Self Expression Magazine

Senator Fraser Anning, This is for You

Posted on the 17 March 2019 by Scribe Project @ascribeproject

An attack on a racial group is an attack on the predicate that humanity is founded on; human decency and individuality.

The incident at Christchurch was an indication of hate manifesting with violent means to become the aggressor in which the party concludes in the death of multiple innocent lives. In this case, the innocent lives of 49 members to the Islamic faith.

Senator Fraser Anning, this is for you
Killing those who are attempting to find solitude through prayer and attempting to become better
people is cruel ; and unjust.

But I’m not here to condemn the shooter; as that’s already been done.

I’m here to respond to a letter, a letter that originated from the pen of a man of power, a letter that conceivably either lacks analysis, or is just pure retardation.

A letter that grained salt onto an already weakly patched wound in today’s social stigmas about

A letter that shouldn’t exist, but here I am, writing about it.

Senator Fraser Anning, this is for you.

Senator Fraser Anning, this is for you

You firstly phrase the gunman’s actions as “violent vigilantism”. So, in your eyes Senator, this shooter was Batman; swooping in through the crevices of the uncouth and the evil to save and protect; against the will of formal legislature?

If that is how you view vigilantism, you shouldn’t watch any Marvel movies.

What the gunman did was atrocious, no words could subscribe to such unrefined mannerism.

Yet for some reason, Senator Anning, you decided to phrase it as “vigilantism”.

Maybe you made a mistake and weren’t thinking, as this is me nit-picking at two words. Or maybe I’m right and you have morphed lens folded into his spectacles which makes you see the whole world as mud.

You go on to say that even though it is Muslim people who are the victims today, most of the time they are the perpetrators of crime all over the world (I am paraphrasing of course). Understand this Senator, faith is subjective to all those who believe. Religious people all over the world, even scholars, debate over how certain religious doctrine is interpreted due to its subjectivity. To label the attacks of known terrorists, such as ISIS or Al-Quada, on a whole populous of people is not only divisive, but it presents us with the obvious connotation that you have not thought this through.

Evil people are evil, regardless of what their faith originates from.

Buddhism prescribes to no violence at all whatsoever; yet we see monks like Ashin Wirathu from Myanmar who comes on national television and spouts divisive nonsense regarding Muslims in his country. That does not
mean all Buddhists are such violent humans.

EVEN if in the worst case scenario where most terrorists are predominantly are of the Muslim race it is unfair to conclude that the sole factor for such people to waiver into violence is due to their faith. There are many factors as to why a person commits a crime, not just one.

It is truly unsurprising that you have isolated faith as the whole reason as used it as a base to attack a whole group of people. It is unfair to label a whole group of faith as criminals and uncivil.

For those who take the Senator’s words as a label for conservatists everywhere, please don’t. There are legitimate conservatives who do not share such views and believe in policy that does not emit any hate towards any group. Just as how one ISIS suicide bomber does not represent all Muslims in  the world, or how one White shooter does not represent all white men in the world, one cracked Conservative Senator does not represent all conservatives.

For those who felicitated and congratulated the boy who threw an egg at the Senator during a press conference, think before you throw a bouquet of flowers.

It’s a cycle of hatred that ensured the endurance of violence in this world. The boy’s actions should be condemned as an unjust action of malice and ill-discipline.

We all have an equal right for the pursuit of happiness, do not blow someone’s candles off based on the label of the individual.

Individualism decides who you are as a person, not the color of your skin, not you genitals and certainly not your faith. How you decide to live your life decide who you are as a person.

Using signboards of group identity is superficial and stereotypical and hurts the potential divinity of an

Live, and Let Live.

Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog