religious descriminitation

[TKE_440 0]

Not hurt. Just having fun in SC.

[lost_n_confuzd 0]

Quote

However we do not stop for Chinese new year, and the Chinese work through our Christmas/New Year. I am pretty sure Islamic countries do not stop for our Christmas, Easter etc but they do for Islamic holidays. I don't think that the average Christian is offended by or even considers it "their right" when in one of those nations. Ultimately the UK has a Christian heritage and our holidays are biased in that direction - I don't believe it is wrong for that heritage to be honoured in favour of others.

Well said. After a few (hundred) years countries establish their own heritage that, even w/ religious seperation, involves religion. In the U.S. and much of Europe Christianity is the foundation for much of the heritage, etc...

[Darius11 12]

Personally I would be for all religion-derived laws and holidays to be void. Freedom of religion is freedom from religion.

As for Islam it kind of hard to complain. You already have everything set for Christians and mostly Christian values in public schools. You cant bitch about it if the population has more Muslims and they are going to push for what they want. That is actually democracy.
I went to school in US I don’t remember many Native American holidays, but being in New York we had all the Christian holidays, and in Collage we had the Christian holidays and the Jewish ones.

For some reason when any concession is given for Muslims some people tend to have a knee-jerk reaction, which says more about them then any thing else.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Personally I would be for all religion-derived laws and holidays to be void. Freedom of religion is freedom from religion.

As for Islam it kind of hard to complain. You already have everything set for Christians and mostly Christian values in public schools. You cant bitch about it if the population has more Muslims and they are going to push for what they want. That is actually democracy.
I went to school in US I don’t remember many Native American holidays, but being in New York we had all the Christian holidays, and in Collage we had the Christian holidays and the Jewish ones.

For some reason when any concession is given for Muslims some people tend to have a knee-jerk reaction, which says more about them then any thing else.

Or maybe that says something about Islam's own intolerances itself. Does anyone know the percentage of terrorist attacks/year that are done in the name of Islam vs. other religions?

I think all religions are bad, but Islam, particularly the violence prone uneducated strains of it, are far worse.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Or maybe that says something about Islam's own intolerances itself. Does anyone know the percentage of terrorist attacks/year that are done in the name of Islam vs. other religions?

I think all religions are bad, but Islam, particularly the violence prone uneducated strains of it, are far worse.

I think any absolute way of thinking is bad, and religions tend to present them selves as absolute.

Back tp Islam being violent:

That shows a huge lack of vision.

There is more blood on Christian hands then any consider history, and even now how many Muslims have died in Iraq? You might think that’s unrelated but its not. It is just the latest example of the actions we take that cause hate. Now for some the motivation is Jesus and you cant deny the huge presence of Christianity in are armed forces. The other motive is the true god of most Money. Neither should be use to justify murder IMO.

It is an extremely simplistic view to think the violence is motivated by Islam and Islam only. Islam is a tool to rally the people but the motivation is often provided by our actions.

I also think you tend to excuse hundreds of thousand of deaths caused by us. If one Muslim destroys a home in the US and kills two people it must be Muslims are violent but if we drop a bomb that kills a bunch of inocent people in Iraq you don’t seem to judge is as harshly.

Why is that?


I am keeping in mind that there are groups on all sides that are violent and hell bent on destruction. However if we want to talk about the minorities and discuss them we will be here all day as there are always exceptions.

Quote

intolerances

All religions are intolerant.
Its just many people consider themselves Christians don’t really live the Christian values or live biblically, most don’t even know what that means.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Bolas 5]

I'll agree Christian were and some still are violent, but for the most part that they grew out of it. These days, any fringe group that commits an atrocity (abortion doctor killing or office bombing as an example) in the name of God or Jesus, is publicly shunned and chastised by their own religious groups.

Why do we not hear of Islamic leaders and groups doing the same with these terrorist fringe groups?

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

Why do we not hear of Islamic leaders and groups doing the same with these terrorist fringe groups?

Because you're ignoring them.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Why do we not hear of Islamic leaders and groups doing the same with these terrorist fringe groups?

I think most do, but thats not news worthy.


Also not all groups that we consider terrorist are viewed in the same manner. The definition of terrorist and insurgents means different things to different people.

