jeremy cobert
United States
cedar rapids
Iowa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think the interesting thing about Islam is how early on in the Koran , it starts out relatively peaceful but by the end as Mohammed becomes more warlike, the Koran also becomes more militant. When people want to quote the peaceful parts of Islam, they use the early sections and leave out the later writings.

It almost seems like the opposite of Christianity which the bible starts out violent with wars, famine and ends in the teachings of Jesus preaching peace instead of hate.

I assume this has to do with their founders. One was a war mongering pedophile and the other died to preserve the peace.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Cates
United States
Visalia
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I used to go with a co-worker to the Mosque on Friday before 9-11-2001. The sermons would often wander to, "The Jews and Christians will burn in hell and God will give them new bodies to be burned again and again."

After 9-11 the sermons were all about how Islam is the religion of peace. I guess that's better, I try not to argue with that.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Me nah play no 'ide and seek
United States
Lincoln
NE
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
jeremycobert wrote:
I think the interesting thing about Islam is how early on in the Koran , it starts out relatively peaceful but by the end as Mohammed becomes more warlike, the Koran also becomes more militant. When people want to quote the peaceful parts of Islam, they use the early sections and leave out the later writings.


I have less than no interest in discussing matters of religion with you and your ilk, but as a mere factual statement, I will point out that, apart from the first introductory chapter, the Quran is ordered by length of chapter, not by chronological order of revelation.
15 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jeremy cobert
United States
cedar rapids
Iowa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
toku42 wrote:
I have less than no interest in discussing matters of religion with you and your ilk, but as a mere factual statement, I will point out that, apart from the first introductory chapter, the Quran is ordered by length of chapter, not by chronological order of revelation.


Great, we agree then. Younger Mohammed vs salty Mohammed. Later in life as he became more unhinged, his teachings became more war like and oppressive toward outsiders.
2 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Me nah play no 'ide and seek
United States
Lincoln
NE
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
jeremycobert wrote:
toku42 wrote:
I have less than no interest in discussing matters of religion with you and your ilk, but as a mere factual statement, I will point out that, apart from the first introductory chapter, the Quran is ordered by length of chapter, not by chronological order of revelation.


Great, we agree then. Younger Mohammed vs salty Mohammed. Later in life as he became more unhinged, his teachings became more war like and oppressive toward outsiders.


I have no idea how you could gather that from the factual information I told you. Good day, sir.
13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Woodcock
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I think most Muslims are pretty peaceful and don't feel any need to convert somebody to their ways, behead people, etc. Their book does unambiguously say that "infidels" are to but most of them seem to view that through the lens of a more modern eye.

I've known one Muslim lady, a very pretty young woman named Shabnam. She was a refugee from Iraq when the Shah was deposed and my aunt semi-adopted her until she could get on her feet here in America. I didn't know much about Islam at the time; while she was devout she a.) never tried to convert me and b.) didn't darkly suggest I should lose my head or anything. She was a normal, intelligent young woman.

Islam itself is getting a bad rap from the zealots within their religion, and because there are generally more of them (a billion or so Mulsims I believe) and the zealotry extends to chopping people's heads off (not something you'd see the Amish do for example) they get a lot of press and make quite a bit of noise.

Going forward is very tricky. We can't let them just kill us or our friends, and that means we have to fight sometimes. Getting the non-zealots to help us is a must, but we also can't throw away all our tools just because using them might upset somebody.

Best we can do short term is rigorous screening and background checks into any Muslims we let into the nation coupled with more folks being prepared to defend themselves if needed. While trying to stop them wherever they crop up of course.

They have an advantage in that their ways use terror and make lots of headlines. You don't hear about our guys taking out a cluster of their leadership very often, which is probably on balance negative. But it's a tough call.


Ferret
4 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Before I join in, I should get a clarification: Do I qualify as one of those "Conservative Only"s you describe? I mean, I ain't a liberal. But I will likely dispute a lot of what is being shared here. So does that disqualify my as a Conservative for the purpose of this conversation? Is this just about trying to stand around in public, stroking your beards and nodding sagely, hoping that by disinviting the other side of an issue, it will keep things from being combative and changing the language to one where the hatred is more overt?

I never know when I am a conservative and when I'm not.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
Behold, the thoughtful conservatives.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hyperbolus wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:
Before I join in, I should get a clarification: Do I qualify as one of those "Conservative Only"s you describe? I mean, I ain't a liberal. But I will likely dispute a lot of what is being shared here. So does that disqualify my as a Conservative for the purpose of this conversation? Is this just about trying to stand around in public, stroking your beards and nodding sagely, hoping that by disinviting the other side of an issue, it will keep things from being combative and changing the language to one where the hatred is more overt?

I never know when I am a conservative and when I'm not.


It's just an experiment. If the discussion devolves into insults then maybe it is not political affiliation that is causing all the discord?

I voted for Bill Clinton twice, voted against GWB twice, voted for Obama twice and will vote for Hillary but yet I am pretty far right on this particular issue. Much of the left has gone insane in my opinion but I guess the right started it with the Tea party and Sarah Palin. The only reason why Trump is so close in the polls is because a lot of people are pissed and they are desperate to try anything. Anyway feel free to comment on the topic at hand, if you are here to wag your finger then why not leave it?


My question is exactly what it was: curiosity to see if I would be pre-shunned for not having passed enough purity tests. But since I'm being invited...

The issue of radical Islam is, in my opinion, similar to the problem of race in our country. That is to say it is a matter more of poverty than of the issues being discussed. If the Middle East had more of a burgeoning middle class, would they need to turn to the more extreme teachers who preach bringing back Islam's glory by the sword? It is just like how race is one of many outcroppings of the poverty issue.

There is no faith which is predisposed to violence just like there is no race that is predisposed to violence. But when poverty exists, then anything is an excuse to be violent. We don't have Islamic violence here in the US, not to any appreciable scale. The foreign stuff is taken care of by our intelligence agencies, and the domestic part is taken care of because... why would they want to be violent? They have things good here. The laws of the land keep the sharia law boogeyman in check and at bay. People aren't blowing stuff up. What's to be violent about?

You want to curb the violent portions of Islam? Let the Middle East keep their wealth. Stop exploiting them, taking their natural resources for ourselves, and not doing anything to develop their infrastructure or help the next generation coming up in the ME. Do we have to do that? Are we under any sort of obligation? No. But if we don't, we'll be dealing with this same issue twenty years down the road.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pontifex Maximus
United States
CA
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hyperbolus wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:

There is no faith which is predisposed to violence just like there is no race that is predisposed to violence.


Wrong. You are very wrong about this. I don't know why you would repeat such nonsense that has been stated here before.

And this very easy to demonstrate.

Take the a current version of Christianity.

Imagine a carbon of that version in every way except
Exodus 31:14 is removed from that new version's Bible

Quote:

"Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it is to be put to death; those who do any work on that day must be cut off from their people.'


Logically the second version of Christianity would be more peaceful if only by a little bit.

All religions are not equally violent or non-violent. It is simply irrational to think this true.


GameCrossing wrote:

But when poverty exists, then anything is an excuse to be violent. We don't have Islamic violence here in the US, not to any appreciable scale. The foreign stuff is taken care of by our intelligence agencies, and the domestic part is taken care of because... why would they want to be violent? They have things good here. The laws of the land keep the sharia law boogeyman in check and at bay. People aren't blowing stuff up. What's to be violent about?

You want to curb the violent portions of Islam? Let the Middle East keep their wealth. Stop exploiting them, taking their natural resources for ourselves, and not doing anything to develop their infrastructure or help the next generation coming up in the ME. Do we have to do that? Are we under any sort of obligation? No. But if we don't, we'll be dealing with this same issue twenty years down the road.


Now you are just parroting the progressive default line that Islam has nothing to do with violence in Muslim countries? Maybe you should turn your conservative credentials in?

It is colonialism, it is the christian white people's fault. This is not only wrong because sharia law directly comes from the Quran and Hadiths and no white people force Muslims to implement sharia law. It is also a bit arrogant to assume that Muslims have no autonomy and are completely at the mercy of the Western countries, many of whose citizens have never been to or plan to visit much less impose their dominance upon. Yes the British Empire imposed upon the Middle East boundaries and Western civ style political systems but Islamic law has been at work for nearly 60+ years and that argument is getting very stale.



Just like all Conservatives were not members of the Klan in the 1950's, not all Conservative adhere to your similarly bigoted views here in the 21st Century. Sorry cupcake, you don't get to decide who is or isn't a Conservative. Because being prejudicee is not a pre requisite for being one. As strange a concept as that is for you to grasp. Now if you want to decide who is and who is not a mindless bigot, you are on firmer ground
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Me nah play no 'ide and seek
United States
Lincoln
NE
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Kumitedad wrote:
hyperbolus wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:

There is no faith which is predisposed to violence just like there is no race that is predisposed to violence.


