. So you tell me my opinion doesn't mean .. diddly squat. OK. I didn't say it did. Howsomever, then why would YOUR opinion mean diddly squat?
2-If I am .. what was that?... "BUTTHURT?" Did you actually type out b-u-t-t-h-u-r-t? You know what, smarty pants... I didn't even listen to that exchange between Maher and whatshisname.
SO... how could I be BUTTHURT about it. I was expressing my opinion abut Bill Maher. If you had actually read my fucking post ( I know, I know, it's not really a fucking post. I just threw that in there) you would have seen that nowhere, anywhere did I say ANNNY THING about his comments about Islam. I don't even know what he said and don't care.
3"..but to then elevate your disagreement with him.." repeat..and rinse. I have no idea what he said Sooooo.. how could I disagree with him?
4- ".. by suggesting Bill Maher is unfunny then you just don't know comedy..." As you said of me, that is your opinion. And you are certainly entitled to it. (Oh, don't tell me that millions and millions of other people disagree with me. I've already been notified of that.) However, I won't try to insult you by saying you don't know comedy because we disagree about what is funny.
Whew. I need another Bookers after that effort..
840high
(17,196 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)penndragon69
(788 posts)dude, stop getting stoned before the show !!
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)There ! how's them potatoes...
pangaia
(24,324 posts)How's them potatoes?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)How's THEM potatoes...
pangaia
(24,324 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)watching him some time back.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)I have no idea what Vanilla is talking about when referring to my 'like them potatoes' thing.
Something is going over my head. What is it?
I stopped way way back also.
840high
(17,196 posts)will tell us.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Or any other. Maybe a performing arts magnet school, or something like that, but he's really not commencement address material.
JMHO, YMMV
closeupready
(29,503 posts)The difference between him and Gennifer Flowers is people are still paying attention to him.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)to protest the use of university funds or facilities to host any particular speakers chosen for them by university administrators.
Speeches, concerts, and similar events that occur at universities should result from the desires of the students and faculty, not simply be 'thrust upon them'. I spent quite a bit of time in college, and it always irritated me that the general student body usually had no real input, but were simply presented with a schedule of events chosen by someone who seemed to have a far different agenda behind their choices.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)The students threatened to boycott the graduation. The administration then claimed that the only one they could get on short notice was the President of Coca Cola. My friend's entire frat pretended to fall as each of them went onto the stage to get a diploma.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)I love it....
AndreaCG
(2,331 posts)Many of us walked out on him not because we objected to his politics but because he was selected without the approval of the University Senate, which was supposed to approve commencement speakers. So I agree, students, and faculty, are being ignored frequently.
adirondacker
(2,921 posts)student recommendations. I know, sounds like Democracy
Our class voted bell hooks. It was a memorable and awesome commencement.
AndreaCG
(2,331 posts)The university senate at Syracuse was composed of faculty and studentsIIRC. This was the only time the administration pulled this stunt to my knowledge. Wonder why. We couldn't stand the chancellor. I wrote a song parody about him to the tune of California Uber Alles.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)I just read a bit more elsewhere on this, and at this university, speakers ARE chosen by student representatives. It actually was a group of students that chose him in the first place, and a wider protest that resulted in the same body of students reconvening to choose to withdraw his invitation to speak, which withdrawal the administration decided not to allow.
So at least in this case, Maher's original choice was not 'thrust upon' the student body by admins, but selected by their fellow students. I felt, having learned this, that I should issue this correction, since I was incorrectly assuming that Maher's selection was solely by administration.
truthisfreedom
(23,113 posts)He speaks his mind and he makes me laugh.
SkyDaddy7
(6,045 posts)Some are twisting what Bill said about Islam into him being this White Supremacist NAZI...Seriously getting old. But that is what happens when you talk about people's imaginary deities they get ruffled under garments.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Is Condi the War Criminal.
At least Maher is just giving a speech, not getting paid big bucks to "lecture" and be on a sports selection committee (football? Since TV zoomed in on her, laughing and in a luxury box, during the Stanford vs. Oregon State game.)
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)the Hoover Institution is there, among other things. It was founded long before the Bay Area became the liberal bastion it is today, with quite a bit of help from Berkeley.
And yes, Kinda Sleazy is on the college football playoff selection committee.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)for the condi...... , fits. But not just Kinda......
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Not a dime. They've always been cozy with nasty conservatives. That school is all about $$.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)jonjensen
(168 posts)blasphemy is a crime and bill mahr should be stoned to death right? WRONG! muslims should learn to be tolerant that is what a college education is all about. when they say be tolerant of us ;but we don't have to be tolerant. we fight the intolerance of christian fundamental fascists we should fight islamo fascist intolerance. everybody likes to censer that doesn't make it right!
Rhinodawg
(2,219 posts)Last edited Mon Oct 27, 2014, 05:03 PM - Edit history (1)
wow
on edit...apparent its ok to say "islamo fascist intolerance"
closeupready
(29,503 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)In the largely secular 'western' countries, blasphemy is indeed usually no longer a crime. Go to a solidly theocratic country, though, and you're on your own if you want to start committing blasphemy.
But refusing to allow someone to give speeches on your campus, using campus resources is hardly 'censorship'. If he really feels the need to speak on campus, I'm sure he can join the guys who hang out outside student unions and rail against the gays and premarital sex.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)is laws like those against gay people he criticizes and for which you castigate him. Anti gay laws exist in nations with laws based on theology and religion, nations that forbid and censor critics.
It is interesting how may people try to invoke a shield by mentioning gay people while they defend nations with anti gay laws...
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)The context being that I was saying he could go out and shout on the corner with the nutjob preachers who like to hang around college campuses, and are usually doing sexist or homophobic rants. I'm not saying HE would be out doing the same sort of rant, just saying he'd have all the free speech he wants out on the corner.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)It's "Maher" and "censor", and there should be a few commas spread around in there.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Cartoonist
(7,298 posts)Another case of religious privilege. How dare Bill Maher criticize "our" religion. I say BS. Everyone's religion should be subject to criticism just like anything else. Calling him a blatant bigot and racist is reprehensible.
alarimer
(16,245 posts)Banning this or that speaker just because they said something we don't like says more about us than it says about them.
Let them speak. Don't go if you don't like them. Carry a sign, whatever. It's cowardly not to engage with the opposition, in my opinion.
