Good Friday to everyone. I know that the last few weeks have been rough as I haven’t been around much to post articles or offer my thoughts. Work certainly hasn’t slowed down any but I am making an effort to at least get some stuff posted. I will also work with the other authors here at SUFA so that they can make things happen when I can’t. Thank you to LOI and G-Man who both took time to make SUFA work over the last few weeks. I will offer up a few topics for open mic this morning. Not a ton of time to comment on them but I will offer my quick thoughts…
Do Crosses at Catholic University Violate “Human Rights” of Muslims?
The Washington, D.C. Office of Human Rights confirmed that it is investigating allegations that Catholic University violated the human rights of Muslim students by not allowing them to form a Muslim student group and by not providing them rooms without Christian symbols for their daily prayers.
The investigation alleges that Muslim students “must perform their prayers surrounded by symbols of Catholicism – e.g., a wooden crucifix, paintings of Jesus, pictures of priests and theologians which many Muslim students find inappropriate.”
A spokesperson for the Office of Human Rights told Fox News they had received a 60-page complaint against the private university. The investigation, they said, could take as long a six months.
The complaint was filed by John Banzhaf, an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School. Banzhaf has been involved in previous litigation against the school involving the same-sex residence halls. He also alleged in his complaint involving Muslim students that women at the university were being discriminated against. You can read more on those allegations by clicking here.
Banzhaf said some Muslim students were particularly offended because they had to meditate in the school’s chapels “and at the cathedral that looms over the entire campus – the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.”
“It shouldn’t be too difficult somewhere on the campus for the university to set aside a small room where Muslims can pray without having to stare up and be looked down upon by a cross of Jesus,” he told Fox News.
A spokesman for Catholic University released a statement to Fox News indicating they had not seen any legal filings — but would respond once they do.
“Our faithfulness to our Catholic tradition has also made us a welcome home to students of other religions,” said Victor Nakas, associate vice president for public affairs. “No students have registered complaints about the exercise of their religions on our campus.”
In a 2010 interview with National Public Radio, university president John Garvey acknowledged that they don’t set aside prayer rooms for Muslim students.
“We make classrooms available, or our chapels are places where they can pray,” he told NPR. “We don’t offer Halal meat, although there are always meals that conform to Halal regulations, that allow students to do what they want.”
Banzhaf said that it is technically not illegal for Catholic University to refuse to provide rooms devoid of religious icons.
“It may not be illegal, but it suggests they are acting improperly and probably with malice,” he said. “They do have to pray five times a day, they have to look around for empty classrooms and to be sitting there trying to do Muslim prayers with a big cross looking down or a picture of Jesus or a picture of the Pope is not very conductive to their religion.”
Read the rest of the article here: http://radio.foxnews.com//toddstarnes/top-stories/muslims-want-catholic-school-to-provide-room-without-crosses.html
Are you kidding me? For those who defend the Muslim faith no matter what, how do you defend this? It isn’t a Catholic University. It is THE Catholic University. Muslims have the audacity to go to a school named “The Catholic University” and complain that there are Catholic symbols everywhere?!?!?!?!?
Notice on the sign that they are in service to Church before nation. What did the Muslims think was going to be at the Catholic University of America?
This is where I fervently believe that groups like CAIR and the ACLU are damaging our nation beyond repair. They honestly believe that they have the right to attend a private university founded on the beliefs of the Catholic Church and based completely around those beliefs, and dictate that their human rights are being violated because there are crosses everywhere.
I reiterate that the belief that you have the right to not be offended in this country is ridiculous. Say you are offended when someone wears their pants with their ass exposed and you are racist. But say you are offended when a Catholic institution displays Catholic symbols and you are a citizen being discriminated against.
I say screw you to the “offended” muslims (who I fervently believe were planted at the university specifically to raise these types of issues). When muslims around the world begin removing muslim symbols from mosques and treating christians with a tenth of the respect that muslims are treated with in this country, I will begin to reassess my position. Until then, if you don’t want to see Catholic symbols, attend some other college besides “The Catholic University.”
Occupy Wall Street: Not Here To Destroy Capitalism, But To Remind Us Who Saved It
Over at The New York Times, Nicholas Kristof has enunciated an excellent defense of the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators, aimed at dispelling the notion that the Occupiers are some single-minded mass movement targeting the capitalist system for destruction. In fact, Kristof says, “while alarmists seem to think that the movement is a ‘mob’ trying to overthrow capitalism, one can make a case that, on the contrary, it highlights the need to restore basic capitalist principles like accountability.”
Kristof says that what Occupy Wall Street represents is “a chance to save capitalism from crony capitalists” and an entrenched system of “government-backed featherbed[ding]” that amounts to “socialism for tycoons and capitalism for the rest of us.” As Kristof notes, he’s seen this before: Years of covering the ’90s-era Asian financial crisis brought Kristof face-to-face with the same critique. It’s now unspooling in the United States and having its own deleterious effects, such as the near-intractable income inequality that was, at long last, reported on fully this week (perhaps thanks to the presence of the Occupiers themselves).
Kristof’s right to suggest that the Occupiers aren’t “half-naked Communists aiming to bring down the American economic system.” This isn’t the “Project Mayhem” of Chuck Palahniuk novels — we’re talking about a movement that’s spurring people to move their money from “too big to fail” banks into credit unions. That’s not exactly “smash the system.” That’s more like a group of people seeking out a means to maximize their power within the system, or using consumer choice to preserve, enhance and improve the best parts of the system. As Matt Taibbi notes in a fitting companion piece to Kristof’s, “These people aren’t protesting money. They’re not protesting banking. They’re protesting corruption on Wall Street.”
Taibbi calls them “cheaters,” Kristof calls them “cronies,” but the concept of “corruption” is intrinsic to both critiques. In fact, one could well argue that the truest evidence of Wall Street corruption is the fact that prior to the economic collapse, what Wall Street was practicing wasn’t really “capitalism” at all.
And here, Kristof absolutely nails it:
Capitalism is so successful an economic system partly because of an internal discipline that allows for loss and even bankruptcy. It’s the possibility of failure that creates the opportunity for triumph. Yet many of America’s major banks are too big to fail, so they can privatize profits while socializing risk.
Read the rest of the article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/27/occupy-wall-street-isnt-h_n_1035988.html
Let me first say…. Bullshit.
Believe me, I won’t trample on the right of people to protest Wall Street. I am not a fan of the big banks and market moguls either. But the entire premise of this article is a complete fabrication. Talk about completely inventing a more reasonable sounding principle behind a movement that never would have issued this as there official stance….
The people doing the “Occupy” protests are not, and never have been, looking to “remind Wall Street of who saved it.” What a complete crock of liberal retarded bullshit. They are screaming to “remind” anyone of anything. They are screaming “The New American Revolution” and “The end of Wall Street.”
The sad part for me is that I agree with much of what the movement is about. Wall Street does need reform. The big banks should be allowed to fail. Corporate greed has corrupted the American political system. These are all facts. But what I have seen so far out of this movement is the typical liberal hippie bullshit. Not to mention the hypocritical shit that drives me crazy (we hate big companies because they corrupt the system, but we love big unions that corrupt the system).
You know what people… you want to protest? Knock yourself out. I don’t have a problem with it. Lord knows, protesting is what the fringe left does best. They certainly do it better than work. But first find some real principles instead of simply hating something because you hate it. If you are opposed to big corporate corruption, then you should be opposed to big union corruption. But you aren’t. And that means you are not standing on principle, you are standing on nothing.
And you know what Huffington Post. You could simply try reporting what their stance really is instead of making up this utter bullshit about they are “just trying to remind Wall Street”. They want to tear down Wall Street. They want to tear down Corporations. They want to end Capitalism. You can lie for them all you want. But you can’t make your lies true.