Multiculturalism and Religiously-Sanctioned Rape

Ethnically diverse manifestations of behavioral excellence are rightly to be celebrated. However Multiculturalism's moral anarchy beckons a more circumspect examination. Naively concluding that all religions -- including atheism masqueraded as secularism -- are good, may invoke the blissful release of endorphins into the brain. Nonetheless we will show that such Pollyanish thoughts are an acid to our humanity.

The Multiculturalist Dehumanization Agenda

It is a cultural universal to humanize our children by invoking stories, like Hansel and Gretel or Snow White, which involve a contrast between good and evil. Although it is psychologically taxing for a child to imagine an evil witch, such descriptions of evil are used as moral medicine.  Name the culture and one can find an analogous popular narrative where redemption is couched in a battle involving a virtuous protagonist facing an evil oppressor.

The more evil and powerful the oppressor, the more it is possible to showcase greatness of character. To be polite in polite company is one thing, to have poise and evidence moral beauty in a context of significant oppression is another.

As children see moral strength they can be inspired to be courageous in their circumstances and to achieve greatness. This moral inspiration is foundational to the time-honored process of humanization. Children are humanized by being exposed to dramas where, even if the good guy gets killed by the villain, good nonetheless conquers evil. Good is inherently superior to evil.

The towering superiority of good over evil compels us to distinguish between good and evil. But in order to distinguish between good and evil, we must have the intellectual freedom to identify evil.

The appeal of multiculturalism then, is as a self-medication of endorphins to relieve us from ailments such as white guilt, "hubristic" notions of cultural superiority, or what Jack Wheeler calls, fear of the evil eye. But seen in the light of our humanization discussion above, multiculturalism is the antithesis of humanization.

Whereas humanization requires the entertainment of evil, multiculturalism requires the denial of evil. Whereas a good parent raises all his children to be moral philosophers, a multiculturalist raises all his children to be morally blind. 

Yet the "grown up" multiculturalist man-child is worse than morally blind: He labors to stifle, prohibit and punish moral acumen.

An Example of Multiculturalist Dehumanization Program: The Islamic Rape Sanction

How do we use multiculturalistic counseling to help a rape victim? Of course just denying Islam's sanction to rape non-Muslim women (e.g., Koran 4:3, inter alia) -- even if they are married -- serves to legitimize Islam. Denying Islam's rape sanction also is uncompassionate toward the victims of this Islamic policy. Witness that all 83 of the rape cases in Oslo in 2010 -- where the victim could identify the perpetrator -- were committed by Muslims.

Examples of Multiculturalism's Tendentious Epistemology

In his "Call to Renewal" speech made in 2006, Senator Barack Hussein Obama said,

"Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values."

Of course democracy makes no such demands. There is no secularism or religious neutrality. Never mind that atheism is unable to support "Nature and Nature's God," or humankind's beloved "inalienable rights."  There is however the ugly political and psychological fruit of atheism. Is that what we want?

But despite Barry Soetero's high minded rhetoric of subjecting religions to scrutiny by even-handed universal principles, when the context is Christianity, Obama -- in the same speech no less -- warns against "sectarianism," supports "secularism" (really, atheism) and naturally gravitates to mocking the Bible.  However when the context is Islam, Obama becomes filled with awe and embraces this sectarianism as much as is politically possible (e.g., 911 Ground Zero Conquest Mosque, or the more than 10,000 outreach documents detailing the cozy relationship between Obama and Muslim Brotherhood groups). Following the edict of Koran 9:5, and the example of Mohammad, the Umma kills daily. But rest assured this detail does not give Barack Hussein Obama pause to call repeatedly the Koran, "the holy Koran."

Perhaps the most emphatic statement made over two dozen times by our president is "[The US is not, and will never be,] at war with Islam." From the words and actions of this multiculturalist, one does not get the sense that this statement is the result of subjecting Islam to moral scrutiny. Rather such a statement is a mere reflection of multiculturalist assumptions. (Where is Joe Wilson when we need him to shout out at Obama, "But what if Islam is at war with us?"?)

Providing a meaningful moral evaluation of Islam is not good multiculturalist etiquette. Multiculturalist etiquette further denies the most meaningful metrics of Islam: the Koran, the example of Mohammad, the four historic schools of Sunni jurisprudence and demographics correlating evil behavior and beliefs with Islamic piety and zeal.  Instead,  in order to "evaluate" Islam, multiculturalists cherry pick taquiyya, cite Meccan and/or early Median abrogated suras (e.g., Koran 2:252), throw in a few tears from Keith Ellison and recall their friendly non-fundamentalist Muslim acquaintance.

As Mosab Hassan Yousef notes, the nominal Muslims -- the half-hearted Muslims who integrate well with Western society, but embody a tepid or superficial commitment to Islam -- provide Islam with moral cover.  These nominal Muslims and multiculturalists fog the West's spectacles so that the West cannot identify the enemy in this ludicrously labeled "War Against Man Caused Disasters" (Obama) or "War on Terrorism" (Bush). Even those on the right identify this ideology of terror by "Islamism," "political Islam" or "Islamic jihadism." But such characterizations also suffer from multiculturalist infection: It is the Koran of Islam -- and not the Koran of Islamism or of political Islam or of Islamic jihad -- which serves as the ideological fountainhead for nearly all of today's terrorism.

Example of Multiculturalism's Savaging of the Victim of Islamic Rape

Feminism is great for fomenting hatred against natural law -- the real criterion for cultural superiority -- and hence for undermining the foundation for our precious inalienable rights. But feminism and her multiculturalist mother have only guilt and some dissonant endorphins to offer the Western woman rape victim of Islam.

Multiculturalism and her feminist offspring deny the Western woman raped by an Islamic perpetrator her rightful sense of injury. What is arguably worse than rape is the de-legitimization of the rape victim's sense of violation and ability to forthrightly declare as "evil" an ideology that sanctions rape.  Multiculturalism forbids the moral healing from the wound of rape.  While in the abstract feminism can admit to the renouncing of rape, such spineless generalizations do not require courage. In the face of Islam's sanction of rape, the kin of multiculturalism are deafeningly silent.  When the ideology behind the rape is Islam, multiculturalism's adjudication obsequiously grants the perpetrator invisibility and immunity.

Multiculturalism's commitment to granting unscrupulously moral legitimacy to evil ideologies forbids multiculturalism's compassion to the victims of such groups.

Perhaps feminism's gravest fear is that a systematic evaluation of woman's rights and/or women's happiness might reveal that the most satisfied women are mothers in traditional Western married households where the woman is not a significant wage earner.

Multiculturalism's Dehumanization

Rejecting multiculturalism does not mean that one is denied the benefits of endorphins. We get those endorphins by forgiving others. But in order to forgive, we must recognize the wrong done. Trying to get those endorphins on the cheap, multiculturalism replaces forgiveness with permissiveness.

Multiculturalism's inability to see non-indigenous evil means that she is unable to engage in objective moral evaluation. Multiculturalism is the idiot at the table of morality.

But multiculturalism is not just an inhibitor of healing and a facilitator of evil; multiculturalism is itself an evil. By denying objective evil or disempowering our capacity as moral philosophers, multiculturalism attempts to deny us the legitimacy of our own humanization.

Today's wicked witches are not some long-nose women with warts on their faces, but "educated" -- often Ivy-league -- multiculturalists. These empty suits deny the moral foundation of Hansel and Gretal. For these multiculturalists, 270 million murders in the name of Islam are not enough to bring the multiculturalist to his moral senses.

Dr. Pieder Beeli's (Ph.D., Physics) is a homeschooling father. He founded the Facebook groups: "No 501(c)3 Status for Islam," "Pro-homosexual Anti-homosexuality" and "The Audacity of Fraud: America's First Photoshop President."

