On Monday, Stephen Colbert interviewed Bill Maher – a comedian, talk show host of "Real Time" and a staunch liberal. Though the two are generally both considered to tend towards the far left wing, the interview was filled with awkward conversations and confrontations. For example, in response to Stephen saying that though he "sucks" as a Catholic, religion gives him a "connection to our ancestors," Maher replied with, "These were men who did not know what a germ or an atom was, or where the sun went at night, and that's where you're getting your wisdom from. Anyway, but let's not argue." This interaction was especially odd because Maher was portraying Colbert as being much more religious and conservative than most others would consider him to be. In the face of the recent ISIS attacks on Paris, Maher asserted that "if only ISIS believes that anyone who leaves the religion should be killed, well, then maybe we can finally kill all of ISIS. But what if that is 20, 30, 40% of all Muslim people in the world?" Though not his intention, Maher brought up a touchy subject by insisting that a large portion of the Muslim religion is inherently bad.
Maher could be considered a liberal extremist, but liberal ideology places a huge emphasis on freedoms - freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of marriage etc. When someone is liberal to an extreme, do their beliefs come full circle and resemble conservative beliefs (Maher criticized the Islamic religion for being sexist, but in doing so suggested that all Muslims shared this belief)? Is it more important to protects some groups' rights over others? In this time of crisis (ISIS attacks), is subjugating Muslims to some sets of stereotypes for the purpose of protecting the majority of people morally permissible?
I absolutely agree that once you become extremely liberal your actions become almost conservative. An extreme liberal may want to control religion or end religion, they want freedom but once the liberalism becomes extreme they attempt to obtain freedom through more control. I think subjugating Muslims to stereotypes is the completely wrong direction to go, going backwards socially in that way is the worst thing we could do right now, if anything it would just cause more violence and chaos.
ReplyDeleteIt is not ok to subject people to stereotypes. Everybody is different, and it is impossible to accurately stereotype people. Extremists on either side of the spectrum hold controversial views. I do not think that they will be conservative, rather they are unified by their extreme beliefs. Extremists are often overly harsh on certain groups, and in doing that take away some groups beliefs.
ReplyDeleteEveryone is different and there should not be stereotypes of any kind of people. Extremists hold controversial views. Extremists are harsh on certain groups, mainly other religious groups, and try to take away some groups beliefs. I do not think that they will be conservative because they are firm in their beliefs and will not change.
ReplyDeleteI agree that becoming too extreme of a liberal can skew one's actions to becoming conservative. It is important to put people's rights at the forefront, but people's beliefs may complicate this. Subjecting all Muslims to stereotypes is not how to solve the issues with Isis. Reprimanding terrorists rather than an entire culture is not right and is not right ( even if it protects the "majority").
ReplyDeleteEven though his views are liberalism to the extreme, the American way is to let him have them--no matter how much you may disagree. The limits on freedom of religion, speech, press, etc are an often debated topic, and in this case we've got freedom of religion clashing with freedom of speech, and in the end both should come out unaffected. It's Maher's right to be able to criticize Islam, because if he couldn't then countless other groups would risk their ability to criticize other issues since it would establish a limit on freedom of speech. Conversely, if Maher were calling people into action to attack Muslims, that would be over the line and illegal. On the other hand, Islam has the right to exist in the US, but it doesn't have immunity from criticism and can't be used to justify actions which harm others. It's wrong to lump an entire group together, but sadly that's become the American way.
ReplyDeleteI agree that everyone has a right to their opinion no matter if others disagree, in fact free speech is part of our constitution. Because Maher is stating his beliefs but not threatening anyone I believe he hasn't done anything wrong.
