The Muslim Test: How To Expose The Hypocrisy Of The Religious Right

Author: August 9, 2013 3:30 pm

Because celebrating diversity is NOT an American value! To conservatives…

One of the more ridiculous talking points of the right is that America was founded by devout Christians. Christians that, despite living centuries ago, believe and hate all the same things that today’s conservatives believe and hate. Poppycock, says I! And so does any reputable historian. But the people behind this fable are not interested in historical accuracy. The real intent behind this “belief” is to erode the separation of Church and State to the detriment of both and to the benefit of those who would use religion as a means of control. To this end, the right has spun a truly fantastic yarn where they are an oppressed minority and Christianity is beset on all sides by those with evil intent. But there is a way to pierce this fabrication. I call it “The Muslim Test.”

So what is the Muslim Test? Simple! It is the foolproof method of revealing this right wing hypocrisy. As the last several years have made blindingly obvious, the average conservative has lost all sense of reality. They are so consumed by hatred of Muslims, they’ve jettisoned every shred of rationality. But how do you get through to people this crazed? Well, you really can’t. But what you can do is force them to confront their lunacy and watch them howl at the moon in outrage. This provides a glimpse for neutral or undecided bystanders into the depths of right wing fanaticism while providing liberals with an amusing game to play with mentally unhinged people.

Here’s how the Muslim Test works: Take any conservative claim that they are being oppressed by evil secularists or rival religions, replace “Christianity” with “Islam” and see if the offended party is still quite as gung-ho. Conversely, take any demand  for special privileges, insist that they be granted to Islam as well and watch the odd conservative head explode.

Let’s try it out!!

Angry conservative: “I’m offended that those darn liberals have taken prayer out of school! I demand that we allow our children to worship in the classroom!”

The Muslim Test: “Well, OK, we’ll allow the principal, Mr. Siddiq, to lead a morning prayer to Allah.”

Angry conservative: “WHAT?! I don’t want my children worshiping another faith!”

The Muslim Test: “Well, then they can stand out in the hallway while the class prays.”

Angry conservative: “ABSOLUTELY NOT! Why should MY children be treated like outcasts?!”

See how easy this is?

Angry conservative: “You can’t build a mosque in our neighborhood! We won’t allow it!”

The Muslim Test: “I guess you if you really feel that strongly about it, it’s OK. I hope you don’t mind, but the Muslim community of Dearborn, Michigan has said the same thing about new churches.”

Angry conservative: “They can’t do that! The Constitution says that I have the right to freedom of religion! I can build a church where ever I want!”

Please don’t look for consistency from these people. You won’t find it.

Angry conservative: “The Constitution does not say anything about keeping Church and State separate! We should base our laws on the Bible!”

The Muslim Test: “Well, OK. We’ll make it illegal to eat, drink or have sex between dawn and dusk during the Muslim holiday of Ramadan.”

Angry conservative: “Wait, that doesn’t sound like the Bible…”

The Muslim Test: “Obviously pork will be illegal.”

Angry conservative: “Now hold on there…”

The Muslim Test: “And state mandated circumcisions for all males.”

Angry conservative: “Wait a minute! I meant MY religion!!!”

The Muslim Test: “Of course you did…”

You should have a pretty good idea of how the Muslim Test works now. Go ahead and try it out on a few of your conservative friends!*

*The staff of Addicitinginfo.org takes no responsibility for the fallout when your conservative friends call you a terrorist sympathizer and defriend you.

Come join me on Facebook, my home blog or just follow me on Twitter @FilthyLbrlScum

 

 

Help us get the word out!
Share on Google+Share on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

facebook comments:

35 Comments

  • Islam promotes male circumcision? I thought that was just Judaism.

  • We should all just go with the Wiccan Rede; “An it harm none, do what ye will”.

  • Question: Why don’t Baptists have sex while standing?
    Answer: They don’t want anyone to think they’re dancing.
    Also!Coming soon! A follow-up piece. “The Milky Way: How to bar-hop with a Scientologist.”

  • (false answer buzzer)

    Wrong. Your incorrect answer disqualifies you from the lightning round.

  • The same could be said of Christianity which systematically obliterated pagan religions in Europe by stealing their symbols and motifs and adopting them as their own. You celebrate the solstice? Well now you celebrate the birth of Christ. Ever green trees are a symbol for life through cold winters? Nope, now it means whatever the hell Christmas trees represent (i honestly don’t know…)
    Christianity avoided criticism for a long time by mandating that its scripture be kept in the original format. No not Hebrew, Latin. Day one of Christianity was not during Christ’s day, but some 300 years later when the Bible was cobbled together in a form which met the interests of the leader’s of that time.

    • Thank you! Just had to say that I love your post. So true, and I always wondered what christians claimed christmas trees (not to mention easter eggs!) represented outside of the original pagan meanings.

  • This test fails because most wingnut teabaggers simply wave their hands and declare that Islam is not a religion. I’m not joking. Do a little research and you’ll find many just say it’s a cult or something else that deserves no rights of a religion.

  • Stephen G. Ford

    PP: Moose-Hunter Barbie is a JOKE as a human being… as a POLITICIAN… she is a WALKING CLUSTERFUCK! There is NOTHING she could do BETTER for the democrats than to RUN!!! Run MHB! RUN! OH… I was wrong… the BEST THING the GODDAMN DITZ could do is to name “The Donald” as her RUNNING MATE… but that would require BOTH jokes to share the SPOTLIGHT… the CHANCES of that happening are PRETTY SLIM! But you keep DREAMING! And make sure and take your MEDS!

  • I’ll give you another test: Tim Tebow turns football arenas into his private devotional chapels. Now imagine a Muslim player pulling out a prayer rug and doing the same thing. He’d probably be shot before he made it to the parking lot.

  • matthew dunham

    I’m a firm believer in freedom from religion.

  • If I may, and mathew doesn’t mind, I’d like to express an opinion. I find value in Christianity but a fundamentalist would call me an atheist. That being said, I have come to belief that anti-Christianity is more of a religion than Christianity. ‘Atheist’ used to mean you had an open realistic mind, but that has been hijacked by people that hate having religion presented to them. The Anti-Xtians want to put religion in the closet where homosexuality used to be. So the oxymoron of taking religion out of State is impossible because relatively your still making laws regarding and limiting religion. if A bigot can be defined by one that wants to suppress one of another race or belief then how is one different that wants to suppress religion?
    My point is that a rebel is still a conformist. Get out of your boxes.

    • ‘…if A bigot can be defined by one that wants to suppress one of another race or belief then how is one different that wants to suppress religion?…’

      ‘race or belief’ is a very poor way to state the problem as they fall in completely different categories. A person objecting to another based on their race is finding fault with an involuntary quality that has never been established as a basis, in and of its self, for criticism. Criticism of a person’s belief system is objection an entirely voluntary quality that can be demonstrated to have a basis in fact, or not, and which can be shown to be socially beneficial, or not. I am a person that objects very strongly to organized religion as it has always been a powerful political force based on unproven, often unprovable, commonly irrational, assertions about the nature of reality, and which uses its political power to preserve its ‘special’ position in societies all through history and extracts vast treasure from the masses which it uses to enhance that power. There is no act, good or bad, by a religious group in history that can be shown to be impossible without the overburden of superstition that accompanies all religious organizations, and which, in and of its self, impairs societies in their struggle to comprehend and deal with actual reality. The classic example of what I am talking about here is the recent statistic from the Pew Research Center that exposed 67% of the American population being unwilling to accept evolutionary theory as the basis for biological science; this in 2011! That howling ignorance is the direct result of organized religion and is only one of its damaging effects.

      • Only two things I want to point out here: first is that religion tends to be non-rational, not irrational. Irrational indicates a belief in something proved wrong, while non-rational indicates faith in something that cannot be proved or disproved by reason or logic.
        Second is evolution. As a staunch Christian, I believe that the almost knee-jerk hatred between Darwinian belief and and Intelligent Design is a foolish conflict between two sides that have failed to put serious effort into what they are arguing against. Also, there is the point of macro-evolution vs micro-evolution(environmental adaptation). I believe that evolution has played its part in differentiating variations on a theme(eg. different breeds of dog), but not that evolution is the be-all-end-all of humanities origins. It seems to me that both exclude-any-other-option extremes take similar amounts of faith, since we cannot conclusively go back and prove either a creation story from some 10,000 years ago, or a universe-forming cataclysm billions of years ago.

        • >I believe that evolution has played its part in differentiating variations on a theme(eg. different breeds of dog), but not that evolution is the be-all-end-all of humanities origins. It seems to me that both exclude-any-other-option extremes take similar amounts of faith, since we cannot conclusively go back and prove either a creation story from some 10,000 years ago, or a universe-forming cataclysm billions of years ago.<

          What you 'believe' matters not a wit here. We have mountains of 'proof' for the general concept that present life forms have evolved from previous life forms and that the universe was created in an explosion 13.7 billion years ago. You need to run, not walk, to the nearest public library and become very familiar with the contents of its science section. You are talking gibberish.

          • Virtually all DNA structures are within a rather small percentage of each other, but relative DNA structure a relative does not make. There is no identifiable proof that one species has transformed into another, just that there is a remarkable similarity between genetic/physiological structures. Which should not be surprising since humans are almost as near genetically to sea slugs as to apes.

            The simple fact is that the only solid scientific proof we have of evolution, recorded, non-biased empirical data, shows micro-evolution(adaptation) but cannot prove macro-evolution(transformation). We simply have insufficient data to say that this is an absolute, and those that do have, and need, as much faith in their belief as Christians require for Creation.

            And to throw a second wrench, even if species evolution is true, it cannot disprove Intelligent Design. How can you claim, let alone prove, that God would not have used guided evolution as a means of creation?

            • Take out the word god, and put in any other person / thing / word / belief. Only then will you stop taking faith seriously.

              example: How can you claim, let alone prove, that “a six foot tall portrait of two clowns laughing” would not have used guided evolution as a means of creation?

              You cannot prove this wrong, nor will you ever be able to prove this wrong or correct. Just because it cannot be proven wrong, does not mean it should be taken as true.

    • My rule: You can believe in giant hairy monkeys in the sky, or bow down six times a day to worship a distant rock, or wear little hats and shawls all the time. Use it to comfort yourself; more power to you, may it do you and yours good.

      BUT: If you use your delusions to whip women for exposing their ankles or burn non-believers at the stake or snip up the genitalia of babies —

      I AM GOING TO RIDICULE EVERYTHING YOU STAND FOR!

      You AND your Flying Spaghetti Monster.

      • Hey! Leave the Flying Spaghetti Monster out of it! We are ridiculing RELIGIONS, not facts!

      • But all that stuff done to women in the name Christianity is okay? Burning women alive and drowning them for being alleged witches wasn’t a Muslim practice…

        • Maybe you should look into what Muslim practices regarding women are… Sharia Law can be a frightening thing, especially for a rape victim. She can be divorced because of it, she requires at least three other female witnesses or two male ones to bring charges, and her entire family is allowed, if not expected, to ostracize her.
          That’s not a Christian practice, nor is witch-burning anymore. A dark chapter if there ever was one. Besides, virtually every religion has its horribly dark moments. Some learn and grow beyond them.

      • you are being very hard on orthodox jews in Israel. They are stoning Jewish girls for not being the right kind of Jew. Amazing stuff.

    • The Bible has Christ himself saying that one should pray in private. i dont know the exact passage, but it’s in there! So going to church is against Christ’s teachings! (There are many things Christians do that are against Christ’s teachings IMO…)

  • And they’ll be wearing a lovely mauve lipstick, too!

  • When Sarah Palin becomes President, all the non-judeo christian religions WILL BE EXTINCT! Islam is the first to go, then Buddhism, then Hinduism, etc.

    • Yes indeed. Also pigs will fly!

    • @Palin Power – Islam IS an Abrahamic religion – ask a Muslim, they will tell you. They claim to be descent from Ishmael, Abraham’s son with his slave, rather than Jacob, his “legitimate” son with Sara. PalinPower, thats about 1/2 a watt, right?

    • Sure, if all the “non-judeo christian” (sic) religions will be extinct, then ISLAM STAYS. That’s the third (and latest) of the JudeoXian religions. Are you sure that’s what you want???

      These are the same people that got all huffy that the Obama “Christmas” card was missing their pagan Christmas tree. Yes, we needed to have the “Christmas” tree in our homes to symbolize the sacrifice Odin made to himself by hanging on Yggdrasil.

    • If Ms. Palin had the super powers you attribute to her, then why is she not President? Because if she was as powerful as you say, you would not be able to stop her. Why do you fear her? Is it because you NEED someone to fear?

      • Mike Chamberlain

        Sorry to point this out, but Islam is a product of the judeo-christian tradition. The prophet Muhammad had only good things to say about Moses and Jesus Christ.

        • Yes, Islam sees itself as a further evolution of the Jewish/Christian path, but their hatred of Jews and Christians is despicable. The whole religion is rooted in destroying other religions and has been since day one.

          • Mike Chamberlain

            JadeDragon, you just failed the Muslim Test. Your statements are contrary to historical (and Quranical) fact. There is no general hatred of Jews and Christians among Muslims, and the Quran does not call for the destruction of Judaism and Christianity. I’m going to take a wild guess and say that you have no Muslim friends and have never traveled in the Muslim world.

    • Whats up with that

      “Palin Power”?? I’m trying to imagine what a person who would use that name might be like. Or what someone who thinks Sarah Palin will ever be president might be like. But both of these things together exploded my mind. Still, even through the smoke and smoldering brain debris in my head I can think well enough to tell you that 1)Palin power doesn’t exist in a quantity large enough to measure. 2)She will never be president (not of this country) 3)No president has the power to bring about the extinction of religion. Which is too bad really because looking at the big picture here it’s doing more harm than good these days.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

x
Click "Like" to get the latest updates