Skip to main content

Another false equivalence Facebook meme

It appears pro-confederate anti-Muslims didn't take long to come up with a lovely post-San Bernardino meme. Earlier today, I stumbled upon this post courtesy of a friend on Facebook:

"if the shooting by a window licking retard with a bowl haircut in south carolina is cause for banning the confederate battle flag, removing statues of confederate soldiers and erasing southern history then the shooting by the muslim in san bernardino is cause for banning the hijab, the quran, muslim symbols and all mosques on american soil"

This is of course a prime example of the fallacy known as false equivalence. Islam is a religion. The First Amendment of the Constitution provides us the right to believe in and worship as we so choose. The last time I checked, the Confederacy is not a religion, so therefore the meme is comparing apples to oranges.

If the author(s) of this meme wanted to be more consistent, they could say this:

"The shooting by the Muslim in San Bernardino should be cause for the banning of the hijab, the quran, Muslim symbols, and all mosques on American soil! Being consistent with this, we should also ban the Bible, churches, and Christian symbols as well."

The meme also exaggerates in some respects. The Confederate flag, long a controversial symbol, has seen its odds of being sold on the shelves of stores decrease quite substantially since the South Carolina shooting, however, there hasn't been a complete ban placed on the object. Also, while there have been petitions going around about the removal of Confederate soldiers' statues, there hasn't been a great deal of success with that objective. Lastly, Southern history was not in any way erased because of the mass shooting mentioned in the meme. However, an increasing number of people would like for die-hard Confederates to finally admit they lost the war, they're citizens of the United States of America, would like to place our racist past in the distant rear-view, and continually progress toward a better future.

People can argue as much as they'd like that the Confederate flag is an expression of free speech and should always be protected, but they'd be committing the false equivalence fallacy if they equate that to the Islamic faith, as the latter is a religion and the former is not. Also, in singling out Islam even though there have been multiple mass shootings in the name of different religions in this country, including Christianity, the meme also showcases a double-standard, likely xenophobia, and on its way to committing the slippery slope fallacy if it remained consistent across all religious demographics.

Comments

  1. The Constitution that you site protects free speech, not just freedom of religion. Both are in the same First Amendment fruit basket.

    The actual false equivalency here is comparing the Bible with the Quran. They are equivalent only in being spiritual books. Beyond that they are polar opposites.

    If you cannot see the problem with your false narrative here then there is no point in exposing the myopic tripe in the rest or your screed. But consider this: you have lost all credibility and exposed your own anti-Christian bias by trying to assign mass shootings to any other religion than Islam. Which ‘other’ religions? Fact check; mass shootings ascribed to Christianity = None. Nada. Zip. Zero. Go ahead and try to name one but let me give you a head start. The Oklahoma bomber was a self-described, self-centered, agnostic.

    Here is why this is true and Islam and Christianity are polar opposites; Allah tells his followers to go out and kill innocent people for them to earn ‘Paradise’. The God of the Bible says He came and sacrificed Himself for our guilt so He may come live with us then afterward, make Heaven our home.

    Quit believing all the junk you have been told and believe that Almighty God actually loves you and cares for you. Let everything else go. Read John 3:16 (and verses 15 and 17!) for yourself and start believing He is saying this to you.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"