DeleteBeing too liberal can definitely skew one's perception of freedom. However, in times of crisis sometimes certain demographics do need more protection than others. By subjugating American Muslims to racist stereotypes, it causes further dissonance within American society regarding Muslims. Maher is exercising his right to free speech by sharing his opinion, but he is also subjugating an entire portion of people in the US to a stereotype that does not apply to them. Putting people in a "box" does not protect the majority of Americans because it is punishing people who are innocent of the biases placed against them.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Maher's comments were touchy and at times extreme, he has a constitutional right to express his political and religious opinion. There is definitely some controversy when it comes to the order of importance when it comes to the rights of individual groups, however society and its current structure demands that some group's rights need more protection than others, not because they are inherently superior, but because they are straggling behind on the supposed ladder of equality. At the same time, however, no group should be subjugated to discrimination for the purpose of protecting another group of the population.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen someone is too liberal, they often come across as being extremely sarcastic. While some people are able to recognize this because it is Stephen Colbert, others will most likely not be able to distinguish any other civilians ideology. I don't believe it is important to protect some groups ideas over others because that constricts people's freedoms given to them in the constitution. I believe that subjugating Muslims to an extreme is unreasonable because even though members of ISIS may be of that faith, it is not fair to completely deny them. However, with that said, I believe that we should be more strict when addressing people who may pose a threat, but racial slurs aren't that important.
ReplyDeleteI do think that sometimes being too liberal can cause someone to circle back to the conservative side on some issues, but I don't think it applies to this one. Although it seems like Maher is criticizing all Muslims, his main purpose of these comments is to criticize liberals in America. From his point of view, true liberals should be defending human rights. Instead of getting caught up in every liberal movement and accusing anyone who speaks out against anything as being a bigot, he thinks that the liberals should be fighting for the true victims, those who humans rights are infringed upon in countries that follow Sharia Law. Also, I don't really interpret his comments as subjugating all American Muslims to stereotypes, but rather, I think his point is that the peaceful majority of Muslims are irrelevant, since they aren't the ones carrying out the attacks and infringing on people's rights as human beings.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I'm not really sure if I agree with all his points, I definitely think the debate that Bill Maher is sparking is very valuable to our free speech democracy, and in general, there are times when it is important to protect certain groups over others.
I agree with that bringing up the peaceful majority of Muslims is irrelevant. It's not fair to label the entire Muslim group as terrorist, when in reality only a few are carrying out attacks and infringing on people's rights human beings. I also don't agree with most of his points, and I understand why Colbert would be leaning more towards the conservative side, due to Maher's strong sense of liberalism.
DeleteFrom a moral standpoint, Maher's statements were offensive and stereotypical to a fault. However, from a constitutional standpoint his statements were perfectly fine. He was exercising his freedom of speech while other exercise their freedom of religion. At this particular time under these specific circumstances, morally, it isn't right to subject all Muslims based on the actions of a few, however he does reserve the right to speak freely about them in any way he wants to. Since he has not promoted any form of violence his speech is perfectly legal, but when he crosses that line then everything he says will automatically be illegal and more immoral.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mateo in the point that what Maher said was pretty offensive, but since he has the right to free speech, he can technically say it. But Lina does bring up a good point and I do think he became so liberal that he went full conservative, as shown by his labeling of all Muslims as part of ISIS, which just isn't true. It is never alright to subjugate one group because of extremists, and if we do that here in America, then we're no better than the terrorists we're fighting. If we put the rights of one group above another's by allowing them to put them down, then all rights of free speech are misused and turn into a weapon instead.
DeleteHis words entertain me, although they are fortunately not true. I don't know whom this study was conducted by because he did not cite his source, so I don't believe it. As far as his comments on religion in general seems to always be negative. He has every right to criticize the religion, I really wish I knew where he was receiving his information from, because if we believe in beheading everyone who converts out of Islam then why don't we believe we should behead anyone who does not believe in the religion. Logically it does not make sense to me. In Islam nor does the Qur'an or sharia law permit for any convert out of Islam to be killed or beheaded. Although if one does convert out of Islam and is at war meaning in combat fighting a Muslim then one person has die for the other to live. Just like in any war, it has nothing do do with his religious state once he leaves the religion only where he is standing when they face each other at battle. I do find it offensive though that I am being generalized and compared to a terrorist group such as ISIS, for someone who claims to be educated on the subject he certainly can not differentiate between groups and people. No matter what religion a terrorist justifies their actions with, it does not and should not reflect on the religion but rather that they are terrorists.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete