Dennis Prager Responds

Dennis Prager, the man who touched off a firestorm from the PC Police, has written another column to respond to their vitriolic charges. I strongly recommend you read the entire article. Here's what stood out to me:

So, for those who do cherish dialogue, including those on the Left who have trained themselves to avoid thought by merely choosing from a list of epithets, "racist," "bigoted," "homophobic," "Islamophobic," "sexist," "xenophobic," "fascist", here are my responses to the most frequently offered objections to my piece:

Thank you, Dennis Prager, for stating the sorry state of debate on the far left. This 'technique' is also used by CAIR and others in the Muslim community, as is the case here:

"No one who holds such bigoted, intolerant and divisive views should be in a policymaking position at a taxpayer-funded institution that seeks to educate Americans about the destructive impact hatred has had, and continues to have, on every society. As a presidential appointee, Prager's continued presence on the council would send a negative message to Muslims worldwide about America's commitment to religious tolerance."

CAIR doesn't address Mr. Prager's arguments. Instead, they open by accusing Mr. Prager of being bigoted and intolerant. What's striking is that they didn't attempt to show why Mr. Prager's views were wrong. They simply jump to namecalling.

Doesn't that strike you as an odd thing to do for an organization that "organizes regular conferences and training seminars for government and law enforcement agencies, media professionals and the academic community" and that "strives to educate others about Islam while building strong relationships with other faith communities"?

Let me frame it differently. How do you "strive to educate others about Islam" when your first response to a differing viewpoint is to start calling that person names? At best, that seems counterproductive to me. A skeptic might even say that such a response is a Freudian slip, a glimpse of their true nature and purpose. To be certain, it raises doubts about CAIR's purpose in their communications.

Likewise, it raises questions about what CAIR's goals are. Are they truly committed to "building strong relationships with other faith communities" or are they more committed to silencing and shouting down their critics?

Their actions going forward, not their words, will answer that question.

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog