So a few weeks back after the Orlando shootings I was having a discussion with someone over social media about Orlando. I've often found it strange how much some celebrities get when they die because of the fact that all artists die physically. But they do live on forever through their art. It's a very happy philosophy to hold and it does tend to minimizes the grief felt after their death in a way that is frowned upon by our society. The killings in Orlando were horrific and I believe it was the "biggest" mass shooting to happen in America. Calling it that and commemorating it as such disturbs me in a way because it a) makes it seem like a competition and b) diminishes the significance of prior mass shootings. But this wasn't the crux of the issue for me. The crux of it was all of the people who said that the shooter wasn't a Muslim fundamentalist and thus Muslim fundamentalism shouldn't be addressed. This stems from a notion that "if someone doesn't die to it, it isn't worth acting on". We have so many injustices in the world. But we only start talking about them when something like this happens. I agree that it shouldn't start us debating scepticisms or certain off-topic philosophies but it made me consider a very silent genocide that streams of Islam in other parts of the world does commit. In many Muslim countries homosexuality is seen as criminal or worse. I thought about all of the people who were at that gay bar when the Orlando shooting happened. And how they were all expressing themselves and perhaps, after the event, some of them stopped going to bars or even tried to conceal their own feelings. In the aforementioned countries. Syria and Saudi Arabia being 2 examples. There aren't gay bars. If one was to be created, it would be a hot spot for murderers and nobody would go there anymore. We've fought for years in the West to allow these people to be seen as normal (which of course they are), acceptable and perfectly functionable people. Was the eventual triumph not worth 50 lives? How many lives is the triumph worth? And how can we consider then that all of the people in Saudi Arabia and Syria aren't at least a little bit dead inside. For if it'd worth the lives of 100 people for an entire nation's homosexual population to be liberated. Then how many are being cost in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Indonesia and any other country where their rights aren't fully revealed. Imagine the sheer mass of suffering, despair and hopelessness present there and tell me how 50 lives lost to a shooting wherein which countless people have expressed themselves over the years. Is it really better that people not have gay bars and stay alive than people having gay bars and 50 or so of them dying to a fanatic on one freak occasion? The bloodbath that would occur if every homosexual here was splattered with red paint and revealed to be so wouldn't be half as bad as what it is there. Until their identities are liberated truly and allowed to live. I don't think the killing of 50 people really weighs up to the suppression of thousands. It really is time we stopped ironing all the microscopic cracks in our own society and focused on those with gaping wounds.
every religion is dangerous in its purist form. the fact that religion is dangerous isn't the issue; it's the fact that muslims are condemned to a much more extreme degree than any white religions are. the fact that a muslim murdered people is not grounds to say a person murdered people BECAUSE they were muslim, in the same respect a christian murdering people isn't grounds to say a person murdered people because they were christian. both religions are despicably intolerant; both parties' fundamentalists are dangerous. but someone belonging to either doesn't warrant that particular aspect of their existence being presented as motive for their actions. when non-muslim people commit mass shootings - 999 of them, since sandy hook - neither their race nor religion are plastered in headlines or made feature-points of articles regarding the incident. when muslim people commit mass shootings - 2 of them, since sandy hook - the entire event becomes an analysis of their religion, and a subsequent demonization and very blatant targeting of all muslim people following the incident. it's not only fallacious to assume muslim people in america are more radical or dangerous than their christian/catholic/etc counterparts, it's downright dangerous. it puts millions of muslim peoples' lives at risk; it makes muslim people in america live in fear. i am just as afraid for muslims in america as i am for LGBT people, following an event like this. the fact that you bring up middle eastern countries' homophobia and radicalization i find fallacious as well; you cite terrorism in these 3rd world countries driven by muslim extremists, yet fail to mention the contrasting terrorism in a FIRST world country created and perpetuated by christians. is the KKK not comparable to the homologous terrorist groups in muslim counties? does it not terrify you that one of the (acclaimed) most progressive countries in the world shares the same hatred and discrimination with that which you are denouncing? did the central african republic being wiped clean of mosques by christian terrorists and the subsequent lynching of muslim people in the streets drive fear into the hearts of christian people around the world? of course not, for two reasons: firstly, christians as a whole are not condemned for the actions of any other christians; and secondly, because the people being targeted and murdered were brown and black people in a third world country, and we in the first world are veritable experts at turning a blind eye to deaths of these natures. what youre taking issue with, then, (whether consciously or subconsciously), is not death, nor discrimination, nor either of these happening in "radical" parts of the world -- what youre taking issue with is muslim people in particular, while disregarding statistics, attacks, and radicalization that doesn't fit that agenda. the issue is not muslim people, nor is it islam itself - i will say that yes, religion is extremely dangerous in and of itself; but to borderline revile one and not the others is hypocritical at best, and deadly at worst. your 12th paragraph gets to me. as a gay person, i shouldn't have to choose between going to a gay club and living. no matter how small the chances are; no, it shouldn't "cost" 50 lives of my people. we are dying enough, whether plastered on a screen or forgotten by all but the coroner. our death rates are not a price to be paid for our freedom. i am fully aware that was not your intended implication, but it's the one you gave, so it's the one i am reacting to. your net point that we, in layman's terms, have bigger things to worry about... i both agree in that we need refocus our energy on universal improvement, and disagree in that all murders, whether one or 50 or 3 million, make a statement and have the potential to impact more than we foresee. that is to say, the deaths of many thousands of LGBT people in radical muslim countries don't serve as a catalyst for change in the same way the death of 50 do in white middle-class america. again, i understand some of this is addressing issues im sure you didnt aim to pose, but take it partly as a direct response and partly as a general one for related issues. bolded for TL;DR purposes
sorry that more than two sentences is too much for you to handle ? nobody is forcing or even asking you to read anything we're writing
I wouldn't dare to try and have an essay competition against Kitty. I was just sharing my thoughts on the recent shootings and some of the discourse around it.