Wrong. You are very wrong about this. I don't know why you would repeat such nonsense that has been stated here before.

And this very easy to demonstrate.

Take the a current version of Christianity.

Imagine a carbon of that version in every way except
Exodus 31:14 is removed from that new version's Bible

Quote:

"Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it is to be put to death; those who do any work on that day must be cut off from their people.'


Logically the second version of Christianity would be more peaceful if only by a little bit.

All religions are not equally violent or non-violent. It is simply irrational to think this true.


GameCrossing wrote:

But when poverty exists, then anything is an excuse to be violent. We don't have Islamic violence here in the US, not to any appreciable scale. The foreign stuff is taken care of by our intelligence agencies, and the domestic part is taken care of because... why would they want to be violent? They have things good here. The laws of the land keep the sharia law boogeyman in check and at bay. People aren't blowing stuff up. What's to be violent about?

You want to curb the violent portions of Islam? Let the Middle East keep their wealth. Stop exploiting them, taking their natural resources for ourselves, and not doing anything to develop their infrastructure or help the next generation coming up in the ME. Do we have to do that? Are we under any sort of obligation? No. But if we don't, we'll be dealing with this same issue twenty years down the road.


Now you are just parroting the progressive default line that Islam has nothing to do with violence in Muslim countries? Maybe you should turn your conservative credentials in?

It is colonialism, it is the christian white people's fault. This is not only wrong because sharia law directly comes from the Quran and Hadiths and no white people force Muslims to implement sharia law. It is also a bit arrogant to assume that Muslims have no autonomy and are completely at the mercy of the Western countries, many of whose citizens have never been to or plan to visit much less impose their dominance upon. Yes the British Empire imposed upon the Middle East boundaries and Western civ style political systems but Islamic law has been at work for nearly 60+ years and that argument is getting very stale.



Just like all Conservatives were not members of the Klan in the 1950's, not all Conservative adhere to your similarly bigoted views here in the 21st Century. Sorry cupcake, you don't get to decide who is or isn't a Conservative. Because being prejudicee is not a pre requisite for being one. As strange a concept as that is for you to grasp. Now if you want to decide who is and who is not a mindless bigot, you are on firmer ground


Stop violating hyperpwn3dbolus' safe space, you monster.
14 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pontifex Maximus
United States
CA
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hyperbolus wrote:
toku42 wrote:

Stop violating hyperpwn3dbolus' safe space, you monster.


He cannot help himself being the complete bag of shit that he is. Islam is being insulted, so he must be continue his keyboard jihad. You are actually a Muslim if I remember correctly and you don't get as triggered as he does.


Quite an intellectual display you are putting on to justify your hate. Actually I am a firm believer in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Remember the First Amendment which goes something like this

Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


I bolded the part you keep having a problem with. Study up, there's a quiz later
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I personally think that far more relevant to a discussion of Islam in practice as germane to today's political issues is the history of Islam and of Muslims rather than the theology of Islam. The same would be true of virtually any other religious group.

The Muslim world is diverse in populations, ethnicities, and religious interpretation, among other things. Most violent groups which identify as Muslim first and foremost attack other Muslims who disagree with their take on Islam. Non-Muslims in some cases are the victims of such attacks, but the Muslim world is always the audience for whom such acts are committed.

Asking if Islam is a religion of peace is overly simplistic.It's as peaceful or not as Muslims want it to be. Not all Muslims want the same thing. Most Muslims want to live in peace. The violent extremists are first and foremost trying to convince or coerce other Muslims into accepting their view as truly representative of Islam. Ironically those non-Muslims who attack Islam as dangerously violent etc are helping those violent extremists to make their point.

We have to stand with those Muslims fighting the violent factions. That's Muslims here in Israel standing up to say that this is their country and they have more right and privileges here than anywhere else in the Arab/Muslim world (which is not to deny social issues). That's also the Kurds, whose Peshmerga is on the forefront against the so-called IS. Yet that's also Muslims who have gone to the West to escape despotism and to live free, as well as those Muslims who simply are fully functioning members of Western society whether born into it or not.
24 
 Thumb up
0.40
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
On what issue are you conservative?

I always forget.

