Well, it looks like the insulting and highly inaccurate sobriquet of “American Taliban” has been slapped on the religious once more. This time, by John Cole. This does not take many of us by surprise. Every time a religous person makes a religious statement in protest of anything at all, Cole is there to do his best reverse Cotton Mather.
Today’s Cole Outrage is a New York Times article reporting on how some religious folks have taken umbrance to an openly gay activist and actor playing a lead role in a film with heavily Biblical overtones that’s being marketed to Christians of every stripe. One of the quotes from the article that Cole picks is this one:
One Web log, nossobrii.blogspot .com, written by Kevin T. Bauder, president of Central Baptist Seminary in Minneapolis, stated in a Jan. 13 entry: “Granted, we must not overreact. And it would probably be an overreaction to firebomb these men’s houses. But what they have done is no mistake. It is a calculated strategy.”
Cole’s blog entry is entitled “Firebomb These Men’s Houses”.
Well yes, John. That’s exactly what he said. Clearly, if you read the quote, that’s precisely what he called for.
Well, that’s what he said only if you decide to misquote him and lose the “…probably would be an overreation…” part, at least.
Look, the word “probably” there is a horrible weasel word that says that the guy who write this probably wouldn’t lose a wink of sleep if those houses got firebombed. Had he said that in my presence, I would have jumped on him for both feet for qualifying that sentence at all.
His statement, though, isn’t the same, though, as alleging that he’s calling for or ordering that firebombing in any way. It’s a blatant misquote on Cole’s part made to support his later assertion.
You know what- I am just not going to say anything anymore when the left-wing calls these lunatics the America Taliban. They are.
Sure they are, John. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been to church services where the leaders then left, took their places in the government, and started crushing gay people under collapsed walls. Why, dozens of times I’ve personally witnessed church leaders, acting as the government of this nation, beating women in the streets for baring so much as an inch of their flesh or for doing something so presumptuous as speaking out loud without permission.
Happens all the time in our churches, especially those danged “fundamentalist” ones.
Sure, Cole’s allegation is ridiculous, but it’s emblematic of the hysteria with which a whole lot of people who have proven themselves smarter in many other areas prove themselves rock-stupid when it comes to religion.
Here’s a simple rule. When church leaders start directly running the government then begin beating women, killing gay people, and ripping down satellite dishes from our houses, then you get to use the word “Taliban”. Not one second before. Misusing that word is an offense to those who lived, and dies, for decades under the Taliban’s brutal totalitarian rule. Tagging obscure representatives of various Christian religions (really, how many Baptists have ever heard of the Central Baptist Seminary, and is Minnesota really going to be the launching point for the New Crusades Against the Heathen?) is an even worse offense against those who are, right now, trying to rid Afghanistan of the deplorable theocrats.
It’s also, as if it even needed mentioned, an insult to the millions of Americans who not only profess to be Christians, but who live their religions in a real way every single day without ever crushing a gay person under a wall.
I’m sorry that Cole so despises religion that he feels the need to besmirch it nearly at every opportunity. I wish I knew why it was so. More, I wish I could have a real chance to sit down with him and have a talk about religion, if for no other reason than to disabuse him of the prejudices that he’s picked up throughout his life.
I understand that not everyone is going to accept my religious view of the world. I don’t aspire to that goal. What I do want to see, though, is less of the hysteria from otherwise smart and insightful people. Cole ought to know better than to wave the red “American Taliban” banner of the left. It doesn’t suit him at all.
[...] And this is the kind of dishonest crap that gives these lunatics the cover they need to operate. Jimmy at the Sundries Shack now wants to pretend I am somehow smearing all religious people- I am not. I am merely reacting to the responses of these members of the lunatic fringe. My father is one of the most deeply religious people I know, born a Southern Baptist, practicing his entire life, and dedicating thousands of hours to the local church. I would never think he or those like him, or my deeply religious friends at Red State, are members of the “American Taliban.” But these lunatics, in particular the ones who have been waging jihad against homosexuals and who would even THINK to firebomb someone’s house because a gay actor appeared in a movie, are precisely as they have been labeled. [...]
Not to be a smartass, but the Taliban only came to power in the mid-1990′s–they didn’t rule for a decade singular, let alone decades plural.
“Tagging obscure representatives of various Christian religions (really, how many Baptists have ever heard of the Central Baptist Seminary, and is Minnesota really going to be the launching point for the New Crusades Against the Heathen?)”
Probably way more than many “dems” or “liberals” had ever heard of Ward Churchilll. If you read BJ, those on BJ enjoy turning tables.
“I’m sorry that [X] so despises [Y] that he feels the need to besmirch it nearly at every opportunity. I wish I knew why it was so. More, I wish I could have a real chance to sit down with him and have a talk about [Y], if for no other reason than to disabuse him of the prejudices that he’s picked up throughout his life.”
Here’s a christian excercise for you. List everything you despise and besmirch. Insert “I” for the X, and Y for the latter. If Y is a pretty long list, you might want to ponder that.
FYI, the Taliban did not rule Afghanistan for decades. The movement started in 1994-1995 and took over in 1996. And many of the warlords that supported the Taliban are now in the Afghan gov’t. Not to imply that there hasn’t been significant progress.
Not to mention that—the Taliban’s strict morality and brutality aside—they actually brought relative peace to Afghanistan by displacing and crushing the warlords who had been raping and murdering Afghanistan since the Soviets left. The warlords killed more Afghanis than the Russians did, and the Taliban put an end to them.
Of course those warlords are called the Northern Alliance, and we supported them in our war to oust the Taliban after 9/11, so these murderous thugs (and narco-traffickers) who are probably worse than the Taliban in many ways are now regaining power.
Look, if you’re not an extremist who believes in subjecting other people to your moral views, than Cole ain’t talkin’ about you. It’s that simple.
Cole ain’t talkin’ about you
No, he’s just agreeing with the folks who do. And they don’t make any such crawdadding distinctions.
Okay, I’ll demur on the “decades” comment, but my point stands.
srv – Ward Churchill held a position of some influence as a college professor, influencing the minds of thousands of students, as opposed to the one lone crazy quoted in the article who influences the minds of…what…hundreds? At most?
Churchill was a hell of a lot closer to the liberal mainstream than Kevin T. Bouder is to the conservative mainstream. It’s not a fair comparison.
Yeah Jimmie, that’s why liberals fell over themselves to distance themselves from Churchill and condemned what he said, while you guys over here on the right are essentially defending Bauder’s comment (or just attacking those who are condemning it)—because Churchill is so close to the liberal mainstream.
You say that Churchill “held a position of some influence as a college professor, influencing the minds of thousands of students, as opposed to the one lone crazy quoted in the article.”
Lone crazy? Perhaps you missed the part where it was clearly stated that Bauder is “president of Central Baptist Seminary.” You realize that’s a SCHOOL, right? In addition to being the president, he’s also editor of the seminary’s paper and a moderator of their radio show. According to the website, “Central graduates serve in ministry in nearly every state of the United States, as well as in mission works on many foreign fields.”
I don’t know precisely how many students are enrolled, but it opened in 1956, and had to expand in 1965 & 1998. I’m guessing between his professional role in the school and his private blog, he influences the minds of more than just “hundreds.” But you just keep right on trying to downplay it as you excoriate those who rightfully take exception to such comments.
I hate to break it to you, but concern over the rise of fundamentalism is not equal to feeding Christians to the lions. And unless the extreme fundamentalists are the mainstream of Christianity, then criticism of them is NOT criticism of Christianity in general.
It’s very specific.
Jimmie,
Your equivocation regarding Bouder’s statement is what I think gives people pause. The proper reaction, IMHO, to a “Christian” making this kind of absolutely immoral supposition (even with the wink-wink nudge-nudge qualifier “probably” thrown in there to provide a way to say that he didn’t actually mean what he said) is outright condemnation. Period
The fact of the matter is that Bouder, by means of his credentials, purports to speak for some subset of Christians. I believe this is a very small subset, but one that nevertheless tends to be on the vocal side and thus gets significantly more press than the millions of quiet Christians who go about their daily business while striving to be Christ-like in action and deed (not unlike the strident portion of the left getting more press than the centrists).
It is the exact same thing I believe vis-a-vis Muslims and protestations such as “But Islam is a religion of peace!”. Letting radical elements hijack other’s perceptions of one’s religion requires a lot of inaction by those of a moderate bent. I mean, how I long for the day that the majority of imams loudly and unequivocally condemn those who advocate or carry out violence against innocents. Until that time Muslims will have to face the inevitable consequences of this silence – a equivalance in the minds of many of that religion and suicide murderers, for instance. Unfortunately, I think I’ll be waiting a while…
Don’t want folks to tar mainstream Christians with the same brush as Bouder? Then be loudly vocal in your uncategorical rejection of what people like him say.
Worn,
You want to condemn the guy. GOOD. He deserves to be dismissed as a crackpot lunny every chance we get. He deserves to be scorned and shunned by all Christians. The guy is a wacko that should never be in any kind of position of authority in any Christian capacity.
But conservatives can’t complain about horrid hyperbole such as Bush=Hitler because of the Patriot Act when we engage in it ourselves with cries of American Taliban.
The real Taliban wouldn’t have said firebombing the guys house was “probably to far”. They would have said firebomging the guys house, his work, beheading his family and the families of all the cast and crew would have been “a good start”.
worn – I’m quite glad that you feel free to tell me how I should and should not react. The point of my post is not whether I feel indignation at what Bauder said. The point is that Cole misquoted Bauder to make his point, then conflated it to include an undefined group of Christians who choose to be vocal about their faith. That’s who the left means when they say “American Taliban” and by accepting their definition, Cole means them as well.
I expect people who have proven themselves to be intelligent people, as Cole has over and over again, to use that intelligence to be discerning. Why on earth do I need to stand here and repudiate Bauder’s remarks when common decency and the most elementary principles of the Bible repudiate them already? I don’t need to condemn them. They condemn themselves. The people I condemn are those smart people who wax dumb for the sake of hyperbole.
Guav – I tell you what. You show me the masses of leftists who criticized Ward Churchill. Go ahead. I’ll show you where he was feted by leftists who work in the mainstream of Democratic politics. My job will be much, much easier.
For the record, and I’ll type slowly so you can understand it. I’m no condemning John Cole for his condemnation of Bauder’s remarks. I’m condemning him for the stupid and disingenuous use of a single quote to throw up his hands and say “I guess that ‘Taliban” description was right after all”. His surrender was far too easy. I say that he really wasn’t all that interesting in fighting the comparison all that much.
[...] Jimmie also seems to think that because someone is obscure, they are less of a threat: [...]