Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Radicalism and religion.
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6023 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 46 of 62 (116512)
06-18-2004 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by paisano
06-18-2004 2:06 PM


I wasn't being political. George W. talks about God every time he mentions the war in Iraq - is that a biased or political statement?
My point was - non-Christian religions are called radical by Christians when their members mention their god in a paramilitary situation, yet somehow most Christians consider it absolutely different for Christian government leaders.
I'm not saying this is unique to Christians, it appears to be true for most religions - which goes a long way to explain inter-religion strife and radicalism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by paisano, posted 06-18-2004 2:06 PM paisano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by paisano, posted 06-18-2004 3:32 PM pink sasquatch has replied

  
custard
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 62 (116513)
06-18-2004 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by pink sasquatch
06-18-2004 1:45 PM


pink sasquatch writes:
As I side note, I'm trying to remember the last time I heard on the news any Muslim actually stating that the reason they were doing something horrific was "in the name of Allah"
Odd, I was thinking the exact opposite - I have never heard a Muslim clip without a reference to God unless the clip was a short sound bite.
Could that be because the translators don't always bother to translate it? Or are you referring to English speaking muslims?
Your GWB comment is true, and I didn't find it to be partisan, merely a statement of fact. I can remember no other recent President, not even Clinton or Reagan, who has invoked God as frequently as GWB does.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 1:45 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 4:32 PM custard has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 48 of 62 (116528)
06-18-2004 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by almeyda
06-18-2004 1:24 PM


What i mean is that all i see on T.V are muslims killing themselves & others in the name of Allah.
And, of course, what you see today on TV is all that counts. What you don't see doesn't exist, what happened last year doesn't count, nothing means anything but your biased perceptions of here and now. Pitiful.
What about Northern Ireland? Catholics and Protestans blew each other up, slaughtered little children, carried out countless atrocities, for decades ...and both sides did it in the name of the Christian God. But it means nothing to you because you don't see it on TV today. Pitiful.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by almeyda, posted 06-18-2004 1:24 PM almeyda has not replied

  
paisano
Member (Idle past 6423 days)
Posts: 459
From: USA
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 49 of 62 (116530)
06-18-2004 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by pink sasquatch
06-18-2004 2:47 PM


No, not biased or political. I just don't attach undue significance to GWB's God talk, or think it necessarily implies he views the Iraq conflict as a holy war. ( I think it's being conducted for mostly geostrategic reasons, some valid, some questionable, but that's another thread in the making).
I think he lays it on a bit thick with the God talk (and I'm Catholic) but I see it as just a personal quirk. And a a lot of it is largely for public consumption (the religious right is a big chunk of GWB's supporters, though by no means his sole supporters).
Looking back in history, Abe Lincoln has a lot of God talk in his speeches, but in his private writings and conversations, his religious views seem Deist at most. A lot of it was just for public consumption.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 2:47 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 4:23 PM paisano has not replied

  
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6023 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 50 of 62 (116539)
06-18-2004 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by paisano
06-18-2004 3:32 PM


I just don't attach undue significance to GWB's God talk, or think it necessarily implies he views the Iraq conflict as a holy war.
Exactly. That's the point I'm trying to make - in light of comments from others in the forum, that suggest that talk of religion during a military action means that the action is supported and condoned by that religion's teachings and followers.
Specifically, if a terrorist mentions Allah, he is following the mainstream tenets of Islam when he attacks - which is a misconception. An anti-US Iraqi might believe that George W. is leading a Holy War after hearing his many mentions of God - that would also be a misconception.
Both misconceptions are likely aided by religious xenophobia.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by paisano, posted 06-18-2004 3:32 PM paisano has not replied

  
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6023 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 51 of 62 (116540)
06-18-2004 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by custard
06-18-2004 2:53 PM


Odd, I was thinking the exact opposite - I have never heard a Muslim clip without a reference to God unless the clip was a short sound bite.
Maybe I'm not listening close enough, or to the right sources... But my point was meant to be that the cause of much of the struggle/attacks seems to be much more based in anti-American sentiment than in pro-Allah sentiment, if that makes sense.
I've heard statements that ended with "praise Allah" just as many US leaders end their statements with "God bless." I think that returns to the distinction of a homogeneous religious culture that happens to be at war, and a culture that is at war simply for religion's sake.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 2:53 PM custard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by paisano, posted 06-18-2004 4:46 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

  
paisano
Member (Idle past 6423 days)
Posts: 459
From: USA
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 52 of 62 (116542)
06-18-2004 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by pink sasquatch
06-18-2004 4:32 PM


I think that what you are saying makes sense to a degree. It's probably more fundamental than anti-Americanism, more like anti-superpowerism.
I suggest that if China, for instance, was the #1 superpower and had heavy presence in the Persain Gulf militarily, we'd see a similar range of anti-Chinese views.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 4:32 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

  
Hangdawg13
Member (Idle past 751 days)
Posts: 1189
From: Texas
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 53 of 62 (116548)
06-18-2004 6:10 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by JonF
06-18-2004 9:45 AM