What is particularly insidious is when it is religiously based. There was a case in Britain (not sure which university at this point) where the Muslims demanded that women and men be segregated in seating. The speaker, in this case, rightfully said that she would not speak if this was done. I don't remember the outcome, but it was a ridiculous demand.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali was disinvited by Brandeis because some people objected. Now, I don't always agree with her (seldom, actually) but I think there is value in listening to people you disagree with. Especially those that have some degree of experience with the topic. I don't think Bill Maher is particularly well-informed.
msongs
(67,199 posts)Dr. Strange
(25,898 posts)than by the beginning of the Anti-Blasphemy Movement?
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Students are just irked at who administration has chosen to speak at their commencement. I share their annoyance, as the speakers at my various commencements were simply imosed upon the student body from on high, the student body as a whole weren't given any chance to pick speakers they actually might find interesting and informative.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)I learn something every day!
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)7962
(11,841 posts)rpannier
(24,304 posts)yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Absolutely frightening. Our education system is horrid!
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)The terms racist and bigot would both apply to Maher. Oh, and sexist. Let's not forget that when he's not expressing his deep heartfelt concern for the welfare of Muslim women, he's one of the most heinous misogynists on television. Stunning hypocrisy.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Let me spell it out for you: ideas and people are not the same things.
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)Furthermore, he takes what are essentially cultural practices in other regions that also happen to be Muslim, and tries to mislead people into thinking they are common practices among Arab Muslims. When Bill Maher says "Muslim", he wants you to think "Arab". All of the grotesque caricatures he draws are anti-Arab. He's extremely pro-Israel. This isn't that hard to figure out.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)he doesn't seem to mind that Israel fights its wars using the $ 30 billion our nation has been and will be giving it, from 2009 to 2018, under legislation George W signed off on.
And you' re correct about his sexism as well.
name not needed
(11,660 posts)Orrex
(63,086 posts)They simply don't want to pay for his speech.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)The whole student body or a handful that claim to speak for all of them?
Instead of censoring why not boycott the speach?...because too few will do it and a censoring does not require a lot of people to approve...just a reason.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)same thing happens here on DU....the few Far Left Indies want to tell the entire Democratic party who SHOULD be their candidate...even when 2/3 disagree with their choice! The Teabaggers have tried that same tactic on the Right.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)students is unknown, as the petition is open to everyone.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)The evidence that the student body does not want him to speak is pretty shake.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Because universities should only have speakers who everyone already agrees with 100%. God forbid there should be any vigorous debates or protests.
alp227
(31,962 posts)Cases in point: Alex Jones, 9/11 truthers, creationists. Some ideas are so out there they add nothing to the mission of a university.
Bill Maher is not just Islamophobic. He's also a quack and vaccine denier. His rhetoric adds nothing to an intellectual atmosphere.
Free speech absolutism ends up backfiring despite its intent.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)It's not only obvious why we want to suppress those we disagree with, but it's also morally satisfying, isn't it?
merrily
(45,251 posts)You can argue whether his stereotyping was bigotry, but stereotypes usually are.
Not having him at their commencement, paid for by their tuition, is not suppressing him. He still gets to have a weekly TV show and speak wherever else he wishes. He has far more of a platform for his speech than they do for theirs.
This may not be a majority of graduates, though. If it is not, then a minority should not get to decide.
Ineeda
(3,626 posts)IMO, his rigid, evangelical atheist point of view is equally offensive as a rigid, evangelical xian point of view. Both are extreme and express the opinion that you're stupid and wrong if you believe otherwise. ALL absolutism, especially radical absolutism, is dangerous.
Ampersand Unicode
(503 posts)I see nothing wrong with being "Islamophobic." Islam is not a race. It's a phony-baloney fairy-tale ideology just like the other supernatural belief systems. I see nothing wrong with being Christianity-phobic or Judaism-phobic or Scientology-phobic or SomeOtherMagicalBullshit-phobic.
He only brought up Islam because, obviously, it wasn't Mormons or Taoists or Buddhists cutting people's heads off in Syria. And because Affleck is a pathetic terrorist sympathizer and a hypocrite: Christianity hates gays and women just the same as Islam does -- aren't these supposed to be groups that liberals support?
I bet he supports Woody Allen for his "contributions to art" too. GFY, Batman.
merrily
(45,251 posts)AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)There is a question who gets banned. MRAs? David Duke? Charles Murray? Angela Davis? Condi Rice? Samantha Powers?
In some places the heckler's veto has been allowed: if a speaker is likely to be attacked in a violent way, the state is within their rights to suppress their speech. So if Maher, or Rice etc. might get people so wound up the audience might be violent, can a public school ban them?
alp227
(31,962 posts)having an open mind means not just "anything goes" - it means being able to pick distinguish good ideas from BS. No way David Duke is at the same level as Angela Davis.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)but it has to guarantee free speech. Maher has the right to say what he wants at Cal.
The university has to be very careful about limiting the right to free speech. It has to allow free speech. The university most likely hired speakers with different opinions on things.
Response to JDPriestly (Reply #101)
alp227 This message was self-deleted by its author.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)not walk across the street to shake hands with, someone whose television programs I would never watch.
It's just the way it is. Once he has been invited, the university would have a hard time explaining why it violated the First Amendment by refusing to allow him to speak based on the content of his message. They might be able to uninvite him on some other ground, but not because what he is saying is politically offensive.
Rhinodawg
(2,219 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)will be paying for him.
This raises the larger issue of someone in the administration of a school, who is paid via tuitions, deciding who should speak to, and, to some extent, for a graduation class--at the expense of the graduating class.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)I'm sure they wouldn't have a problem with it at all.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)based on stereotypes....his objection to Christianity are somewhat reasoned, his hatred of Islam is bigoted and foaming at the mouth not much less than Pam Gellar.
Hulk
(6,699 posts)Some, if not ALL, of the statements I have read in this article about Islam and their intolerance of anyone disagreeing with them, illustrating comics, paintings or in any way defaming the Great and Only One DO draw death threats and actions by the religion. Is that so far off base to make him a "bigot/racist"?
I'm thinking he has a right to speak to the student body, and I'm thinking his views, although not all are measured as realistic and rational, are worthy of attention.
If you can have She-man Coultier speak to a student body, and Kinda-sleazy; I think it's within the realm of reason to have Bill Maher as a speaker.