Ethnically diverse manifestations of behavioral excellence are rightly to be celebrated. However Multiculturalism's moral anarchy beckons a more circumspect examination. Naively concluding that all religions -- including atheism masqueraded as secularism -- are good, may invoke the blissful release of endorphins into the brain. Nonetheless we will show that such Pollyanish thoughts are an acid to our humanity.

The Multiculturalist Dehumanization Agenda

It is a cultural universal to humanize our children by invoking stories, like Hansel and Gretel or Snow White, which involve a contrast between good and evil. Although it is psychologically taxing for a child to imagine an evil witch, such descriptions of evil are used as moral medicine.  Name the culture and one can find an analogous popular narrative where redemption is couched in a battle involving a virtuous protagonist facing an evil oppressor.

The more evil and powerful the oppressor, the more it is possible to showcase greatness of character. To be polite in polite company is one thing, to have poise and evidence moral beauty in a context of significant oppression is another.

As children see moral strength they can be inspired to be courageous in their circumstances and to achieve greatness. This moral inspiration is foundational to the time-honored process of humanization. Children are humanized by being exposed to dramas where, even if the good guy gets killed by the villain, good nonetheless conquers evil. Good is inherently superior to evil.

The towering superiority of good over evil compels us to distinguish between good and evil. But in order to distinguish between good and evil, we must have the intellectual freedom to identify evil.

The appeal of multiculturalism then, is as a self-medication of endorphins to relieve us from ailments such as white guilt, "hubristic" notions of cultural superiority, or what Jack Wheeler calls, fear of the evil eye. But seen in the light of our humanization discussion above, multiculturalism is the antithesis of humanization.

Whereas humanization requires the entertainment of evil, multiculturalism requires the denial of evil. Whereas a good parent raises all his children to be moral philosophers, a multiculturalist raises all his children to be morally blind. 

Yet the "grown up" multiculturalist man-child is worse than morally blind: He labors to stifle, prohibit and punish moral acumen.

An Example of Multiculturalist Dehumanization Program: The Islamic Rape Sanction

How do we use multiculturalistic counseling to help a rape victim? Of course just denying Islam's sanction to rape non-Muslim women (e.g., Koran 4:3, inter alia) -- even if they are married -- serves to legitimize Islam. Denying Islam's rape sanction also is uncompassionate toward the victims of this Islamic policy. Witness that all 83 of the rape cases in Oslo in 2010 -- where the victim could identify the perpetrator -- were committed by Muslims.

Examples of Multiculturalism's Tendentious Epistemology

In his "Call to Renewal" speech made in 2006, Senator Barack Hussein Obama said,

"Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values."

Of course democracy makes no such demands. There is no secularism or religious neutrality. Never mind that atheism is unable to support "Nature and Nature's God," or humankind's beloved "inalienable rights."  There is however the ugly political and psychological fruit of atheism. Is that what we want?

But despite Barry Soetero's high minded rhetoric of subjecting religions to scrutiny by even-handed universal principles, when the context is Christianity, Obama -- in the same speech no less -- warns against "sectarianism," supports "secularism" (really, atheism) and naturally gravitates to mocking the Bible.  However when the context is Islam, Obama becomes filled with awe and embraces this sectarianism as much as is politically possible (e.g., 911 Ground Zero Conquest Mosque, or the more than 10,000 outreach documents detailing the cozy relationship between Obama and Muslim Brotherhood groups). Following the edict of Koran 9:5, and the example of Mohammad, the Umma kills daily. But rest assured this detail does not give Barack Hussein Obama pause to call repeatedly the Koran, "the holy Koran."

Perhaps the most emphatic statement made over two dozen times by our president is "[The US is not, and will never be,] at war with Islam." From the words and actions of this multiculturalist, one does not get the sense that this statement is the result of subjecting Islam to moral scrutiny. Rather such a statement is a mere reflection of multiculturalist assumptions. (Where is Joe Wilson when we need him to shout out at Obama, "But what if Islam is at war with us?"?)