Many people derive moral principles from their own internal feelings and respect for others.
Aha! this is where many people also derive immoral principles. You are saying all standards of right and wrong are based on our own subjective perceptions of reality, which can be very skewed by emotion, personal bias, and personal arrogance.
as we have seen, some people drive immoral principles from the Bible, the Q'uran, or any other religious book or principle.
As you have just stated people derive their principles (moral or immoral from their own subjective experience). People often take their principles and put the face of a religion on it to acquire more followers, instead of actually following that religion's original moral standard.
You need to find morality and respect for others from within or you're just putting on a false face.
What?!? How can you objectively evaluate your own subjectivity??? This is stupid! True objectivity is looking to a source outside yourself for moral truth. Subjectivity is looking either to your own experience, emotions, or feelings. Subjectivity also looks to religion to try to fit it with your own experience, emotions, or feelings: THIS IS HOW RELIGIONS BECOME RADICLE!!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by JonF, posted 06-18-2004 9:45 AM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by jar, posted 06-18-2004 6:22 PM Hangdawg13 has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 54 of 62 (116552)
06-18-2004 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Hangdawg13
06-18-2004 6:10 PM


You keep bringing stuff like this up,
but still have not answered the question I asked in Message 18 and again in Message 23.
If there is an outside objective moral standard, what is it? Please, can you list one?
It cannot be something general like "follow God's teachings" since the nature, existence and identity of God will vary depending on the belief structure of the person you ask.
Personally, I believe that there is one but I have yet to see you or anyone else point to such a critter.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Hangdawg13, posted 06-18-2004 6:10 PM Hangdawg13 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Hangdawg13, posted 06-18-2004 7:37 PM jar has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 735 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 55 of 62 (116568)
06-18-2004 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by almeyda
06-18-2004 4:14 AM


Western nations like Australia and U.S.A were blessed and prospered as they based there understanding on Gods word.
Yeah. Ask the Australian aborigines that were hunted down like dogs about that "understanding." Ask the Iroquoian women and babies that the colonists in New York presented with smallpox-infested blankets. Ask the Seminoles, and the Cherokees, and the Souix.
Fuckin' A, man! Get a wisp of a clue before you start typing! The folks you mentioned prospered because they took all that good land from its former inhabitants. And they killed as many of them as it took to get it!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by almeyda, posted 06-18-2004 4:14 AM almeyda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-18-2004 7:17 PM Coragyps has not replied
 Message 58 by almeyda, posted 06-18-2004 10:39 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 56 of 62 (116569)
06-18-2004 7:17 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Coragyps
06-18-2004 7:08 PM


Hey Cory !
Sorry to interrupt, you were right, they loved my God sense arguments
Willowtree

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Coragyps, posted 06-18-2004 7:08 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Hangdawg13
Member (Idle past 751 days)
Posts: 1189
From: Texas
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 57 of 62 (116571)
06-18-2004 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by jar
06-18-2004 6:22 PM


Re: You keep bringing stuff like this up,
Sleeping Dragon and I had a long, long, exhausting debate on this in the thread on Satan and evil. I don't want to go into it again.
I'm glad you do believe in an absolute moral truth. I was beginning to think... well nevermind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by jar, posted 06-18-2004 6:22 PM jar has not replied

  
almeyda
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 62 (116593)
06-18-2004 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Coragyps
06-18-2004 7:08 PM


quote:
Yeah. Ask the Australian aborigines that were hunted down like dogs about that "understanding."
Oops, I stand corrected you are right. Dont forget the evolutionists who hacked up Aboriginies to send to England as missing links!.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Coragyps, posted 06-18-2004 7:08 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by matt_dabbs, posted 06-19-2004 12:30 PM almeyda has not replied

  
matt_dabbs
Inactive Junior Member


Message 59 of 62 (116675)
06-19-2004 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by almeyda
06-18-2004 10:39 PM


?????????????
almeyda:
Oops, I stand corrected you are right. Dont forget the evolutionists who hacked up Aboriginies to send to England as missing links!.
What!? Where did you get this from?

"The religion of the invisible pink unicorn is based both on faith and logic...through faith we know that the unicorn is pink, while logic tells us it is invisible."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by almeyda, posted 06-18-2004 10:39 PM almeyda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by JonF, posted 06-19-2004 2:33 PM matt_dabbs has not replied
 Message 61 by jar, posted 06-19-2004 2:50 PM matt_dabbs has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 60 of 62 (116681)
06-19-2004 2:33 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by matt_dabbs
06-19-2004 12:30 PM


Re: ?????????????
Oops, I stand corrected you are right. Dont forget the evolutionists who hacked up Aboriginies to send to England as missing links!.
What!? Where did you get this from?
Where else? Answers in Geneses. Darwin's Bodysnatchers. Of courese, Almeyda swallows evcerything from AIG so quickly that he doesn't think at all ...
quote:
In a previous Creation magazine we related evidence that perhaps 10,000 dead bodies of Australia's Aboriginal people were shipped to British museums in a frenzied attempt to prove the widespread belief that they were the 'missing link'
{emphasis added}
Note that the "perhaps" allows them to publish unsupported allegations and fool the gullible. Of course, to Almeyda "perhaps" means "definitely".
The article goes on to draw almost exclusively from an article in The Bulletin, an Australian newsmagazine somwhat akin to Time or Newsweek. Possibly but necessarily a trustworthy source.
The allegations may or may not be true; AIG obviously isn't interested in finding out, since the propaganda value of their suppositions is much more interesting to them than the truth. It seems liklely to me that the stories are tremendously overblown but based on a few real incidents. Nonetheless, whether or not the incidents occurred, they are not linked in any credible way to the theory of evolution, and they are on a par with the things done in the name of one God or another and already mentioned in this thread. Evil people do evil things under whatever banner suits them, and that includes the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by matt_dabbs, posted 06-19-2004 12:30 PM matt_dabbs has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by paisano, posted 06-20-2004 12:32 AM JonF has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024