Mosque Vandal National News?

CNN ran a story this morning about a vandalized mosque.  Some guy spelled out the word “Pig” with bacon in front of the mosque.  The news anchor went on a 30 second monologue about how reprehensible and catastrophic this act was.  She went on to decry the act as further proof of our country’s persecution of the Muslim community.  She concluded with the following insight, “Spelling out the word ‘pig’ in bacon is especially bad, as Muslims don’t eat pork.”

Thanks for the multicultural education, CNN lady.  Listen.  You’re doing more harm than good.  Was this act stupid? Yes.  Was it tasteless? Yes.  Is it worthy of national news?!? Well, consider this:  I guarantee I could drink a couple cases of Polygamy Porter on the front lawn of the Mormon Church up the road, and spell out the word “FORNICATION” with the empties.  Mormons don’t like being associated with polygamy, reject alcohol consumption and premarital sex, but I promise we wouldn’t hear one peep about it the next morning, nor should we!

This is just silly.


23 thoughts on “Mosque Vandal National News?

  1. Let me see if this is what your argument is so that I can clarify:

    Argument 1:

    1. Someone smeared a mosque in a demeaning way.
    2. Smearing a mosque in a demeaning way is a specific application of smearing a place of worship in a demeaning way.
    3. Someone could smear an LDS church in a demeaning way.
    4. Smearing an LDS church in a demeaning way is a specific application of smearing a place of worship in a demeaning way.
    5. However, smearing a mosque in a demeaning way gain national news, while the smearing of the LDS church in a demeaning way would not.
    6. But because both are forms of smearing a place of worship in a demeaning way, they should both get the same application.

    Thus, I see it going two ways: if the mosque gets national attention, then so should the LDS church.

    Or, maybe this is your conclusion: any smearing of a place of worship in a demeaning way does not merit national news.

    So which conclusion are you affirming?

  2. Interesting. Well, I guess my next question is what does merit national news? How about the Delware Senate debate? All polls show that the democrat was going to win (thus, it assumes that it doesn’t merit national news), but it was aired on CNN. But since your post wasn’t directly about that, I’ll let that slide. 🙂

  3. Man, come on. I know you agree on this. If you had seen the anchor try to relay the story with as much gravity as she was trying to convey, you would roll your eyes too. It was just some douche that got bored one night. Shaun, you of all people would have been humorously annoyed.

  4. So are you mad about the story itself, or the way the anchor displayed the story? Give me the link so I can see for myself. But in the end, we may have to discuss what merits national news.

  5. I can’t find the link. There’s a story on the CNN website about a very similar incident. I didn’t watch the whole thing, but the part I saw was delivered in a “hard news” style and not analysis. It didn’t bother me, so I guess my problem isn’t so much that the original story made national news, rather, the melodramatic analysis given by the CNN lady bugged me.

    Enforcing political correctness regarding everything Islam seems to be the cause du jour. The original clip was a representation of that, and it was annoying.

  6. I don’t know, it just seems when the media latches on to a social issue they blow shit out of proportion. It usually seems politically motivated, and political correctness is a tenet promoted (most of the time) by one side of the aisle.
    Ultimately, my annoyance is at a deeper level based on a series of beliefs i have about specific events when they occur (as are all emotions, I suppose).

  7. I guess the real question here is “does anyone care about this incident” ?

    Was any harm actually done to anyone? Why would it make news? Is this, in fact, someone exercising their rignt to free speach? At what point do we cross the line?

    Again, if there was not so much press lately because of the Muslem terroist connection (which I find a little weak). Should it be national news every time someone is insulted?

    Keeping in mind that I am not well versed in Muslem religion, other than having to clean up bacon what real and lasting loss of use, money or function of the building.

    It seems that we have lost sight of the lesson that I learned when I was a child “sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me”. People do not always get along the more attention you pay to people who do stupid things like this the more power you give them.

    • John’s last paragraph pretty well captures my beliefs. …and Shaun, I want you to try to guess the political tenet. You don’t have to agree with it, but I think you know it. Show me you know it! haha

  8. I still don’t get it. So if someone holds a KKK rally, we should say, “Hey, they’re not physically harming anyone, so don’t take it personally.” What about a Neo-Nazi parade? Should we tell the Jews, “relax, they’re just parading around. No harm done.” And I’m willing to bet that if you sprayed alcohol while smearing fornication on the LDS church, I bet you wouldn’t say, “Ahh, at least there wasn’t any harm done.” Well, that’s where I disagree. It was on a building, which means it was on property. People have a right to property. Therefore, defacing property is a harm.

    Yes, giving people more attention can exacerbate the problem, but as Kant says, talking about the problem is far better than leaving it alone in silence.

    As for guessing the political tenet, I’m honestly at a loss Jeff. I seriously have no idea what the political sway is, that’s why I’m asking.