I'd have to analyze ALL of his statements about Islam to see how far off base he might be. But it's also my firm belief that Muslims do very damned little to denounce the intolerance and violence within their fringe religious zealots. Very damned little.
merrily
(45,251 posts)That's the point. You don't say all Italians are Mafiosi or that all African Americans are on welfare or all women are weak because you see a relative handful of any of those groups doing something.
And no, he has no right to speak the student body.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Better to keep it simple and use broad brushes.
Hulk
(6,699 posts)I want to see the Muslim clerics, the leaders of the Muslim communities speak out against these heinous actions. Are you hearing them? Let me know where, cause I seem to miss them.
Violet_Crumble
(35,954 posts)ABC News Laura Ingraham, Fox News Sean Hannity, Fox & Friends and other U.S. media commentators say that Muslims are silent and complicit in the barbarian crimes of ISIS. Fox News host Andrea Tantaros said that all Muslims are the same as ISIS, and implied that all Muslims should be met with a bullet to the head.
Why dont we hear Muslims condemning the barbarian ISIS terrorists?
Turns out they are loudly condemning ISIS
but our press isnt covering it.
Father Elias Mallon of the Catholic Near East Welfare Association explains:
Why arent Muslims speaking out against these atrocities? The answer is: Muslims have been speaking out in the strongest terms, condemning the crimes against humanity committed by ISIS (or, as it is increasingly called, IS) and others in the name of Islam.
Father Mallon is right
Vatican Radio an official Vatican news site reported last month:
Two of the leading voices in the Muslim world denounced the persecution of Christians in Iraq, at the hands of extremists proclaiming a caliphate under the name Islamic State.
The most explicit condemnation came from Iyad Ameen Madani, the Secretary General for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the group representing 57 countries, and 1.4 billion Muslims.
In a statement, he officially denounced the forced deportation under the threat of execution of Christians, calling it a crime that cannot be tolerated. The Secretary General also distanced Islam from the actions of the militant group known as ISIS, saying they have nothing to do with Islam and its principles that call for justice, kindness, fairness, freedom of faith and coexistence.
Meanwhile, Turkeys top cleric, the spiritual successor to the caliphate under the Ottoman Empire, also touched on the topic during a peace conference of Islamic scholars.
In a not-so-veiled swipe at ISIS, Mehmet Gormez declared that an entity that lacks legal justification has no authority to declare war against a political gathering, any country or community. He went on to say that Muslims should not be hostile towards people with different views, values and beliefs, and regard them as enemies.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/muslim-leaders-worldwide-condemn-isis/5397364
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Hulk
(6,699 posts)I will say that you hear not one word from Muslim leaders denouncing these actions. That's the point. No...the majority of Muslims are good people; as good as anyone else on this earth. But where are those multitude of clerics denouncing the actions of the radical crazies? "chirp, chirp...." Have I missed something here?
"The point" you seem to have missed is the denunciation by the leaders of the Muslim faith. If that puts them in "a group", then perhaps they can make their voices a wee bit louder so we can hear them. And for probably good reason; THEY would be marked if they spoke up.
It's a crazy world. All religions scare the hell out of me, with the crazies that commandeer the media. Religion is fine; keep it to yourself and do as you wish, so long as you don't infringe on my right to my private life.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)What is rational about his Christianity comments that's irrational about is Islam comments?
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)which is my point. Don't pretend anyone here gives a shit when someone bashes Christians (usually they join right in). Maher was right about progressives and Islam. I don't belong to either religion so I really don't care but the differences in how they are each treated here and on other liberal boards are massive.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)He points out that adherents from only one of those religions is currently cutting off people's heads and also points out quite correctly the disturbingly large percentage of Muslims who believe it's okay to murder someone for leaving Islam. You can ignore the reality all you want -it doesn't change a thing. Murder - for leaving Islam.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/01/64-percent-of-muslims-in-egypt-and-pakistan-support-the-death-penalty-for-leaving-islam/
According to Pew's data, 78 percent of Afghan Muslims say they support laws condemning to death anyone who gives up Islam. In both Egypt and Pakistan, 64 percent report holding this view. This is also the majority view among Muslims in Malaysia, Jordan and the Palestinian territories.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)degree, but the same principal, the same hate, the same desire to kill others...why do folk not see that. The rush to entrenched judgment is a sickness.
And do you remember the Crusaders, at that time, when the religion was as young, entire nations sent off their sons to kill in the name of "religion".
In more modern times I give you the Muslim genocide in the former Yuogoslavia, did the Christian blood letting make all Christians criminals!
It is not religion, it is insanity and criminal.
It is not the religion, it is the lust for power, we see it in the Republicans, this insane lust.
But you want to pick up the big brush and paint the entire canvas you go for it, keep it simple, free country.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)killed anyone? They're annoying as hell but they number around 20 family members so that comparison is laughable. And I swear anyone who brings up the crusades as if that excuses what's happening today is simply not someone to be taken seriously. Religion IS the problem when people are murdering IN THE NAME OF THEIR RELIGION. Let me know when the westboro whack jobs take control of a major city and start cut off heads. Then it will be a valid comparison.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)That is not the way your President sees it, so you disagree with him also?
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)You have some fucking nerve. Because I wont let you compare tens of thousands of animals who cut people's head's off to 20 family members with signs that means I hate 1.8 billion people? How the fuck do you sleep at night making such wild accusations against people? You are not a serious person and you argue like a fucking child. Stop shoving words into people's mouths who have said no such thing as what you're accusing them of saying. It's not worthy of this board. I am done with you.
merrily
(45,251 posts)make up.
rock
(13,218 posts)He is comedic and politically incorrect and pretty damn funny. I suppose the students have the right to decline him for whatever reason, but it's not because he's a bigot and a racist (of course they may think that).
alp227
(31,962 posts)Or calling Sarah Palin's special needs kid "retarded"? http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/06/13/goddamnit-bill-maher/
Or a domestic violence joke? http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2014/07/19/when-you-let-assholes-be-the-public-face-of-atheism-its-no-wonder-we-have-a-bad-reputation/
Sorry. Bigotry is bigotry. Nothing funny about it. end of story.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)Maher is weak tea compared to a lot of them.