Providing a meaningful moral evaluation of Islam is not good multiculturalist etiquette. Multiculturalist etiquette further denies the most meaningful metrics of Islam: the Koran, the example of Mohammad, the four historic schools of Sunni jurisprudence and demographics correlating evil behavior and beliefs with Islamic piety and zeal.  Instead,  in order to "evaluate" Islam, multiculturalists cherry pick taquiyya, cite Meccan and/or early Median abrogated suras (e.g., Koran 2:252), throw in a few tears from Keith Ellison and recall their friendly non-fundamentalist Muslim acquaintance.

As Mosab Hassan Yousef notes, the nominal Muslims -- the half-hearted Muslims who integrate well with Western society, but embody a tepid or superficial commitment to Islam -- provide Islam with moral cover.  These nominal Muslims and multiculturalists fog the West's spectacles so that the West cannot identify the enemy in this ludicrously labeled "War Against Man Caused Disasters" (Obama) or "War on Terrorism" (Bush). Even those on the right identify this ideology of terror by "Islamism," "political Islam" or "Islamic jihadism." But such characterizations also suffer from multiculturalist infection: It is the Koran of Islam -- and not the Koran of Islamism or of political Islam or of Islamic jihad -- which serves as the ideological fountainhead for nearly all of today's terrorism.

Example of Multiculturalism's Savaging of the Victim of Islamic Rape

Feminism is great for fomenting hatred against natural law -- the real criterion for cultural superiority -- and hence for undermining the foundation for our precious inalienable rights. But feminism and her multiculturalist mother have only guilt and some dissonant endorphins to offer the Western woman rape victim of Islam.

Multiculturalism and her feminist offspring deny the Western woman raped by an Islamic perpetrator her rightful sense of injury. What is arguably worse than rape is the de-legitimization of the rape victim's sense of violation and ability to forthrightly declare as "evil" an ideology that sanctions rape.  Multiculturalism forbids the moral healing from the wound of rape.  While in the abstract feminism can admit to the renouncing of rape, such spineless generalizations do not require courage. In the face of Islam's sanction of rape, the kin of multiculturalism are deafeningly silent.  When the ideology behind the rape is Islam, multiculturalism's adjudication obsequiously grants the perpetrator invisibility and immunity.

Multiculturalism's commitment to granting unscrupulously moral legitimacy to evil ideologies forbids multiculturalism's compassion to the victims of such groups.

Perhaps feminism's gravest fear is that a systematic evaluation of woman's rights and/or women's happiness might reveal that the most satisfied women are mothers in traditional Western married households where the woman is not a significant wage earner.

Multiculturalism's Dehumanization

Rejecting multiculturalism does not mean that one is denied the benefits of endorphins. We get those endorphins by forgiving others. But in order to forgive, we must recognize the wrong done. Trying to get those endorphins on the cheap, multiculturalism replaces forgiveness with permissiveness.

Multiculturalism's inability to see non-indigenous evil means that she is unable to engage in objective moral evaluation. Multiculturalism is the idiot at the table of morality.

But multiculturalism is not just an inhibitor of healing and a facilitator of evil; multiculturalism is itself an evil. By denying objective evil or disempowering our capacity as moral philosophers, multiculturalism attempts to deny us the legitimacy of our own humanization.

Today's wicked witches are not some long-nose women with warts on their faces, but "educated" -- often Ivy-league -- multiculturalists. These empty suits deny the moral foundation of Hansel and Gretal. For these multiculturalists, 270 million murders in the name of Islam are not enough to bring the multiculturalist to his moral senses.

Dr. Pieder Beeli's (Ph.D., Physics) is a homeschooling father. He founded the Facebook groups: "No 501(c)3 Status for Islam," "Pro-homosexual Anti-homosexuality" and "The Audacity of Fraud: America's First Photoshop President."