Conservatism is an approach to issues, not a conclusion on them.
19 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G Rowls
msg tools
Mostly made up of spare parts and sarcasm! A cad perhaps, but no bounder.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
"I assume this has to do with their founders. One was a war mongering pedophile and the other died to preserve the peace. "

Being an orthadox religious conservative ie. I don't believe in false gods I can correct that for you.

and the other a fictional character who died because he allegedly pissed of the money lenders , the priests and the usual authoritarian wing tptb's of the day.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hyperbolus wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:

There is no faith which is predisposed to violence just like there is no race that is predisposed to violence.


Wrong. You are very wrong about this. I don't know why you would repeat such nonsense that has been stated here before.

And this very easy to demonstrate.

Take the a current version of Christianity.

Imagine a carbon of that version in every way except
Exodus 31:14 is removed from that new version's Bible

Quote:

"Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it is to be put to death; those who do any work on that day must be cut off from their people.'


Logically the second version of Christianity would be more peaceful if only by a little bit.

All religions are not equally violent or non-violent. It is simply irrational to think this true.


GameCrossing wrote:

But when poverty exists, then anything is an excuse to be violent. We don't have Islamic violence here in the US, not to any appreciable scale. The foreign stuff is taken care of by our intelligence agencies, and the domestic part is taken care of because... why would they want to be violent? They have things good here. The laws of the land keep the sharia law boogeyman in check and at bay. People aren't blowing stuff up. What's to be violent about?

You want to curb the violent portions of Islam? Let the Middle East keep their wealth. Stop exploiting them, taking their natural resources for ourselves, and not doing anything to develop their infrastructure or help the next generation coming up in the ME. Do we have to do that? Are we under any sort of obligation? No. But if we don't, we'll be dealing with this same issue twenty years down the road.


Now you are just parroting the progressive default line that Islam has nothing to do with violence in Muslim countries? Maybe you should turn your conservative credentials in?

It is colonialism, it is the christian white people's fault. This is not only wrong because sharia law directly comes from the Quran and Hadiths and no white people force Muslims to implement sharia law. It is also a bit arrogant to assume that Muslims have no autonomy and are completely at the mercy of the Western countries, many of whose citizens have never been to or plan to visit much less impose their dominance upon. Yes the British Empire imposed upon the Middle East boundaries and Western civ style political systems but Islamic law has been at work for nearly 60+ years and that argument is getting very stale.



What I am saying is that the Muslim faith is the tool that is being used to whip those in poverty to radical action. I am saying that the ability to leverage that religious faith to terrorism is reduced in direct proportion to the economic destitute being relieved of their poverty.

Look at any individual, and yes, that person is responsible for their choices. But look at a group as a whole, the poverty they are born into and the sight of outsiders exploiting their land, then law of averages says they are more likely to make bad choices. It's why you see businesses like pawn shops and payday loan centers clustered together in the same neighborhoods. People in those neighborhoods have a higher propensity for making bad choices, so those who prey on them know where to go. Same with those who would use Islam to whip the poor into a fervor.

And I am not talking about colonialism. I am talking about corporatism. Nestle goes into a country and buys their water rights, then turns around and sells their people their own water at a marked up rate. And then those profits come back home. Now, it's not the US government that is doing it, but when the company doing it is based in the US, is the average person going to really care that much about nuance?

And this is pretty much why I asked the question I did. I knew the moment I did more than try to take an intellectual tone as I gazed at my navel and mumbled well-mannered slurs at the savages, I would be asked to turn in my Conservative Cred card.

By those who have hijacked the party and run it into the ground. Voting for Trump, are you?
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:
Before I join in, I should get a clarification: Do I qualify as one of those "Conservative Only"s you describe? I mean, I ain't a liberal. But I will likely dispute a lot of what is being shared here. So does that disqualify my as a Conservative for the purpose of this conversation? Is this just about trying to stand around in public, stroking your beards and nodding sagely, hoping that by disinviting the other side of an issue, it will keep things from being combative and changing the language to one where the hatred is more overt?

I never know when I am a conservative and when I'm not.


On what issue are you conservative?

I always forget.


Many. It just doesn't look like it from the hanging-off-the-cliff far-right crowd. Thanks for Trump, BTW.
10 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Boykin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
For BJ.....
Avatar
mb
Shit, there are even Buddhist terrorists who have been terrorizing Muslim minorites in Burma.

People who want to do harm to others will rationalize their violence by misusing the spirit of any given religion or political ideology.

People use ideas to rationalize their actions; they're not computers. It's not like a religion just turns them into automatons until reprogrammed with some other idea. The hypothesis that religion, even extremist religions, 'cause' people to become violent terrorists puts the cart before the horse- rather, terrorists use the most extreme and radical versions of religions in order to rationalize their actions.

Darilian
18 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hyperbolus wrote:
Kumitedad wrote:

Just like all Conservatives were not members of the Klan in the 1950's, not all Conservative adhere to your similarly bigoted views here in the 21st Century. Sorry cupcake, you don't get to decide who is or isn't a Conservative. Because being prejudicee is not a pre requisite for being one. As strange a concept as that is for you to grasp. Now if you want to decide who is and who is not a mindless bigot, you are on firmer ground


If I heard you were in an ISIS video cutting teenagers in half with a chainsaw I would not be surprised. You would likely do that in lieu of being labeled a racist. Have I expressed the utter contempt I have for people like you lately?


You probably have. But I am not sure what sock puppet it would have been done under. Can you provide an index or a flowchart on that?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
casey r lowe
United States
butte
Montana
flag msg tools
mb
hyperbolus wrote:
I can't imagine what in Buddhist doctrine can support Suicide bombers.

lol this guy
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
casey r lowe
United States
butte
Montana
flag msg tools
mb
islam is very violent religion - weve never had christians wage war and commit atrocities on a large scale
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
single sentences wrote:
islam is very violent religion - weve never had christians wage war and commit atrocities on a large scale

Whoa, dude-- green text.

I know you know better but I can see others sayng this with a straight face.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adrian Hague
United Kingdom
Bristol
Bristol
flag msg tools
badge
RAWKET LAWNCHA!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hyperbolus wrote:
I just wanted to see if it was possible to have a civil discussion about this topic among the right leaning or at least those with conservative views on this topic.


You have got to be having a fucking giraffe.

All you want to do is reinforce your misconceptions and fears in a self-proclaimed right-leaning bubble.

The fact that you want to start a thread that will not brook any dissenting voices (from the 'left', or to put it more accurately and view in opposition to your own) means that you have strayed so far from a credible definition of 'discussion' that it is not even funny.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Boykin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
For BJ.....
Avatar
mb
hyperbolus wrote:
Darilian wrote:
Shit, there are even Buddhist terrorists who have been terrorizing Muslim minorites in Burma.

People who want to do harm to others will rationalize their violence by misusing the spirit of any given religion or political ideology.

People use ideas to rationalize their actions; they're not computers. It's not like a religion just turns them into automatons until reprogrammed with some other idea. The hypothesis that religion, even extremist religions, 'cause' people to become violent terrorists puts the cart before the horse- rather, terrorists use the most extreme and radical versions of religions in order to rationalize their actions.

Darilian


Bullshit.

Kamikaze pilots do not exist if they do not believe their emperor is God.
Suicide Bombers do not exist if they are not commanded to slay or be slain for the will of Allah.
Nazism cannot happen without people being programmed to believe absurd notions about Jews and others.

You want to categorize terrorists as followers of "extremist religions". They are not extremists they are simply reading the Quran at face value.
The book is extremely dangerous. Yes different people have different interpretations. A face value reading of the Quran "kill all unbelievers until they surrender" is not mental gymnastics. Extracting a "religion of peace" from the Quran takes mental gymnastics and lots of theological hoop jumping.

I can't imagine what in Buddhist doctrine can support Suicide bombers. There is a reason why the world worries about Islamic terrorism and not Buddhist terrorism, one greatly outweighs the other.


There have been dozens of attacks by Buddhists against Muslims in Burma, Thailand and Sri Lanka over the last 10 years, but in the West, I mean, United States, we don't really hear about it because those areas aren't really in America's sphere of influence- ie, they don't produce oil, and we haven't fought a major war there in generations. In other words, we're narcissistic assholes in the US when it comes to paying attention to the rest of the world. If it's not about us, or affects, we don't give two shits.

We care about Muslim terrorism disproportionately because of oil- basically, we give a shit because we give a shit. We don't care at all about what happens elsewhere, as evidenced by the fact that you're so incredibly dismissive of a terrorist wave that made the cover of time magazine in 2013.

Then on top of all of this, we have the impact of the US invasion of Iraq, the Arab Spring and the fall of Qaddaffi and Mubarak, and of course the Syrian Civil War, which have all greatly exacerbated the threat of terrorism by pouring gasoline on the fire of sectarian conflicts between Sunni and Shia's. Prior to the second invasion of Iraq, most terror attacks by 'Muslims' weren't by radical 'Muslims', but rather, by elements of the PLO and affiliated groups- the Munich Massacre, the ongoing agony of airplane hijackings during the 1970's and 80's, and so on. And those Palestinian terrorists hardly identified as 'Muslim' at all- they saw themselves as Palestinians first, fighting a war of what they saw as anti-Colonialism and its allies in Israel and the West.

So to conflate all terror attacks as being motivated by 'Islam' not only demonstrates an ignorance of how ideas actually work, but it shows that you're naive in the history of terrorism in that region.

Again-
People commit acts of terror. Not ideas. Ideas are expressions and signifiers that people use to try and justify their actions to others, but motivation isn't as simple as just uploading RadicalIslam.ver.1.5 and becoming a brainwashed suicide bomber. People become terrorists for a variety of reasons- glory, to help their families economically, because they suffered at the hands of the 'enemy' and want revenge, because they fall in love with a controller who convinces them to die for them. Islam is just a means by which they're able to express and communicate the action to someone else- but if it wasn't Islam, it could be something else.

Right now, the Arab world in the midst of a huge sectarian conflict, therefore the terrorism is 'motivated' by religious differences. Wait a bit, and it will be something else. The key is too look at the reasons behind the reasons- in this case, at the dysfunctional governments that dominate the Middle East, with poor job prospects, slow economic growth, and no political expression. Its no coincidence that the nation with the biggest minority of Muslims, India, has had so few terror attacks from within their own community- most Muslim terror attacks come from Pakistan. That's because in India, Muslims have political freedom in a political system that protects their status as a religious minority group. It's also why there have been so few terror attacks by Muslims in the United States. The only real outlier in this analysis is Europe, and that is complicated by their proximity to the Syrian conflict and the difficulties of border control in the EU.

But arguing that Nazi's became genocidal maniacs because they were 'programmed' to do so? Dude, put down the Daniel Goldhagen and read somebody who actually knows their shit, like Ian Kershaw, Omer Bartov or Christopher Browning. Most people who got involved in the killing of the Final Solution didn't do so out of a desire to kill Jews- they became concentration camp gaurds because it was a way to get a promotion (Franz Stangl, Treblinka), or they got involved in shooting actions because their unit had been called up to do the deed and soldiers don't like shirking duty that their fellows have to do as well (Police Battalion 101 at Jozefew). It's waaay more complicated than what you're trying to make this out to be, and a lot of is made messier because you're positing such a simplistic model of ideas propagate and impact the rest of the overall culture.

Short version-
Meme theory is shit.

Darilian
28 
 Thumb up
1.50
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
casey r lowe
United States
butte
Montana
flag msg tools
mb
hyperbolus wrote:
Darilian wrote:
Shit, there are even Buddhist terrorists who have been terrorizing Muslim minorites in Burma.

People who want to do harm to others will rationalize their violence by misusing the spirit of any given religion or political ideology.

People use ideas to rationalize their actions; they're not computers. It's not like a religion just turns them into automatons until reprogrammed with some other idea. The hypothesis that religion, even extremist religions, 'cause' people to become violent terrorists puts the cart before the horse- rather, terrorists use the most extreme and radical versions of religions in order to rationalize their actions.

Darilian


Bullshit.

Kamikaze pilots do not exist if they do not believe their emperor is God.
Suicide Bombers do not exist if they are not commanded to slay or be slain for the will of Allah.
Nazism cannot happen without people being programmed to believe absurd notions about Jews and others.

You want to categorize terrorists as followers of "extremist religions". They are not extremists they are simply reading the Quran at face value.
The book is extremely dangerous. Yes different people have different interpretations. A face value reading of the Quran "kill all unbelievers until they surrender" is not mental gymnastics. Extracting a "religion of peace" from the Quran takes mental gymnastics and lots of theological hoop jumping.

I can't imagine what in Buddhist doctrine can support Suicide bombers. There is a reason why the world worries about Islamic terrorism and not Buddhist terrorism, one greatly outweighs the other.

you frequently post sam harris videos but have you ever read one of his books on neuroscience - he affirms that the human minds ability to rationalize own actions is limitless and his criticism of islam pertains to the frequent use of violence thinking it can be reformed like christianity
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [7] | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.