There's a reason people fill theaters to hear comics say things that breach the line of political correctness. Hint: It has nothing to do with politics.
alp227
(31,962 posts)And do you think it's RIGHT, or WRONG to make humor out of bigotry?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)You did see the "trying to kill you..." part, right?
alp227
(31,962 posts)That speaks to those with misogynistic prejudices.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)As a non-misogynist, I'm not seeing it.
alp227
(31,962 posts)Why make a joke out of it? What if "woman" were replaced with "black person"?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)alp227
(31,962 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)Indeed, the only people who should be offended by that joke are members of Hamas.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Why not try to debate his controversial comments instead?
alp227
(31,962 posts)and those spkrs are supposed to be enlightening and uplifting not divisive and vulgar.
also. some ideas are too worthless to be debated. like creationism, 9/11 truth, alternative medicine, etc.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)or just boycott the ceremony, if they feel that strongly about it...
It's not like his commencement address is going to get all political
alp227
(31,962 posts)Last edited Mon Oct 27, 2014, 09:45 PM - Edit history (2)
I think it's more powerful to deny the speaker his resume padder than protest. Does UC Berkeley REALLY want to endorse a trashy, vulgar, anti-science moron like Maher?
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)although Maher's career is pretty secure with or without the "resume padding" from being a commencement speaker...
Oprah Winfrey was my commencement speaker -- I'm pretty sure she put "Commencement Speaker at Morehouse College, 1999" on all her business cards
Either way, Cal would be on a *very* slippery slope by rescinding the invitation unless Maher gets caught with a dead girl or live 8-year-old in his hotel room...The only realistic outcome is for the students to maybe make enough of a public stink that Maher pulls himself out...
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Quite the imagery.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)It is the students' day, the one they worked for four years. It's not just another venue for a comedian to showcase his talents or lack thereof, in the opinion of those not paying for the commencement.
These events are part of the package the student pays for in their tuition and fees. So they shouldn't be dismissed as saying they can just boycott the event. It si not about Maher. It's about them. That being said, Maher is a big booster of California in general, so I can see why someone wanted him to speak.
But I've never heard of him doing anything to help the education of Caliornians. He is not a politician, not a leader of any kind. I'd expect him to be at class for drama or another interest he has had.
merrily
(45,251 posts)on campus?
That is not exactly equivalent to students not welcoming someone they feel is a racist, to be paid for with their tuition.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Bill Maher has ridiculed every religion in his movie Religulous - not just Islam. He ridicules all religions and religious people in his comedy.
It is okay for him to ridicule other religions - just not Islam -- then he is a racist and a bigot.
Same argument was used over the Danish cartoons -- it is ok to caricature anyone else -- just not Allah and Prophet Mohammad because Islam is exceptional!
He is a comedian for heaven's sake!!!
7962
(11,841 posts)I know I've disagreed with you in the past over something, but its hard to remember what it was because you've been hitting them out of the park with me lately!!!
alp227
(31,962 posts)Maher talking shit about Islam has such greater force than talking shit about Christianity, the supermajority religion in America. See: systematic discrimination.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)His job is to make fun and point out hypocrisies.
I don't think Maher's words lead to discrimination any more that the Danish cartoons insulted Islam.
What is astonishing is that all the actions of Boko Haram, Al Shabab, ISIS, Taliban, Hamas, Al Q'aeda plus assorted stonings in Saudi Arabia or hangings in Iran are not likely to result in discrimination but a comedian's words can?
alp227
(31,962 posts)It's one thing if people make perceptions out of religion based on facts like the existence of ISIS, etc. but then when people like Maher make a JOKE instead of logic out of trashing religion then that's where hate becomes normalized.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)are are not swayed by it.
If they were, we would not have had Reagan reelected considering the scathing criticism of Reagan portrayed in Doonesbury and other cartoons as well as skits on SNL and In Living Color.
George W. Bush wouldn't have been reelected upon viewing Fahrenheit 911 or SNL or "Bush or Chimp" cartoons.
I can support equal time for an Islamic viewpoint before or after Bill Maher's speech but I am against censorship. The problem is that Muslims do not actively and visibly stand up to the bad bad things being done around the world in the name of Islam as much as they are out to squelch all anti-Islamic speech.
If there were rallies by Muslim students and leaders against what ISIS or Boko Haram are doing on all the college campuses, no one would give second thought to what Maher says.
There are fewer Jewish people in the US than there are Muslims and I see comedians making fun of Jews all the time. No one has tried to silence them.
alp227
(31,962 posts)Should black leaders like Al Sharpton condemn "the knockout game" and such because Worldnetdaily said so? Is it really the responsibility of people of color to condemn all the sins of their groups?
Also, should comedy not have a moral conscience, too?
GeorgeGist
(25,294 posts)not a race.
alp227
(31,962 posts)of the more radical elements instead of others not being so judgmental?
jonjensen
(168 posts)I have seen people being whipped into the mosque to be forced to pray.
merrily
(45,251 posts)required by the religion of the molesters.
merrily
(45,251 posts)will still have his show and will still be able to hold court without being paid.
And censorship is something government does, not college students.
I wouldn't want to have to pay anyone I think is racist to speak to me. The issue here is that the college does the hiring and the students are both a captive audience and the ones who foot the bill.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Did I get a chance to say no?
In a society, whatever the elected/appointed people do is done. Will the students pay any more tuition if Bill Maher speaks? NO. Will the students pay any less tuition because Bill Maher is not allowed to speak? NO. It is a non-issue. They are protesting because of the Islamic exceptionalism.
merrily
(45,251 posts)yes you got a vote, which is more than these kids were given about Maher.
No, paying Maher with their tuition is not a non-issue. I pay no more or less for things I hate than for things I love. That doesn't mean I should be forced to pay for things I hate. They should not be forced to pay for Maher as opposed to a commencement speaker they actually want.
However this does not seem to be a majority. If not, they should not get to decide for everyone.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Or are we going to make an exceptional case for Islam again?
Where does it stop? Should some Catholic students stop a speaker from speaking about contraception? Should Buddhist students stop someone from speaking about hunting? Should Hindu students stop a speaker from speaking about how to cook a steak?
It is Islamic exceptionalism -- no more no less. Grow up and learn to live within a society where hundreds of viewpoints are expressed, not all to one's liking.
merrily
(45,251 posts)I said, if they are not a majority, they should not decide for everyone. But, a majority of the graduates to be should decide.
Grow up and learn to live within a society where hundreds of viewpoints are expressed, not all to one's liking.
Hmm. Maybe I should reply, "Grow up and stop lashing out personally when your intellect fails you." (Nah. Keep it up. I love unintentional irony.)
