I was listening to Rush today. He was commenting on how the media is lambasting the new Catholic pope because he is anti-abortion, anti-birth control, anti-gay marriage.
And he points out that the Muslim community, that has a religion that believes the exact same thing and adds in the fact if they fundamentalits at least, that Muslim women are dirt who must hide their faces and even their entire bodies behind clothing so they don't inflame the lusts of men.
And the media never lambasts them!
And if people express concern that the Muslim population is growing, it's not because they're afraid of Sharia law and of guys who treat dogs better than women (and yet they hate dogs, mark you), that's not a valid concern. Oh, no, it's just that they're "racist" because Muslims are brown, not white.
The "R" word is too powerful. It's impossible to have an intelligent discussion with people about valid concerns when you can just be labeled a "Racists" and then all of a sudden you have to defend yourself against that instead of discussing what's really important.
Over on the FilmscoreMonthly board, there's a discussion of actor John Rhys Davies who complained that by 2020 Europe would be 50% Muslim. And according to some posters on the board, this was hateful speech and he deserved to lose acting jobs over it.
And I'm thinking, these guys aren't logical. Half of them are gay, and if anyone said anything homophoboic they'd be on them in a trice. But Muslims are, by their very religion, homophobic, and yet these same posters, who will excoriate someone who is homophobic, will excoriate someone who is worried about how many Muslims (who are, you know, homophobic) are entering a country.
These same folks will excoriate Christianity for its homophobic stance, but then turn around and excoriate anyone who has an Anti-Muslim stance - when they are much more homophobic than Christiats are!
Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Sudan, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iraq, Uzbekistan and Malaysia have high levels of hostility due to the influence of religion and politics. Among these countries, Iran is seen by some as being considerably more intolerant. In one case that caused international controversy, Iran executed Mahmoud Asgari and Ayaz Marhoni on July 19, 2005, after they were convicted for the rape of a 13-year-old boy—soon after, a British group[who?] alleged that the teenagers were executed for consensual homosexual acts as a committed couple and not rape.
While Iran has outlawed homosexuality, Iranian Shi'a thinkers such as Ayatollah Khomeini have allowed for transsexuals to change their sex so that they can enter heterosexual relationships. This position has been confirmed by the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and is also supported by many other Iranian clerics. The state will pay a portion of the cost for a sex-change operation. Despite support for transsexuals from Iranian religious leaders, Iranian society itself is less accepting of them.
In India, where Muslims form a large minority, the largest Islamic seminary (Darul Uloom Deoband) has vehemently opposed recent government moves to abrogate and liberalize laws from the British Raj era that banned homosexuality. However, consensual gay sex is not a criminal offense as per the constitution of India. In the UK, a Gallup poll showed that none of the 500 British Muslims polled believed homosexuality to be "morally acceptable", compared with 35% of the 1001 French Muslims polled. A 2007 survey of British Muslims showed that 61% believe homosexuality should be illegal, with up to 71% young British Muslims holding this belief. According to a 2012 poll, 51% of the Turks in Germany, who account for nearly two thirds of the total Muslim population in Germany, believe that homosexuality is a sickness