Dean's World

Good bye and good luck to contributors Ron Coleman and Kevin Dombrowski. I know Ron Coleman's going to keep doing great work. Kevin I'm a little worried about, considering the horrible crowd he's just thrown in with. My hope is that he learns a lot from his experience with them, though.

I can't technically say goodbye to my lovely wife, since were just having dinner and chatting amiably, and are going to be watching American Idol soon. We don't take blog stuff personally, in case you were wondering. Ask her if you don't believe me. ;-)

Anyway, I'm sure there may be some more fallout from my line in the sand. Maybe some other resignations or whatever. All I can say is, "For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?"

You make choices, and you live by those choices.

I will say that I wound up rethinking slightly this afternoon. Which is the nature of blogging I guess. I crossed a few words out of the original post and made some slight addendums. Nothing big, but perhaps enough to assuage some of you.

Others of you, not so much.

I note that much is being made of assertion #3:

3) Islam as a religion is no more inherently incompatible with modernity, minority rights, women's rights, or democratic pluralism than most religions.

The words "no more" and "most" and "inherant" are operative, of course. Further, none of this demands that you accept that Islam is true or right, Muhammed was a prophet, etc.

Some have argued that the assertion is empirically impossible to verify one way or the other, and thus cannot be either agreed with or disagreed with. I merely point out that if it's empirically impossible to verify, it is a question of perception, and moral judgment.

And if it's merely a question of perception and moral judgment, then it's my moral judgment that you've got an obligation to presume #3 is true absent inarguable evidence to the contrary. And to ask yourself why the perception is there, and what should be done about that perception besides ranting about the Muslim Threat.

In any case, I cannot look every day on this blog and wince at what I find morally reprehensible. Not to mention deeply destructive to the goals of defending freedom against terrorism (Islamofascist and otherwise).

I hope Ron Coleman will remember one thing though:

I'm no Jew. Ain't never been one, ain't never gonna be one. Ain't related to any. And I'm no Evangelical Christian who is convinced that by helping Israel he's going to speed the coming of the Rapture in accordance with God's plan for the eventual conversion of all the currently living Jews--all the dead ones (men, women, and children alike of course) already being condemned to eternal Hellfire. Please do remember that these are the folks who are your friends at the moment, Ron.

Anyway, why do I care about anti-semitism, and why do I defend Israel? It's the same humanist values that drives me to rage when I see hatred of Muslims.

We all have different motivations I guess.

Anyway, as for comment accounts: I nuked one. I have no intentions of nuking any others. Another couple left on their own, which is up to them. The rest of you can answer the dicatates of your own conscience. I edited to require that you start with certain presumptions if you're going to enter discussions on these matters. Make of that what you will. I won't run a blog that promotes things I consider morally repugnant.

I can't get up every morning wondering if something else appearing on this blog is going to make me ashamed as a human being.

*Update*: Martin Shoemaker, in an earlier comment that I only just saw, seems to have understood my original, unchanged words better than others. He's right in what he says right here. Especially the word "inherant."

*Update 2* Once again I just can't keep up with the avalanche of commentary. I really can't keep up with it. If there's some specific argument you think I have not addressed, or some moral point you think I need correcting on, put it here.