Both the students and I do live in such a society. That does not mean I have to have to fly Maher in to my wedding reception to give the toast or that they have to fly him in to give the commencement speech.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)They are free to not attend. It is not their wedding reception -- doh.
merrily
(45,251 posts)alleged point about freedom not to attend your own commencement. Hint: It's not a freedom at all.
And no one said it was their wedding reception, so let that poor straw man rest. No one deserves it more.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)but honestly I have not thot he was all that funny recently. Just me.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)smear of an entire religion as radical terrorists has got to him.
As it should.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)then, he announced, he'd moved on and wasn't going to talk about it anymore.
He sure can dish it out, but he can't take it, can he.
elias49
(4,259 posts)He's lost it. He's not fresh any more. No sponteniety. Same thing seems to have happened to SNL. There's a thread around...
I stand with the petitioners.
7962
(11,841 posts)But they were fine with his constant criticism of Christianity? Among other things?
Well, get used to it, kids. Sometimes life's a bitch.
alp227
(31,962 posts)It's ok to make an argument why religious belief is wrong. Not to broad brush followers of a religion as terrorist sympathizers or sub-human. Also, criticizing a majority religion is less harmful than criticizing a minority religion.
7962
(11,841 posts)alp227
(31,962 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)After all, Christians are in a majority in this country, yet there is a war on Christmas.
A better example might be women in this country, who were a majority, yet painted broadbrush as too incompetent mentally to do things like vote.
LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)Is criticizing religion okay or is it not.
You are trying to have it both ways:
or
If the latter, then I suppose its "harmful" to criticize people who believe in human sacrifice so long as it is a minority religion?
alp227
(31,962 posts)engaging in human sacrifice en masse, lumping Muslims in America with the ISIS/Taliban thugs in the Mideast is little more than incitement of hatred. I accidentally conflated broad-brushing Muslims with criticizing Muslims. Did you seriously accuse American Muslim of believing in human sacrifice?
LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)that it is not okay to criticize it?
Maher and Harris were not talking about American Muslims. They were talking about Muslims in the middle East and north Africa. They specifically mentions how majorities of muslims in countries like EGYPT believed that apostates should get the death penalty.
They were not making that up either:
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf
And NO, I did not accuse muslims of believing in human sacrifice. I gave an extreme example (and was thinking of the ancient Aztec religion specifically) to show you how far out saying that you can't criticize a minority religion can be.
alp227
(31,962 posts)LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)Even the ones who went to africa to pass the kill the gays bill?
The Catholic League headed by Bill Donahue?
Focus on the Family assholes?
The Westboro Baptist Church doesn't?
They are all religious people.
alp227
(31,962 posts)LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)Maher didn't. He and Harris specifically said: Not all Muslims.
alp227
(31,962 posts)"The most popular name in the United Kingdom, Great Britain -- this was in the news this week -- was Mohammed. Am I a racist to feel that I'm alarmed by that? Because I am. ... I don't have to apologize, do I, for not wanting the Western world to be taken over by Islam in 300 years?" (Source)
"Talk to women who've ever dated an Arab man. The results are not good." (Ibid.)
And the Change.org petition started by the students also has more quotes, not just Islamophobic:
But Ive often said that if I had I have two dogs if I had two retarded children, Id be a hero. And yet the dogs, which are pretty much the same thing. What? Theyre sweet. Theyre loving. Theyre kind, but they dont mentally advance at all.
Dogs are like retarded children.
"Islam is the only religion that acts like the mafia that will fucking kill you if you say the wrong thing."
"The Muslim world has too much in common with Isis."
"You have to understand, you have to embrace the values of Western civilization. They're not just different, they are better."
"For a lack of a better term I would say the feminine values are now the values of America, sensitivity is more important than truth, feelings are more important that facts"
LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)The quote about the name definitely shows a phobia of islam, it was bigoted and I can accept criticizing him on that one. There was no punch line, no joke, and intolerant.
The dog quote was insulting and dumb and It was also said to with the intention to be outrageous as possible during his Politically Incorrect days. When he said that one (after Martin Short stopped laughing) he waited for the gasps that followed. The last quote was part of a chauvinistic comedy routine with him joking about political correctness and him having never gotten married. They were over the line so criticize him on those things all you want.
The quote on Arab men was during a discussion on how women in the middle east are treated. The part about the mafia (from the Affleck encounter) was referring to the fatwa that was placed on the creators of south park and other cartoonist for portraying Mohammad, and the Isis comment was again referring to how over 60% of countries like Egypt think apostates should be put to DEATH.
The comment about western civilization was (again) talking about the fatwa against South Park and how conservative middle eastern/North African countries are on social issues. He then talked about freedom of speech and separation of church and state and many other liberal issues that are lacking in places like Saudi Arabia.
How are these different than criticizing countries like Ireland for its anti-abortion policies, Uganda for its anti-gay laws, evangelicals for their support of prop 8? Or noting that all these people where influenced by Christianity and specifically by bible verses promoting these positions?
How is that different from the South bashing that happens in GD? I am from Texas, I am a liberal and I get it. I understand that the people attacking my area of the country are not attacking EVERYONE here, but rather the large number of RW idiots running things here.
We, as liberals, support equal rights and the separation of church and state don't we? Why shouldn't we criticize these things? Yet Maher is getting quoted out of context time and time again on these criticism of Islam and Middle Eastern culture and attacked for things he didn't say. He never demonized EVERY religious followers for the sins of the bigots. He was criticizing the 60+% of Pakistanis who think apostates should die.
Don't they deserve to be criticized?
Hari Seldon
(154 posts)I've Got Stuff to Say with Bill Maher
But they changed it Real Time for obvious reasons.
Oktober
(1,488 posts)These folks have it covered...
undeterred
(34,658 posts)Throd
(7,208 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)"I object to the 'H' in RAHOWA so that makes be liburl!"
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)Last time I checked, "Muslim" is not a race.
And yes, if people are going to complain about the backwards views of Christians, then Muslims are fair game as well.
I'm pretty sure that as noxious as the Westboro Baptist Church is, they don't think people should be murdered for leaving the Christian faith.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
still_one
(91,966 posts)Iamthetruth
(487 posts)Who want to dictate to the entire student body their views. Competing views and opinions is what college is supposed to be about.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Whatever you do, don't post their names!!!!!!
