Now Bill Maher is an okay guy so far as US-American liberals go. I don't agree with everything he says by any stretch, but for such a backward, indoctrinated political culture he's done a good job of establishing an independent viewpoint.
I don't even take much issue with most of what he says in this "New Rules" segment wherein he basically says that of all the world's religions, it is really only Islam that wants to kill infidels and blasphemers:
Except that I want to add the following. I think people in India might have something to say about religious violence. And Maher had best read Jeremy Scahill's writings on Christian-fanatic-violent-deranged-nut-job Eric Prince and his gang of murderous Jesus-freaks in Blackwater:
Like Maher, I wish all religion would simply evaporate until there's only the awe at the MYSTERIES of creation left. But let's try to think of all the examples we can of religious insanity first, before we utter such triumphant praise for our culture and way of life.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Bill Maher is an awesome guy as far as American liberals go, who tend to be a pretty great bunch, not unlike American conservatives. I probably like Seth McFarlane better as a representative of the type. Rick Mercer will always be a pale, poor substitute for both men if you have the misfortune (I don't:)) of living in a country with tedious Canadian content laws and regulations on the books.
Principled, practical, and for the most part consistent: American liberals and conservatives don't necessarily see anything wrong with trying to make a living and prosper, and aren't the kind of milquetoast Canadian liberal that I've come to despise: liberal when it's easy, but when you scratch the surface, they get pretty conservative tout de suite, and vice versa if it's a Canadian conservative doing the flouncing around squawking about this, that, or the other thing.
Only Islam, eh? Yeah right!
Mark,
You're a traitor to your roots!!!
:)
Gene,
That's a helluva link.
Maher claims to hate religion but he is a staunch defender of the Jewish Apartheid State whose very justification for its location, foundation and existence are pinned on selectively interpreted religious myth.
(Just like Christopher Hitchens)
To me that is enough to make their anti-religion bravado ring selectively false.
Enough of superstition and twisted myth as an excuse for anything.
Just to be clear. Christopher Hitchen's justification for his location, foundation and existence are not pinned on selectively interpreted religious myth.
(sometimes I not write real good)
i figured it out. btw: i don't watch maher enough to know what he says about Israel.
Post a Comment