Skip to main content

David Caton and the Florida Family Association speak out against the reality show "All-American Muslim"

Leader of the Florida Family Association, David Caton, has spoken out in recent days against the new TLC reality show "All-American Muslim".

When asked about why he and his organization felt the show was so controversial, Caton said the following: "It's the absence of the radical side of the imam's proposition of the shariah law that is most concerning. It's the absence of the application of the Islamic code...This program creates the image which is harmful education-wise to the belief structure and memories of millions of Americans who will look at this and say that all Muslims are like this, when it is not accurate."

This quote and a satire on the bit can be viewed here via The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-13-2011/kabulvision?xrs=playershare_fb

So, let me get this straight... It was the absence of extremist portrayed in the show which Caton had a problem with? Because it could potentially tinker with people's belief structures regarding Muslims and make them believe (wrongly) that all Muslims are as peaceful as the ones in the show? So, it's only okay if Muslims are displayed as dangerous or potentially dangerous? Or at least a decent percentage of them are shown in this manner?

No, not all Muslims are peaceful. It doesn't mean we have to include extremist Muslims in any and every televised feature about them. Guess what? There are also violent and dangerous Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, Agnostics, etc., etc., etc. Does this mean that in every television program which includes one or more of these groups of people, we have to give a balanced look at them with individuals whom are peaceful along with ones whom are violent? I highly doubt Caton would be in favor of this if the program focused on Christians. If any were shown in a negative light, he'd probably protest that as well. It's all about the belief-structure and keeping things in tact. Christians are good. Muslims are evil. It's as simple as that - black and white logic. We have to continually paint another group of people as evil to paint us in a brighter light. That's most likely what Caton wants.

It is funny that he brought up education and how such a peaceful and HUMAN portrayal of Muslims was harmful to people's belief structures. He's obviously not in favor of education reform. Education can be a vital tool in expanding our knowledge on groups of people whom we may hold prejudices against in order to give us a more well-rounded view and hopefully allows us to get over said prejudices. That frightens Mr. Caton. His fear is of people losing their fear of Muslims. One thing I fear is people being ignorant, allowing others to take advantage of that ignorance in order to bring about fear in them of what they don't understand. I fully support education and allowing people to make up their own minds on issues as opposed to not being given the opportunity to learn about said issues and being spoon-fed BS.

Comments

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!"