h1

Re: To Alan Colmes, et al, and his bringing up of the subject below (see link).

12/25/2008

http://www.alan.com/2008/12/22/saudi-court-prohibits-8-year-old-from-divorcing-58-year-old-husband

By his bringing this subject up, I have to question Alan’s fairness and consistency.

I recognize some of the callers to his show who complain about Muslims, whether in reference to specific Muslims or all Muslims, and the part(s) of the Quran wherein is mentioned Muhammed’s relationship(s) with an underage, at least by the current standards held by much, I hope most, of the world, female(s), are bigots, but the validity of Alan’s common responses (as I recall them) are unaffected by the fact of him not being a bigot, and not dependent on any bigotry existent in any of the callers to whom he is responding.

Alan’s responses to these callers are:

A., to mention that similar, or equally as offensive, examples of personal impropriety can be found in the Bible, etc;

B., to point out that not all aspects of Islam are followed literally, (which is the same case with Christians, etc., and their following of their religions’ doctrines), with the purpose of undermining the credibility of the caller, should he be religious and imperfectly following his religion, to complain about the existence of actions which most Muslims don’t follow.

The validity of each aspect of the above two rebuttals is beyond my scope to comprehend, and I admit to believing they are probably factual, on the basis of how I believe human behavior to be, and my own, albeit small, knowledge of religious writings. But I also recognize the logical fallacy of their use as rebuttals of callers’ resolutions against Muslims and, or, Islam: In both cases, the resolutions are avoided, not directly challenged, with the exception of the pronouncement that most Muslims do not engage in the morally questionable behavior which exists in the Quran. But all of that is the least of what’s bothering me.

What bothers me is that Alan has brought up a subject which he would criticize his callers for doing, apparently on the basis of their supposed hypocrisy, and false assumptions about Muslims. But it’s not clear to me how the appropriateness of the subject in question is made null if his callers bring it up, even if most or all of them are hypocrites and bigots, but not if Alan does. Does the supposed difference in intent make the subject only proper for one side to bring up? Some would say yes, but I contend that the ethical nature of a given behavior is not contingent on the moral character of the person who brings it up for scrutiny.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: