Muslims

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Quotes for the God justification, please?

here's a few...

We are all proud that through God's powerful aid, we have become once more true Germans. ~ Adolf Hitler

Always before God and the world, the stronger has the right to carry through what he wills. ~ Adolf Hitler

The world will not help, the people must help themselves. Its own strength is the source of life. That strength the Almighty has given us to use; that in it and through it, we may wage the battle of our life The others in the past years have not had the blessing of the Almighty - of Him who in the last resort, whatever man may do, holds in His hands the final decision. Lord God, let us never hesitate or play the coward ~ Adolf Hitler

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

Youre missing the point... Two primarily CHRISTIAN POWERS fire bombed a town of 600,000 civilians for two days straight until it was a heap of steaming rubble

A hideous atrocity, I definitely agree.

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

and just because they werent all screaming they were doing it for god (and you can bet SOME of them DID invoke the name of Jesus at this time) makes it ok while a muslim who straps a belt to his waste and says something about Allah before he detonates himself outside the green zone in Iraq killing a handful of other muslims is a much worse person? Thats completely ridiculous if you ask me. Note from Lief: underlines added.

Of course it doesn't make it "okay". However, it does make it different.

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

Dont get into this tit for tat petty point thing by focusing on technicalities Lief (god justification). Thats not generally your style. Look at the broader picture of what we are saying here.

Usually your examples are related to your point. Muslim terrorists engage in their struggle for largely religious reasons. There are other reasons as well, to be sure, but religion is very strong amongst them. Religion had nothing to do with the bombing of Dresden. You're comparing a secular act with a religious one, and then telling me not to pay any attention to the difference.

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

Oh and by the way what would you call dropping a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima and the pilot saying may god have mercy on us all as exactly? I think thats the shear definition of killing countless civilians on purpose while refering to a diety (in this case christian...). Its just hard to see it because thats our western perspective. But from their perspective its quite clear.

That is a difficult issue you raise, this time. Japan attacked us. Japan was also prepared to fight to the end. Tens of thousands of civilians from around the country were ready to fight to the last man, woman and child. Japan had declared that it would never surrender.

We had the option of invading, which would have cost countless Japanese civilian lives, countless lives of their troops, and millions of ours, or we could drop the nuclear explosives. It was a question of choosing between two evils, with no third option. It also was not a religious attack. The man who flew the plane might have been religious, and Truman also may have been religious. Yet religion was not the reason the attack was made.

To Brownjenkins: I'd like to see Hitler raise one quote from the Bible to validate his point.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

To a muslim, who is the biggest villain? The rich and arrogant Christians who bombed the market you visit everyday and pretended it was an accident? Or the not-so-wealthy suicide bomber who bombed some far-away place and took some foreigners with him?

Now you and I know the West doesn't intentionally kill innocent civilians. The people in the Middle-East might not feel that is the case. As I said earlier, we all perceive the world differently.

Your example is not answering RÃ*an's question. God was not called upon for justification. Also, there is a difficulty with your example in that you talk about the "rich and arrogant Christians who bombed the market you visit every day", while in fact the number of US caused civilian fatalities is very small. This is ESPECIALLY true, as IR has pointed out, in comparison with the number of Muslim/Muslim killings. So the not-so-wealthy suicide bomber is far more present and threatening than the so-called "Christian terrorist".

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Your example is not answering RÃ*an's question. God was not called upon for justification. Also, there is a difficulty with your example in that you talk about the "rich and arrogant Christians who bombed the market you visit every day", while in fact the number of US caused civilian fatalities is very small. This is ESPECIALLY true, as IR has pointed out, in comparison with the number of Muslim/Muslim killings. So the not-so-wealthy suicide bomber is far more present and threatening than the so-called "Christian terrorist".

Both you and RÃ*an are missing my point. You don't need to convince me that the "Christian terrorists" (US and allies) are actually the good guys, I already know this. Though you're helping me show what I'm getting at - Whereas you're arguing that the Christians' crimes are not as bad as the Islamists', people in the Muslim world would perhaps say it's the other way round.

Just as islamophobia seems to be getting a grip of us in the West, muslims in some parts of the world aren't too fond of Christians. We can't take for granted that the Muslim world sees us with the same eyes we do when we look upon ourselves. If they did, there would be much less anti-Christian feelings. And the other way too - if we could put ourselves in the Muslims' position and see the world through their eyes, we wouldn't be so eager to accuse the Muslims as a group and blame their religion for the acts of terrorists.

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Perhaps the Muslims should make their protests against violence newsworthy.

Peace doesn't sell. Why is it, then, that I've seen endless, and I mean endless material on anti-war protests concerning Iraq? And anti-war pressure in Italy, Spain and Britain, has all made the news regularly. Peace talks in Darfur between the rebels and the government made headlines. Gay-rights freedom rallies frequently make headlines.

My suspicion is that a more reasonable interpretation of the silence concerning Muslim peace rallies is simply that there simply haven't been many big moves or big rallies. Much of what is happening is, I expect, smaller scale. Sometimes individual communities might take action, or organizations here and there, but nothing really big. I've been checking BBC international news most days since September 11, yet I've seen very little action on the part of the Muslim community to cleanse its name. Rather, just a few days (or maybe a couple weeks ago? My memory on the time is not excellent.), President Bush and Tony Blair met in a large conference with Muslim leaders, trying to convince them to take a more strong and visible anti-violence position.

I don't know about September 11th, but here's just one example of some Muslims' reaction to the July bombings in London:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/l...re/4686893.stm
There were lots of these kind of rallies all over the country, mostly organised by Muslim groups. Search for "London bombings" in the news section and you'll see reports from all the major British cities of Muslims uniting to condemn violence. I don't think these events have to be huge to be meaningful.

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

(and you can bet SOME of them DID invoke the name of Jesus at this time)

"You can bet" isn't really good enough. If you make a statement like that as part of your argument, you can't then dismiss requests for proof as irrelevant. I'm sure you can find some reference to God in someone's speeches. So, proof, please?

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

Both you and RÃ*an are missing my point. You don't need to convince me that the "Christian terrorists" are actually the good guys, I already know this. Though you're helping me show what I'm getting at - Whereas you're arguing that the Christians' crimes are not as bad as the Islamists', people in the Muslim world would perhaps say it's the other way round.

Bolding mine.
Um... "Christian terrorists" are actually the good guys?

The Klu Klux Klan, logic-impaired sperm-misfires that they are, believe their extreme hatred and racism and acts of terror are supported by God. The KKK are Christian terrorists.

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Bolding mine.
Um... "Christian terrorists" are actually the good guys?
The Klu Klux Klan, logic-impaired sperm-misfires that they are, believe their extreme hatred and racism and acts of terror are supported by God. The KKK are Christian terrorists.

Heh, yeah. I was referring to the US + allies in the Middle-East. They might be considered Christian terrorists in the eyes of some, whereas we think of them as the good guys. Should've made myself clearer

[Nurvingiel]

Oh. Never mind then.

Inked brought up a good point in the "what religion are you" thread. (Sorry to cross the threads here, but it was a good one.) He said he doesn't judge a religion by its fanatics.

That is an excellent point. Christianity shouldn't be judged on the KKK, Islam shouldn't be judged on 9/11, and Hinduism shouldn't be judged on the fundamentalists who jailed Deepa Mehti (she is released now).

But why is it that Islam so often is judged on a few extremists? There are a lot of cultural factors at work as well here. People who are poor and see the United States as the enemy because of Iraq or other actions might actually view the terrorists as heroes - not because they're terrorists and also Muslim, but because they are people attacking their enemies. (I'm not saying it's okay to condone terrorism, I'm saying people have non-religious reasons to do so.)

[Rían]

Originally Posted by sun-star

I don't know about September 11th, but here's just one example of some Muslims' reaction to the July bombings in London:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/l...re/4686893.stm
There were lots of these kind of rallies all over the country, mostly organised by Muslim groups. Search for "London bombings" in the news section and you'll see reports from all the major British cities of Muslims uniting to condemn violence. I don't think these events have to be huge to be meaningful.

That's good to see, sun-star!

[Insidious Rex]

Originally Posted by sun-star

"You can bet" isn't really good enough. If you make a statement like that as part of your argument, you can't then dismiss requests for proof as irrelevant. I'm sure you can find some reference to God in someone's speeches. So, proof, please?

Are you seriously suggesting that you believe not one allied soldier was in any way religious or at any time during one of the most devistating wars this earth has seen didnt invoke the name of christ when mustering the strength to engage in killing a fellow man? I think thats laughingly absurd frankly. But if you must play that game then as I said above look no further then the dropping of the first nuclear bomb on Hiroshima by the pilot of the Enola Gay who after seeing the bomb hit and realizing that 160,000 innocent civilians had been instantly carbonized asked god for his support. But my suggestion would be to do a quick google search with the terms "war" and "invoke" and "god" if you dont believe me... Most of the references, you will be shocked to note Im sure, are christian references and not muslim...

[Insidious Rex]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

We had the option of invading, which would have cost countless Japanese civilian lives, countless lives of their troops, and millions of ours, or we could drop the nuclear explosives. It was a question of choosing between two evils, with no third option.

I completely agree with this. In life there are times when you must chose the lesser of two evils and one can only hope we made the right choice... Im not one of these people who believes we shouldnt necessarily have dropped the bomb on Japan. I can see the reasons for it. Its still very hard for me to accept though. All those innocent lives lost... It makes you automatically think there must have been a better way. But alas in an imperfect world things like this can sometimes happen.

It also was not a religious attack. The man who flew the plane might have been religious, and Truman also may have been religious. Yet religion was not the reason the attack was made.

But nevertheless the reference was made. And it was done for "God and Country" as youll recall. In that order... And I think any extremist muslim would immediatly see this as an act of christian (largly) butchery on a massive scale. Again its a perspective thing. We westerners see it as strictly seculer despite invoking the name of the christian god in the process. They dont.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

To Brownjenkins: I'd like to see Hitler raise one quote from the Bible to validate his point.

the connections between hitler, mussolini and the catholic church and pope are numerous and easy enough to find yourself if you care to look... but probably would take this thread in a direction too far off-topic

the point... combine religion and power, and you get trouble... the most violent times in the history of catholicism were when catholic leaders held the most power... thankfully, that is not the case anymore, though the US scares me sometimes

the same holds true for muslims, and to a lesser degree jews... the issue is not the faith itself, but the fact that there are states based upon specific faiths... if the US became a "christian state", i have little doubt that we would be just as ruthless enforcing our interpretation of "christianity" as the popes of the middle ages were, or hitler of the 20th century was

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

Are you seriously suggesting that you believe not one allied soldier was in any way religious or at any time during one of the most devistating wars this earth has seen didnt invoke the name of christ when mustering the strength to engage in killing a fellow man? I think thats laughingly absurd frankly. But if you must play that game then as I said above look no further then the dropping of the first nuclear bomb on Hiroshima by the pilot of the Enola Gay who after seeing the bomb hit and realizing that 160,000 innocent civilians had been instantly carbonized asked god for his support. But my suggestion would be to do a quick google search with the terms "war" and "invoke" and "god" if you dont believe me... Most of the references, you will be shocked to note Im sure, are christian references and not muslim...

That's not at all what I'm suggesting - as I said, I wouldn't be surprised if you could find some references from people who did think it was a religious war. The Hiroshima quote is a good example, as is the link between Mussolini and the Catholic Church on the other side. However, I do think it's ridiculous to cite the bombing of Dresden as a specific example without offering the slightest bit of actual specific evidence. You just plucked it out of the air for effect.

[inked]

The issue is NOT a lesser one for Islam, BJ. Brush up on the pogroms against Christians in the Ottoman Empire. Or, more currently, check out what is happening in African nations ruled by Islamics. It is called persecution, murder, and conversion at threat of death. But it is ignored by the media mainstream. And I refresh your memory on the recent (last week's) TIME and NEWSWEEK articles about assassinations organized by how many Arab countries...?

HOw about those Hindu's offering burnt offerings of Christian converts if they do not recant?

I note too the many Christian martyrs and missionaries and professed who have built hospitals and sanitariums to provide for the ill and dispossessed. I'd be happy to know of the parallels in Islamic or Hindu countries in their native and dominant religious traditions. Whose the equivalent of Mother Teresa in these venues, for example?

[Insidious Rex]

Originally Posted by sun-star

However, I do think it's ridiculous to cite the bombing of Dresden as a specific example without offering the slightest bit of actual specific evidence. You just plucked it out of the air for effect.

The fire bombing of Dresden is an extremely valid example of how "'Christian terrorists' do their actions intentionally against civilian targets". Whenever you kill tens of thousands of innocent civilians on purpose you cant really say it isnt intentionally targeting civilian targets which was the original point of the argument. And the term 'christian terrorist' would apply to the pilots from the point of view of the radical muslim but not from our (western) perspective.

