Glen writes: "I feel the same way about Charlie Hebdo and the opinions of Sam Harris (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/01/sam-harris-liberals-like-greenwald-aslan-support-thuggish-ultimatum-of-islamic-terrorists/)."
“This ‘respect’ we’re all urged to show for ‘religious sensitivity,’ is actually a demand that the blasphemy laws of Islam be followed by non-Muslims and secular liberals in the West are defending this thuggish ultimatum,” he said. I don't think he means to say the secular liberals are making that demand, but rather that they are surrendering to it. And elsewhere in the podcast he mentions some of them he doesn't "find readable". So I don't think he means all of them. An analogy might be a parent that beats his or her kids so furiously that the screams can be heard around the neighborhood. At some point being `sensitive' to that has a dubious moral foundation. And if one doesn't work from a moral foundation, then what is the motive for tolerance of the disruptive behavior? Just go along, get along? Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