Iamthetruth
(487 posts)I would not waste my key strokes on such a thing.
santroy79
(193 posts)Bill Maher speaks the truth but some people just cant accept it
3rdwaydem
(277 posts)Through his popular telivision.programs and comedy appearances he has used humor to destroy some of the most idiotic policies of the Right Wing.
As a champion for women's right as well as gay and lesbian rights, he has been quite consistent in his attacks on radical, fundamentalist Muslims who murder those who are gay, feminist or who just dare to disagree with them. A true liberal is one who is consistant in his or her beliefs and
doesn't make special exceptions or exemptions for particular individuals and groups.
MontyPow
(285 posts)Who take an equally hard line on Islam. Maher articulates about is piss poor as a teabagger but the essential point is that not all religions are equally violent. I think that is a fair statement in general. However, I think a strong argument can be made that Chrisianity is equally as violent as Islam.
If you want to know how peaceful the "Big 3" religions known to Americans are, just look at their birthplace, the Middle East.
catbyte
(34,174 posts)the DP for the crime that she's not a Muslim. WTF is up with that?
merrily
(45,251 posts)Hanging that around the neck of all 1.8 billion Muslims would be a broad brush smear, which is precisely what was wrong with Maher's comments.
Hell, I don't agree with everything the government of my city does, let alone my state and my nation. Is it fair to me to all they do on me? Invading Iraq? Abu Ghraib? Drone killings?
More to the point, given what Maher said, does the Muslim religion require that she be put to death? Or is that how the government of Pakistan chooses to operate?
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)It is in the news and Muslims need to grow up and stomach it. People who are going to discriminate will always discriminate and those who won't won't. I doubt any people are converted either way by Bill Maher speaking.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)people have been threatened for penning cartoons that were deemed offensive. Anyone remember Salman Rushdie and countless other 'incidents' where death is promised for writing the wrong thing, remember when jihad was the norm not the exception down through history and it's being called for more and more in these modern times. They stone people to death for adultery and other lessor offenses. They cut out tongues, hands ect. Islam is a violent religion as all are when guided by the wrong type of thinking. Crusades anyone? Don't get me wrong, people can worship any god they please in any manner, but Maher is not lying. I understand that some people are real sensitive about certain truths, but Maher has a right to say what he thinks is the truth just as Affleck does.
Response to big_dog (Original post)
Post removed
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)And I'm sure if Maher said what he said about Christians, these whiners would just twiddle their thumbs.
Prophet 451
(9,796 posts)The feedback from the majority of posters was, it's ok to demonise Islam because the people in charge of MidEast Muslim nations are savages". Apparently, judging groups by their worst members is acceptable when it comes to religion.
Oh, and many of them also claim that Pat Robertson or WBC wouldn't be just as bad given the chance. Which is historically blind self-delusion but whatever, I've lost the energy to fight.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Qutzupalotl
(14,230 posts)if inelegant. Even when I disagree with him, I respect his passion.
I believe his point was that Islam is the one major religion with a doctrinal basis for killing the unbelievers--the Koran actually says to do that. But he didn't phrase his critique that way. Perhaps he should have.
I have a hard time squaring that passage with the major thrust of Islam, which is about submission to the will of god. I don't see how killing anybody embodies that submission. So perhaps the real meaning of that passage is an internal (mystical) one, where you kill off those parts of yourself that rebel or cannot accept life as it happens. Maher never considers esoteric religious interpretation, which is my biggest problem with his religious critiques.
I think he's funny as hell, though. I encourage anyone with an open mind to check out his show on HBO.
merrily
(45,251 posts)of killing fetuses in pregnant women.
Slavery portrayed matter of factly, along with rapinng your wife's maid because your wife (who is also your half sister) is barren. And then, when, when your wife gives birth after all, sending the maid and your own son into the wilderness with no protection against anyone or anything--and that was the one so beloved of God that he was honored with founding Judaism.
Offering your two young daughters to be gang raped so two visitors to your city whom you believe to be angels remain safe. And that was the man God considered worthy of being saved while Sodom and Gomorrah burned. Being killed (by being turned into a pillar of salt) because you turned to see your home being burned.
Selling your own brother into slavery, only to be rewarded by him when famine strikes your country.
Trying to get a woman's husband killed so you can sleep with her because your harem just isn't enough--and that was the king so beloved of God that his line was traced to Joseph, surrogate father of Jesus.
Doctrinal bases for a lot of hideous things.
Qutzupalotl
(14,230 posts)it doesn't tell YOU to do the same. That's what I mean by a doctrinal basis, as distinct from a mere historical record.
merrily
(45,251 posts)words like "and they shall surely die" (not necessarily a word for word quote) did mean humans were supposed to put people to death. (In that case, it was homosexuals and s/he was also arguing that the Bible was, for want of a better word, vile. For many reasons, I took the position that God was threatening/promising to do it, not telling us to do it. (I try to take no position, one way or the other, on whether the Bible is vile.) And some @##$% have indeed taken it as a command for today.
So, it depends on one's interpretation.
Qutzupalotl
(14,230 posts)But "kill the unbelievers" is quite explicit.
merrily
(45,251 posts)But "kill the unbelievers" is quite explicit.I don't know the context, but let's assume it is clearly a command that they are supposed to kill non-Muslims who have been kind to them and are not attacking them or trying to take their land in cold blood. It still does not have to be taken as a present day command that one should take literally and act upon. And, very obviously, almost two billion Muslims do not take it that way.
If you are saying that some use it as excuse to murder, the same can be said of of Biblical passages used by those who urge killing Democrat because they uphold a right to choose. Or those who urge killing homosexuals. And even Osama did not urge the attack on the Twin Towers because it contained mostly Christians and Jews. According to him, anyway, it was in retaliation for the blood he saw running in the streets of Lebanon.
Qutzupalotl
(14,230 posts)between people who foment and advocate for (for instance) death to homosexuals, and people organized on a large scale to kill unbelievers, as ISIS is doing. That was Maher's point. I also think using the Bible as an excuse to carry out violence in support of one's own bigotry is different from following a literal command to kill unbelievers, which I would not characterize as an excuse but rather obedience. I think the rise of strict Sharia law does not have a similarly harsh counterpart in other religions, at least not on as large a scale, which was also Maher's point.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Notwithstanding the Pope-like way the shi'as manage things, with their Ayatullahs and Grand Ayatullahs and Guardian Councils in Iran, the bulk of Muslims are NOT shi'a, and they are "managed" locally by assorted imams, if at all.
Technically, you don't need a "leader" to practice the faith, you don't need a mosque, you don't need a prayer rug, you just need yourself--it's what makes it so different from other religions; it can operate in a "trapping-free" environment. This diffuse aspect is also what makes Islam hard to pin down--what is is depends on to whom you are speaking.
This is not a majority of students protesting--it's a tiny minority. They shouldn't get their way at the birthplace of the "Free Speech Movement." They should protest his presence if they don't like him--respond to his speech with more speech of their own.
Rhinodawg
(2,219 posts)and no religion gets a pass.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Neither is pretending that Islam requires its adherents to get violent over a cartoon.
Broadbrush stereotyping of any group, religious or not, is, by definition, never 100% correct.
Rhinodawg
(2,219 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)But when it comes to making stuff up about atheists, well that is perfectly A-okay apparently
merrily
(45,251 posts)And "muslims" was used any number of time without even qualifying it to "most Muslims." That was Affleck's whole point: the broadbrush smearing.
And exactly when did I make up a single thing about atheists? Or so much as imply that all atheists are alike? O that it was okay to broadbrush smear all atheists? I call bullshit on that one.
LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)Those are your words. He never said that. He and Harris SPECIFICALLY said they were not talking about all muslims. In fact, they specifically qualified it to majorities in Countries like Egypt where a MAJORITY of muslims in those countries DO believe that apostates should be put to death.
Yes, sometimes they just said Muslims but from the context of the discussion they were having they had already made it clear what they were talking about. People do that in heated verbal discussion. Ignoring that is strawmanning Maher and doing exactly what I said:
Making stuff up about an atheist.
And if Ben Affleck would not have kept interrupting Maher maybe he would have seen the nuance in their argument.
merrily
(45,251 posts)his broadbrush smears, but because of his spiritual beliefs or lack thereof? That's an ever bigger bs than I thought you were engaging i.
BTW, your claim was "making stuff up about atheists," plural, not simply criticizing Bill Maher for his broadbrush smears. So, who is making up stuff? If I criticized O'Reilly for his broadbrush smears, I would be attacking Christians, too? Please. Get real.
Besides, I did not make anything up. As I said, in that segment, he said "Muslims" without qualification, even as to "most Muslisms" more than once--and even most Muslims would have been bs. And I never implied that he said the exact words I used.
Sorry, I have no patience with dishonest personal attacks posing as honest discussion. Have yourself whatever evening you deserve.
LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)Again, they SPECIFICALLY said not all muslims and to try and distort that to make look like they did is THE REAL intellectually dishonest.
Most muslims (and again they specifically mentions they were talking about middle east) is not all.
Reread what I wrote, there was no personal attack. It specifically pointed out that you were making shit up about what maher, an atheist, said. To ignore that and simply say he said "muslims" is the real intellectual dishonesty here and you know it. Unquantified disclaimers are unquantified disclaimers.
You don't care what Maher actually said, and that is why you are making it up.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)well informed and carries on a decent debate. And his show is one of the few shows were we get to hear from both sides of the isle. And people that judge him should consider that he is a comedian which gives him some license to exaggerate. I don't for a minute condone bigotry or racism but sometimes I think those "cards" are played to quickly. Bill has probably offended all know religions and atheists.
I also think that students should have input as to who their speaker is at their own graduation.
applegrove
(118,022 posts)http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/10/27/fareed_zakaria_muslims_are_right_to_complain_that_there_is_anti-muslim_bigotry.html
"SNIP....................
(the two Canadian jihadists and the one in new York this week) These are not people steeped in Islam, people for whom the religion shaped their world view over decades. People who were motivated by their immersion in the religion. On the contrary, these were unstable young men prone to radicalism and violence. They were searching for an ideology that would fit their disturbed world view, and in the radical and jihadi interpretations of Islam, they found it.
It's always worth remembering that these people represent a tiny minority. Think of it this way. Terror groups like ISIS and al Qaeda have been calling on Muslims to engage in terrorism in Western cities for over 10 years now. Of 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide, the number who have responded to these calls is a small, small, small percentage. If all Muslims were radicals, we would have more than three to worry about this week.
And yet, there is a problem within Islam. It's not enough for Muslims to point out that these people do not represent the religion. They don't. But Muslims need to take more active measures to protest these heinous acts. They also need to make sure that Muslim countries and societies do not in any way condone extremism, anti-modern attitudes, and intolerance towards other faiths.
Muslims are right to complain that there is anti-Muslim bigotry out there, but they would have a more persuasive case if they took on some of the bigotry within the world of Islam as well.
.......................SNIP"
Monk06
(7,675 posts)of Israel on the right and both groups promote the fallacy that Israelis and Palestinians are separate races. They aren't. They are political opponents nothing more.
still_one
(91,966 posts)some, though Israelis are made up of primary Jewish people, there are non-Jewish Israelis also, and in that context you are correct both about Israelis and Palestinians
Monk06
(7,675 posts)to distinguish Hebrew and Aramaic speaking peoples from Europeans along racist lines.
There are Semitic language groups but there is no such thing as a Semitic race. In spite of the insistence of anti ''semitic" historians such as HG Wells, whose deeply flawed Outline of History is racist in the extreme.
Identifying peoples along the lines of marginal and irrelevant genetic markers is by definition racist.
Just as eliding cultural and linguistic differences with race differences is racist.
It's ironic and non question begging to say that the term race in and of itself, is a racist term
For a discussion of the origin of the word semite go here. http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Theology/Who_is_a_Jew/Types_of_Jews/Semites.shtml
still_one
(91,966 posts)Violet_Crumble
(35,954 posts)It's a religion. And unlike Christianity, both Islam and Judaism are seen as more than solely a religion, but being a cultural way of life.
still_one
(91,966 posts)commonality, just as there are genetic markers that can identify other geographic regions of people.
21andme iis one of many tests that can do it
https://www.23andme.com
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Not just no, hell no, not even a December ceremony. Basically he makes a living by playing a troll on TV, like many another, so that's not to single him out, but unless he's also written scholarly tomes he's been keeping a secret, let him stick to his own and stay the heck out of UCB. Otherwise they're asking for trouble.
JMHO, YMMV. p.s. Cal grad here.
Paladin
(28,204 posts)adirondacker
(2,921 posts)Like a Libertarian Think Tank, those two. Narcissism is the trend though...
valerief
(53,235 posts)So the fact that Maher is full of himself doesn't bother me a whit.
He has a valid point about the Middle East and its major religion when used politically. Here in the west we have a tremendous problem with our major religion. It costs lives with its dogma when used politically.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Who believe that protesting the university's choice to pay Maher to speak at the university infringes on Maher's rights to speech. That's not how the right to free speech works, free speech is that the government can pass no laws to prohibit your speech. it doesn't say that a student body can't protest their administration's decision to hire an asshole to speak. And given that since Maher has a weekly HBO show, plenty of other guest speaker gigs, book deals, et cetera, his right to speech is in no fucking danger.
Next, Maher "criticizes Islam" in the same way that Charles Coughlin "criticized Judaism."
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)And I think Maher makes valid points, but engages in too much broad-brushing. Condemning religious fanaticism in all its forms is both valid and important, but I get the impression he doesn't much care for Muslims as people.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Just kidding: hit and run #682.
Joined DU, election day 2012.
Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)If someone wanted to argue that Bill Maher was uncouth and vulgar and unsuitable for such an event I could go along with this argument. But the truth is anyone who deviates from the most sympathetic possible narrative of the contemporary Islamic world will get roughly the same treatment.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)No one can say anything negative about Islam, not even a teensey weensey bit, lest they are painted as bigots near uniformly by the entire community.
These same students would do the same thing to Salman Rushdie who is clearly not a bigot. They would also protest a speech by the leader of the Free Muslim group - http://www.freemuslims.org/issues/terrorism.php
Fareed Zakaria still believes there is a problem within Islam that needs to be addressed:
Muslims need to take more active measures to protest these heinous acts. They also need to make sure that Muslim countries and societies do not in any way condone extremism, anti-modern attitude, and intolerance towards other faiths. Muslims are right to complain that there is anti-Muslim bigotry out there. But they would have a more persuasive case if they would take on bigotry within the world of Islam as well.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnns-zakaria-muslims-need-to-address-bigotry-within-the-world-of-islam/
Only the ones that have anything negative to say about Islam, no matter how rational, will be banned.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)He dislikes all religion and has rightly called out Christians for things they needed to be called out on, but has also made cruel remarks about Christians as well. Is he Chistianphobic? Are members of this site going to call him out on it?
I am sorry but I think people need to stop taking him seriously as I did several years back. He stopped being funny years sgo. Did you see his last HBO special! Very boring.
LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)The special was so dull I think I could have watched paint peel off the walls and be more entertained
MADem
(135,425 posts)Boycott the speech. Protest out in front. Rebut his points.
The solution to speech is more speech--always has been.
How amusing that Ground Zero of the Free Speech movement wants to censor anyone--the irony is both thick and rich.
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)You think hate speech should be dignified in this manner?
I APPLAUD their efforts.
MADem
(135,425 posts)He's an equal-opportunity religion basher. Surely you are familiar with his body of work, which includes this documentary?
http://vimeo.com/53480379
It's not like people don't know what they're getting when they hire him. For Chrissake (to put a level of snark on it), his Big Movie was all ABOUT religion--and not in a "nice" way, either.
This is like asking Serena Williams to speak and being shocked that she mentions tennis.
I think that this small cadre of complainers is helping to foster the image that the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement is making a mockery of itself.
The solution to speech is MORE speech.
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)Judaism gets a tsk, tsk and a finger wave from Maher. Maher is, don't forget, vociferously pro-Israel.
Christianity gets more criticism from him than Judaism does, but not even in the same ballpark as his attacks on Islam, which rise to the level of hate speech.
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of free speech here. Maher being disinvited as speaker does not violate his free speech rights. The students have a right to object to the choice of Maher as speaker. Nothing is accomplished by giving a bigot a podium and a microphone, especially in an atmosphere where dissent and rebuttal will go largely unheard.
MADem
(135,425 posts)He's not cozying up to people of Jewish heritage for any other reason.
The minority of students objecting can object all they want. If they disinvite Maher, he STILL GETS PAID.
And he still has a platform for his views, he's not being silenced, but the ability of the students to hear views that he's prepared for them IS abrogated.
Speech is a two-way exercise, one person speaks, and the audience LISTENS.
The censorship isn't in the speaking, it's in denying the audience the opportunity to HEAR the views.
And if Berkeley is suddenly a place where dissent and rebuttal go largely unheard, then they might as well burn the joint down. Their "free speech" bona fides are dead and buried, and it only took fifty years.
The complainers are attempting the censoring of speech that they don't like after the invitation has been issued. That's the bottom line here. It reminds me of DU, some days!
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)Maher has a Jewish mother. He would enjoy rights that would be denied any Palestinian whose ancestors have lived in the region for millennia. Have you ever seen him interview the war criminal Netanyahu? (easily found on Youtube) It can only be described as lovemaking.
Again, I strongly disagree with your points and support the students. Anyone who wants to hear that fucking piece of shit Bill Maher's loathsome "views" will have no difficultly doing so as he enjoys his full rights of free speech (as much as anyone else, that is). Personally, I think he's scared that he's gone too far and I can only hope we're currently witnessing the dying embers of his shit career.
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)If not, give it a look-see, why don't you:
How about this supremely ugly moment:
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)That was hysterical!
Pointing out the stupidity of religion is never an ugly moment.
There's no need to have respect for oppressive religious crap.
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)You think it's hysterical to watch people degraded and demeaned with offensive stereotypes. You have not the slightest care for how widespread hatemongering of this type affects their lives.
I would bet any amount of money that every single thing you THINK you know about Muslims you have learned from Islamophobes.
Supremely ugly indeed.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts).... is not a couch Dr. Freud.
Holier than thou know it all-ism is extremely ugly.
Well, as long as you feel superior, I suppose
Elmergantry
(884 posts)tularetom
(23,664 posts)He's been overcompensating ever since.
I honestly don't think he believes in anything. He's an unfunny hack comedian who's very lucky to be where he is.
I don't know why anybody would be offend by his comments on Islam, or any other topic. He just isn't that important.
Heywood J
(2,515 posts)They would seem to be people more able to speak on the relative merits of the topic.
True Blue Door
(2,969 posts)under the banner of "tolerance." They would not be going after Maher if he had mocked any religion other than Islam. Notice how they aren't citing his documentary "Religulus" in their complaints.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)He can't resist being an asshole if it gets him attention.