There are people regular everyday people who are not violent but feel that’s the only language the west will understand. You have look at the history of involvement we , the USSR, The UK, and the French have had. These western countries have basically done every thing to get what they want cheap regardless of what it meant for the actual people living in these countries. So people who would not hurt a fly will support the groups who are fighting the west. They view it as pay back and it is along time coming.


I would also add that the foundation of Islam does have something to do with it as well. However I don’t see it as a fault. Islam is very strong on Justice, and not as big on forgiveness. We simply do not believe in turning the other cheek its not our way. To forget and forgive is not viewed as strength but weakness. It is also viewed that when you are meek you become an enabler for evil to occur so you must fight back.

Thats my POV on it.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Also not all groups that we consider terrorist are viewed in the same manner. The definition of terrorist and insurgents means different things to different people.

The definition I use is targeting, killing, and/or injuring civilians (bombing public places, suicide bombers, crashing planes into buildings). In battle there is collateral damage and mistakes made, but intentionally targeting civilians to show your "power" is not only wrong, but in actuality self defeating.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[billvon 2,406]

>The definition I use is targeting, killing, and/or injuring civilians
>(bombing public places, suicide bombers, crashing planes into buildings).

Would you consider the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki terrorist acts, then? Those were entirely civilian targets.

>In battle there is collateral damage and mistakes made, but intentionally
>targeting civilians to show your "power" is not only wrong. . . .

Perhaps - but again, that was our precise intent during our nuclear attacks on Japan.

[Darius11 12]

To Bolas: Just adding on to bills post.

If you decide to start a war or an operation and you know there will be collateral damage (inocent people killed) and you decide go head does that excuse the blame?

You’re simply justifying the death of inocent people to achieve a goal. The difference is nothing but perspective.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Bolas 5]

Quote

To Bolas: Just adding on to bills post.

If you decide to start a war or an operation and you know there will be collateral damage (inocent people killed) and you decide go head does that excuse the blame?

You’re simply justifying the death of inocent people to achieve a goal. The difference is nothing but perspective.

No. It's all about what the primary target is. This is why terrorists are cowards as they are unwilling to take on whom they are fighting against directly. Instead they target civilians and civilian targets, usually in their own country.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[Darius11 12]

what’s our honorable primary Target in Iraq that justifies murder?

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Bolas 5]

Quote

>The definition I use is targeting, killing, and/or injuring civilians
>(bombing public places, suicide bombers, crashing planes into buildings).

Would you consider the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki terrorist acts, then? Those were entirely civilian targets.

>In battle there is collateral damage and mistakes made, but intentionally
>targeting civilians to show your "power" is not only wrong. . . .

Perhaps - but again, that was our precise intent during our nuclear attacks on Japan.

I'm conflicted on whether that was neccessary. As the entire world was at war, one might also say the circumstances are far different.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[Bolas 5]

Quote

what’s our honorable primary Target in Iraq that justifies murder?

The target varies based on the operation, but when we were leading the attacks, terrorist hideouts, groups, training camps, etc. Early on it was Saddam's palaces and military communications.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[pirana 0]

Quote

And since all social fabric constantly evolves, and since much of that evolution is influenced by population migration, it's not unreasonable to expect, and accept, that Muslim migration will inevitably contribute to that. And as the terrain changes, sometime ya gotta roll with it.

And much, if not most of that migration and "influence" was accomplished by violently conquering the indigenous population.

Indigenous populations get to choose whether or not to propogate and protect their culture; rejecting invasive influences they do not wish to embrace.
Some things never change, heh?

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[Darius11 12]

I think your avoiding the question because you know it will prove a fault in your logic, or maybe i was not clear. will try again.

Why did we start the war? If you recall there was no talibon or alqueyda there before we started. You cant just jump on in one operation and say “we are trying to take that street” Why are you trying to take that’s street? Why are you there in the first place?

So how do you justify that and all the violence and destruction that has come from that war?

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Indigenous populations get to choose whether or not to propogate and protect their culture

I don't think the native Americans made a choice they didn't have one.

Its usally the bully (the person with the power and lack of morals) who wins.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[pirana 0]

Quote

You have look at the history of involvement we , the USSR, The UK, and the French have had. These western countries have basically done every thing to get what they want cheap regardless of what it meant for the actual people living in these countries. So people who would not hurt a fly will support the groups who are fighting the west. They view it as pay back and it is along time coming.


I would also add that the foundation of Islam does have something to do with it as well. However I don’t see it as a fault. Islam is very strong on Justice, and not as big on forgiveness. We simply do not believe in turning the other cheek its not our way. To forget and forgive is not viewed as strength but weakness. It is also viewed that when you are meek you become an enabler for evil to occur so you must fight back.

Thats my POV on it.

I agree that in the battle of cultures, the western world has been throwing stones continuously for about 500 years and is now pissed off that someone else has assaulted their glass house.

On the other hand, it may be good that Islam does not embrace forgiveness as a character quality. It'll add to the understanding of their cohorts when the terrorists push the envelope too far and some fed up party simply decides to grinds their asses into oblivion.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

You’re simply justifying the death of inocent people to achieve a goal. The difference is nothing but perspective.

Would that be like the innocent people that AQ *doesn't* warn when they set off IEDs, or the civilian crowds that they fire from because they know that the military will be reluctant to shoot back?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[shropshire 0]

Quote

Quote

To Bolas: Just adding on to bills post.

If you decide to start a war or an operation and you know there will be collateral damage (inocent people killed) and you decide go head does that excuse the blame?

You’re simply justifying the death of inocent people to achieve a goal. The difference is nothing but perspective.

No. It's all about what the primary target is. This is why terrorists are cowards as they are unwilling to take on whom they are fighting against directly. Instead they target civilians and civilian targets, usually in their own country.

Right. so how do you feel about the use of Drones or even manned planes, when there is no chance of the oponent ever hitting back? - Clearly the operators are not 'taking on' those thay are 'fighting against' .... um double standards or what?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

To Bolas: Just adding on to bills post.

If you decide to start a war or an operation and you know there will be collateral damage (inocent people killed) and you decide go head does that excuse the blame?

You’re simply justifying the death of inocent people to achieve a goal. The difference is nothing but perspective.

No. It's all about what the primary target is. This is why terrorists are cowards as they are unwilling to take on whom they are fighting against directly. Instead they target civilians and civilian targets, usually in their own country.

Right. so how do you feel about the use of Drones or even manned planes, when there is no chance of the oponent ever hitting back? - Clearly the operators are not 'taking on' those thay are 'fighting against' .... um double standards or what?

If you let Bolas know what part of "Instead they target civilians and civilian targets, usually in their own country" gave you the problems, I'm sure he'll explain further.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[pirana 0]

Quote

Quote

Indigenous populations get to choose whether or not to propogate and protect their culture

I don't think the native Americans made a choice they didn't have one.

Its usally the bully (the person with the power and lack of morals) who wins.

Of course they made choices. There is a difference between making a choice and having the ability to execute the intended action.

At times they chose to resist, at times they chose not to. When they resisted, that choice was met with bullyish violence.

Cultures treat each other violently. Always have, and seems there is no slowing it down in the foreseeable future. Long term view, you'd think warfare would be slowing down and as a species we'd figure out how to live with our differences - but it is just the opposite.

People on the other hand generally appear to treat each other decently. Too bad everybody in the world can't live next door to everybody else.

In the mean time, it's defend your culture, die trying, or get overrun. It is a choice.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[Darius11 12]

It will get worst because the bottom line is usally resources.

Quote

In the mean time, it's defend your culture, die trying, or get overrun. It is a choice.

You know I wish we just let people do what they want as long as they leave others alone. Problems usually happen when one trys to force their view on others, or if one person wants to get someone else’s candy.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Bolas 5]

Quote

I think your avoiding the question because you know it will prove a fault in your logic, or maybe i was not clear. will try again.

Why did we start the war? If you recall there was no talibon or alqueyda there before we started. You cant just jump on in one operation and say “we are trying to take that street” Why are you trying to take that’s street? Why are you there in the first place?

So how do you justify that and all the violence and destruction that has come from that war?

By we I assume you mean the U.S. We didn't start this war, it's been going on for thousands of years.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.