Sutter's rants are not getting any more intelligent...

In this latest post, the 'Rev.' Jim Sutter makes some humongous leaps of logic, and many glaring mis-conclusions.

First off is his use of the word 'racism'. Dictionary.com defines racism as:

rac·ism (ra'siz'?m)
n.

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
   
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Now Sutter states in his article:

However, CAIR was far from the first to complain about his racism, and his racism encompasses at least four religions.

How can one be racist against a religion ( or religions ) that encompass many different races? By this statement, Sutter is saying that Mormons, or Jehovah's Witnesses, or Scientologists or Muslims are only of one race. That is by far a more bigoted stereotypical statement than I have seen or heard in quite awhile. I am certain that the black, Asian, et al. members of the aforementioned religions would be greatly offended by his assumption, and outright declaration, that these religions allow only one race to participate.

He takes what the TV station that canceled Keller says as gospel. I mean, why wouldn't a television station just come right out and say "yeah, we cow-towed to the Muslims (or other special interests), and we'll do it again." No, the television station would do everything it can to keep people from knowing that if the minority flavor of the month (it is Muslims at this point) complain, they will give in.

Furthermore, he draws all the wrong conclusions from the story. But I can't ask him about it on his site, because he doesn't allow my comments to get through, that is why I'm here. Maybe he can read this, and answer some of my question. While I'm certain he will read this, I'm almost equally certain, he will remain silent because his bigotry and hate cannot survive in the light of truth and facts.

He closes with this remark:

A miscellaneous question - why is it that bigots scream that they are protected by Free Speech, yet no one else is? Whenever anyone tries to object to their bigotry, it’s "jihad", "terror tactics", "censorship" or something similar.

Since you can't seem to figure it out Jimmy, I'll tell you why people scream "censorship" in a case like this, and in all of your cases. Because you and CAIR and the others in your corner are not simply objecting to the speech of others. You are not simply saying "what you are saying is wrong and here is why." No, what you and CAIR and the others in your corner are doing is one of the most Un-American things I can think of to do. That is you are trying to completely shut down those who speak up in opposition to your viewpoint. You would like nothing better than for all speech that you deem wrong to be shut down and silenced...forever. You and CAIR and those in your corner would like only acceptable speech - that which you people deem acceptable, to be uttered. And it is terror tactics, and you are completely and unabashedly guilty of this, calling someone a racist when they, in fact, are not and are only espousing differing viewpoints. You hope that by pulling out the ad-hominem attack of calling someone a racist, it will frighten (terrorize) them into submission. That by (completely) misusing the term to attack your detractors, they will back down for fear (terror) of being labeled a racist. So, yes, it is terror tactics you use, and it is called so justly.

In addition, when CAIR demands the silencing of those who point out that Islamofacists exist, and they are a danger not only to the American way of life, but the free world as a whole, that is jihadist in nature. They declare war on anyone who doesn't say that Islam is a perfect religion of peace. That, Jimmy, is why people say what they do, and respond as they respond. Not because they disagree with what you say, it is your actions, specifically, the actions of attempting to shut down any detractors, that cause them to cry foul.