  9. A KKK rally ,no matter what they say, is a call to violence. I am not sure he word pig in bacon is anything other than an insult. If someone sprayed alcohol on a mormon church an smeared it into fornication I would roll my eyes and think that I was dealing with a bunch of 13 year olds.

    If you witnessed any of these actions taking a stand would be appropriate, but not by making national (or even local) news and acting like someone actually got hurt.

  10. Hmm. . . there are so many things in there that I disagree with.

    First of all, a KKK rally is simply saying that whites are superior than other minorities. Can it lead to violence? Yes, but not necessarily. There have been many KKK rallies where it has never led to violence.

    I don’t understand your last paragraph, mainly because it’s awkward wording. Could you rephrase it? Do you mean that taking a stand would be appropriate, but then taking a stand does not merit news? I don’t understand that.

    According to the notion of rights, someone did get hurt (but not physically). Owning property is part of rights. Defacing property is a violation of rights. Therefore, there was some harm done.

  11. Dude, it’s not news. It’s nothing like a KKK rally either, at least in terms of scope. Running that story with the analysis they used simply perpetuates the victim mentality adored by the types of people that unwaveringly put a check mark next to the “D” in the ballot booth. The government/media complex is a real thing.

    I got punched in the face last night (seriously). I was physically harmed, too! Where’s CNN?? I want my interview! The guy was hispanic, which makes it a hate crime. I’m a victim. Save me, government! Save me, CNN! Heeeeelp!
    Pathetic. Me getting punched by some idiot is not news, nor is a church getting adorned with meat.


  12. I’m not saying that this is like the KKK, but the claim that “sticks and stones may break my bones…” isn’t the proper response either. As for victimizing, it isn’t just simply democrats. Many political parties use it. Fear is the driving purpose to motivate people. And yes, I know there’s an intermingling of government and politics.

    You got punched, but did you report it? Probably not. Maybe it’s because you shrugged it off. I don’t know. Maybe it’s because you didn’t want to be seen as the victim in society. The people who owned the mosque probably did report it, and since they’re property was being violated, that makes them victims, does it not? I don’t see how being wronged makes them not victims.

    So then my question comes back, but another question comes too: what merits as news? And what constitutes as a victim?

  13. I agree with you that the mosque folks are victims. I am a victim too… and yes, they had the right to report vandalism and exercised that right. I chose not to, as I am not seriously harmed and figured it wouldn’t serve any real purpose. So, I shrugged it off.

    People need to learn to do that. It’s a forgotten social skill. Nevertheless, it is their right to report stuff like that.

    The news situation, however, we will obviously continue to disagree upon. How do I know what merits as news? I know it when I see it. Just like porn legislation. haha

    To me, a church adorned with a little bacon should maaaybe register as local news. If it’s a slow day. Give me a break man. But for CNN to cover it? Good lord, man. I don’t know why you aren’t getting the idiocy of this.

  14. Maybe I agree with you and you don’t realize it. 😉 I just couldn’t see your explanation in your post so asking questions helps me, because now I know where you’re coming from, but it also helps you, because it clarifies your beliefs and you see why you believe what you believe.

    As for what merits news, yeah we’re going to disagree on that. As for shrugging off harms, I’ll agree to an extent (and I’m sure you do to), but I think we’ll agree on the same conclusion but for different justifications.

    But how about this? That may merit local news because that deals with a local situation. What about the miners in Chile? That was local in Chile. Should we cover that? What about the “Ground Zero Mosque?” Does that merit national news? After all, it’s only situated in New York and it doesn’t have any bearing to either of us. Probably less so for you since you’re further away from it.

    Here’s my guess: if 9/11 never happened, news about Muslims wouldn’t be on such high demand. Because they are on the radar, national news organizations see it as needing to be reported. If fundamentalists Buddhists hit the towers, there would be more awareness about Buddhists and they would dominate the news more than other religions. This is my hypothesis.

  15. Your hypothesis is a good one. I agree. I’m telling you though, the CNN chick spoke with such a grave, disgusted tone it was a bit comical. Annoying, but comical.

    Bottom line: It… was… BACON! Upon discovering it, the muslim dude should have shook his head, maybe muttered something under his breath, scraped it up and threw it in the trash. Shit happens.

  16. Ok, so therein lies something. The Muslim can’t do it because pork is such an unholy and defiled thing that simply touching it would condemn one to unholiness. There isn’t an equivalent in Christianity, but it’s the similar things with pork in Judaism and Beef in Hinduism. Touching bacon is analogous to touching a demon or associating with it. Now, does this merit news? Probably not, but it puts the Muslim in an awkward position of what to do. He can’t touch it, so he’s somehow got to report it to someone to get rid of it and then make the mosque holy again. From there, the reports probably got to CNN or other news organizations.

Reply to Killer J!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s