What? Are they High?

Writing about the Charlie Hebdo/MoToones court fight, these leftist assclowns are accusing the center-right of colluding with islamists, while blindly failing to notice the blatant, habitual, and pointless Fasco-Green-Red undermining of any kind of available social order that reminds them of their parents.

...last December 9th in Lyon the Minister of Interior had required that in the preamble a sentence appear recognizing the right for any Moslem to change religion, or to declare themselves an atheist. Let us recall that in Koran, this fact is punishable by death.
Banding together, the religious organizations rejected this preamble, and the government backed off.

Ironically, in what they state as a defense of secularism and a social “solidarity” they’re attacking their political foes and accusing the equally weak-kneed center-right of somehow making the left-leaning Charlie Hebdo publication print the Mohammed Cartoons in the first place. With deep concern for what the Koran declares legal under their canon laws, they are offended by the suggestion of making it self-limiting in scope in civil law. Faced with the non-compliance of a nearly-meaningless interfaith lovefest, they criticize anyone for backing down.

It’s puzzling how stupid some people can be to the ways of the world. The internet makes the kind of banishing of information that lefty is accusing the right of not engaging in rather meaningless. Right or wrong, truth or lie, the information goes out there – and so do the critiques, fiskings, and corrections – something lefties enamored with an affection for only permitting private media competition if it’s zombie-like in it’s taste for intellectual diversity and prefaced with the words “indy-“ or is “ATTAC”.

By letting the Charlie Hebdo court case continue for the offence of blasphemy made up in racist offence (did they take Mouloud Aounit like advising?), Boubakeur and the UOIF can maintain a pressure on the whole of French society. If they win, they will have to the great pleasure of the Catholic Church and other religious dogmas, to insert an important corner against the freedom of expression and the right to free criticism of all the dogmas.

Since when have these people ever cared about defending a Church or any other domestic seeming religious body’s right to free speech? They might as well buy this line of crap style of rhetoric about “legality” and the “right to question this or that” that pleases them politically, and take it for truth, and rattle on about what they think “the culture” is or that it’s merely to be employed for their goals, not preserved as a plain upon which people can freely conduct their lives in.