More submission and appeasement to radical hypocrites

Submitted by Joe (United States), Mar 13, 2006 at 21:23

Seems like another inroad for CAIR to exert more political and social leverage. The ACLU should have neutral moderates as chairmen, not those with their own political agenda. As much as we would all like to say that CAIR is only pushing for equality, we also know that CAIR is a polemicist organization that is pushing for extremes. They advocate only "fair" treatments for Muslims, but in doing so, are pushing Muslim considerations above the considerations and ideals of the majority of people.

Let's limit equality to equality under the law, not censorship of free speech, and not advancement of one religion's expansionist and propagandist roles. Isn't this a conflict of interest when CAIR is trying to push the rights for only Muslims?

When CAIR puts out a statement, or lobbies for a particular cause, it only (and clearly) forces its own side, dismissing the other party's argument as biased against Muslims, and conceals underlying truths that subtract from their own argument (because "ordinary" people do not understand the Muslim argument, as demonstrated in http://www.danielpipes.org/article/316).

We can only expect more Islamist propaganda and expansion, achieved by appeasement in the name of equality, to be forced down our throats. What happened to the separation of church and state? Why are Muslims getting special treatment where they don't need it, while everyone else in Muslim countries are forbidden the same treatments.

I think CAIR needs to cater to the rights of other religious minorities in other countries as well as in this country to be considered a mainstream organization.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".