That’s a very charitable reading of what Dean wrote. In fact, you have to actually ignore much of writing to reach that interpretation. He did not call for a “campaign to openly acknowledge” barbarities associated with Islam. He called for our government to “get wise and literally outlaw any and all support for all things Islam.” Lest you think he was being figurative, he was avowedly literal. “Literally outlaw any and all support for all things Islam.” Not much room there for “allow Muslims to pray from their Koran towards Mecca.”

Who here is making excuses for Muslim murder? And no, I’m not in favor of doing so, nor am I inclined to excuse white supremacist murder.

I think what Dean is trying to say is that, very similarly to Nazi ideology, Islam as a religion openly advocates the complete destruction of anyone who refuses to follow Islamic law, institutionalized racism against any ethnic group that will not follow Islamic law, institutionalized mistreatment, abuse and killing of women and children, and genocide and ethnic engineering to sustain an Islamic state. I think what he was advocating is a campaign to openly acknowledge all of these teachings of Islam in the court of public opinion instead of refusing to acknowledge these teachings of Islam and pandering to Arab people for the sake of political correctness. Nazis are still allowed to operate in this country in as much as they are allowed to hold their irrational and vitriolic thoughts. However, Nazism not looked upon as a fine, if misunderstood, ideology. Nazis are generally ridiculed publicly and shunned in decent society, not lauded as an “ideology of peace”. I think Dean was advising a similar public stance on Islam. To use your own example, I think Dean was suggesting that we allow Muslims to pray from their Koran towards Mecca three times a day, just like we allow Nazis to heil to the red and black swastika. But we shouldn’t make excuses for Muslims when they kill people in the name of their religion. I can’t recall the last time a white supremacist was put on trial and had excuses made for him because his mental health may be in question. Maybe we should? What say you?

Instead, you said the government should ban Islam. Now maybe you’re incapable of finding the words to express what you actually mean. Is that the case? Or do you really believe it should be a crime to bow towards Mecca and pray from the Koran?

What do you mean by “Nazi-like behavior?” Genocide? That’s already banned. Marching in the streets of Skokie, Illinois? That’s not banned, and it would indeed be wrong to ban it.

Poopoo pointed out that you want to ban Islam, and he wanted to know how you square this with the First Amendment. I pointed out the similarity of the policies you advocate to some of those advocated by the Nazis you seemingly dislike, and hoped to elicit from you a comment on this irony. So, let’s try again–can you respond to either of our posts without attacking strawmen?

poopoo and katzen your’re right, who are we to judge islam by any reasonable standard of a western society?

“Islam no more belongs in a civilized society than Nazism.”

According to you, the government should “literally outlaw any and all support for all things Islam,” “demean islam [sic],” and “humiliate muslims [sic].”

Sounds like you think Nazism very much belongs in a civilized society.