Once again there will be a debate as to whether Muslims should be compelled to condemn those terrorists who kill in our name.
And I was drawn to a particular kind of legal problem: What happens when a nation, although acting consistently with its own laws, behaves so monstrously that other nations, and eventually history itself, are compelled to condemn it?
Around us are ample confirmations of our enthrallment to what we are compelled to condemn in polite society: bearing a grudge and acting upon it.
That local Muslims felt compelled to publicly condemn an attack which had nothing to do with them is symptomatic of public life for many US Muslims since 9/11.
Just as Mr. Trump has plenty to say about Islamic State attacks but generally has no comment about hate crimes against Indians, blacks and Muslims, the European far-right is quick to denounce any violent act committed by a Muslim but rarely feels compelled to forcefully condemn attacks on mosques or neo-Nazis marching near synagogues on Yom Kippur.
He didn't always bring out the flags — sometimes he just put a poster in COPO's window — but this time he felt compelled to do everything he could to make clear that Little Pakistan condemned the attack.
Women who are in the last stages of consumption, who know that their offspring must be puny, suffering, neglected orphans, are still compelled to submit to maternity, and dying in childbirth, are their husbands ever condemned?
They were expelled from the postwar coalition government, subjected to frenzied propaganda (Pope Pius XI declared that voting communist would condemn one to eternal damnation), and held responsible for repressive acts in the USSR which they felt compelled to justify.
William Scott Norwalk, Conn., March 4, 2010 To the Editor: You bemoan that "scientists feel compelled to support their findings with careful observation and replicable analysis, while their critics are free to make sweeping statements condemning their work as fraudulent".
The battle is asymmetric, in the sense that scientists feel compelled to support their findings with careful observation and replicable analysis, while their critics are free to make sweeping statements condemning their work as fraudulent.
Mr Broder gets to the heart of the matter later in his article, when he writes:The battle is asymmetric, in the sense that scientists feel compelled to support their findings with careful observation and replicable analysis, while their critics are free to make sweeping statements condemning their work as fraudulent.There are two ways to approach this problem.