Now... was I in every cockpit of all the aircraft dropping countless tons of bombs over Dresden that night so that i could provide you with some verifiable proof that someone mentioned the name Jesus during this operation? No I wasnt. So I suppose you can be smug in the fact that I cant provide direct evidence of that small point that they were "calling upon the name of their god" while engaging in this event (although I bet a series of interviews with some veterans could in fact prove this. And no you can remain smug because Im not going to do that either...). But if you ask me thats missing the larger point once again about civilian deaths caused in vast numbers by christian nations being interpreted as such by muslims who have that perspective. Is it really ok to kill tens of thousands of innocent civilians whether one mentions the name of god or not? Are you making the argument that we are so much better then them because we kill civilians from miles up in the sky and we dont kill ourselves in the process like they do? And that since I cant PROVE that a pilot said anything about god while dropping bombs on innocent people that its ok to do that? Or is this simply about defending christianity at all costs and noting that muslims do horrible things in the name of islam all the time but that christians have never done any such thing?

If a muslim told you that they saw Dresden as an example of Christian terrorism would you tell them that they are wrong?

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by inked

I note too the many Christian martyrs and missionaries and professed who have built hospitals and sanitariums to provide for the ill and dispossessed. I'd be happy to know of the parallels in Islamic or Hindu countries in their native and dominant religious traditions. Whose the equivalent of Mother Teresa in these venues, for example?

Every Muslim is supposed to give 2.5% of their income to charity. In many Muslim countries it is required by law that you pay this so-called "zakat" tax. So yes, there is indeed Muslim charity.

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

Now... was I in every cockpit of all the aircraft dropping countless tons of bombs over Dresden that night so that i could provide you with some verifiable proof that someone mentioned the name Jesus during this operation? No I wasnt. So I suppose you can be smug in the fact that I cant provide direct evidence of that small point that they were "calling upon the name of their god" while engaging in this event (although I bet a series of interviews with some veterans could in fact prove this. And no you can remain smug because Im not going to do that either...).

Thanks

But if you ask me thats missing the larger point once again about civilian deaths caused in vast numbers by christian nations being interpreted as such by muslims who have that perspective. Is it really ok to kill tens of thousands of innocent civilians whether one mentions the name of god or not? Are you making the argument that we are so much better then them because we kill civilians from miles up in the sky and we dont kill ourselves in the process like they do? And that since I cant PROVE that a pilot said anything about god while dropping bombs on innocent people that its ok to do that? Or is this simply about defending christianity at all costs and noting that muslims do horrible things in the name of islam all the time but that christians have never done any such thing?

You don't know what side I'm on here, so lay off attacking the straw men. They don't deserve it I'm not arguing that Christianity is better than Islam - did you see the other part of my post to Lief about peaceful Muslims in the UK? I'm just tired of World War Two being used as a rhetorical example for just about anything people feel like, so I thought I'd call you on it.

If a muslim told you that they saw Dresden as an example of Christian terrorism would you tell them that they are wrong?

I'd tell them I could see why they thought that, and that I'd be interested in discussing their definition of terrorism. For example, do they think terrorism is more understandable if it's provoked (as Dresden was, and as some people argue modern terrorism is), and do they define terrorism in its strictest sense as something designed to cause fear? In that case, do they agree that all war is a kind of terrorism? Is there a difference between attacking civilians and military/industrial targets, or are these distinctions not relevant any more? These are questions worth discussing with anyone.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by inked

The issue is NOT a lesser one for Islam, BJ.

i didn't say it was... i said ALL religions, by their very nature, are particularly dangerous when combined with political power... religion has been a great source for positive contributions to society, but it has also been a great source for negative ones... and christianity (or islam) is no better or worse than any other belief system in that regard

religion, due in a large part to it's focus on the "afterlife", allows people to self-justify horrors they would never accept if viewed from a pragmatic pov

[Rían]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

... and christianity (or islam) is no better or worse than any other belief system in that regard

Do you really, truly believe that, when there are belief systems out there that are into things like sacrificing infants? Do you really believe that any one belief system is just as good or bad as another?

[Jonathan]

You didn't quote all of what BJ said. I think he meant that even Christianity (and Islam) has been a source of negative contributions to society (just as it has contributed with positive things). In that perspective, Christianity has historically been just as bad as any other religion because it too has resulted in bad stuff.