This makes no sense to me [political / religious]


Off-Topic Discussions

1 to 50 of 642 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

Has anyone seen this story? LINK

An evangelical church in Florida is holding an event to publically burn a copy (multiple copies?) of the Koran on the anniversary of 9/11.

How can anyone think that this is a good idea?

I can emphatically understand people being traumatised, saddened, angered etc at the events of that day and those responsible. I can understand people transferring that anger from those directly responsible to all Islamic extremists.

But how does burning a Koran help anyone or serve any good purpose? How does this even send a warning like the guy in the article seems to claim? Why do people on both sides want to keep passions and hatreds enflamed?

Also, to be pedantic, if this is happening in one church in Florida, can the guy really call it International Burn a Koran Day?

Anyway, I am not looking for comments expressing hatred to anyone (please do not post such), I just wanted to vent and express my disbelief and sadness at human stupidity and hatred.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

It serves no real purpose. All it will do is fan the flames. Just another symptom of people thinking we're at war with Islam instead of radicals.


They have had a lot of free advertisement on the news because of this. When they get airtime it shows a half articulate minister with a run down and minimal congregation church, that is very much on hard times. I see this as a desperate act to try to garner sympathy and monies they desperately need. It is very sad state of affairs and one I wish the press would leave alone because they are enabling this sad farce.


Mothman wrote:

Has anyone seen this story? LINK

An evangelical church in Florida is holding an event to publically burn a copy (multiple copies?) of the Koran on the anniversary of 9/11.

How can anyone think that this is a good idea?

I can emphatically understand people being traumatised, saddened, angered etc at the events of that day and those responsible. I can understand people transferring that anger from those directly responsible to all Islamic extremists.

But how does burning a Koran help anyone or serve any good purpose? How does this even send a warning like the guy in the article seems to claim? Why do people on both sides want to keep passions and hatreds enflamed?

Also, to be pedantic, if this is happening in one church in Florida, can the guy really call it International Burn a Koran Day?

Anyway, I am not looking for comments expressing hatred to anyone (please do not post such), I just wanted to vent and express my disbelief and sadness at human stupidity and hatred.

Makes no sense to me.

One of the things that keeps me on these boards is that, even among those of us who lock horns on a regular basis, I don't think any of us would say this is a good idea. Within the church member's rights to express themselves, sure, but a good idea? I doubt it.

Of course, someone will now come by and prove me wrong... :D

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
bugleyman wrote:


Of course, someone will now come by and prove me wrong... :D

Damn it.

Liberty's Edge

The Crimson Jester, Rogue Lord wrote:
They have had a lot of free advertisement on the news because of this. When they get airtime it shows a half articulate minister with a run down and minimal congregation church, that is very much on hard times. I see this as a desperate act to try to garner sympathy and monies they desperately need. It is very sad state of affairs and one I wish the press would leave alone because they are enabling this sad farce.

It didn’t even occur to me when I read the article that someone would do something so fundamentally wrong just as a publicity stunt / self promotion. But of course you are right, that may very well be (probably is?) what this is.

From that point of view I guess there is some twisted sense in it.


Mothman wrote:
The Crimson Jester, Rogue Lord wrote:
They have had a lot of free advertisement on the news because of this. When they get airtime it shows a half articulate minister with a run down and minimal congregation church, that is very much on hard times. I see this as a desperate act to try to garner sympathy and monies they desperately need. It is very sad state of affairs and one I wish the press would leave alone because they are enabling this sad farce.

It didn’t even occur to me when I read the article that someone would do something so fundamentally wrong just as a publicity stunt / self promotion. But of course you are right, that may very well be (probably is?) what this is.

From that point of view I guess there is some twisted sense in it.

Yeah the cross on the facade of the'church' is missing a limb. The sign in front of it has a big broken portion in the center. Instead of fixing it, they are purchasing Korans (their spelling) to burn and putting up signs about how "Islam is from the Devil." Even if you believe that, you should try to reason with your neighbors, and such they are, then to burn a book.

What was the old saying, "those who begin with burning books shall end with burning people"?

Liberty's Edge

bugleyman wrote:

I don't think any of us would say this is a good idea. Within the church member's rights to express themselves, sure, but a good idea? I doubt it.

Of course, someone will now come by and prove me wrong... :D

Hmmm, is publicly burning the holy religious text of a legitimate religion legal? Quite probably it is ... should it be? Where does freedom of expression end and displays of hatred, racism and religious intolerance begin I wonder?

Not trying to prove you wrong, just speculating out loud! :-)


Mothman wrote:
bugleyman wrote:

I don't think any of us would say this is a good idea. Within the church member's rights to express themselves, sure, but a good idea? I doubt it.

Of course, someone will now come by and prove me wrong... :D

Hmmm, is publicly burning the holy religious text of a legitimate religion legal? Quite probably it is ... should it be? Where does freedom of expression end and displays of hatred, racism and religious intolerance begin I wonder?

The way the laws work, is when it infringes upon society on the whole. However the specifics could end up quite different.

If the police just up and stopped them, then they would be infringing upon their first amendment rights.

However if an Islamic person, group, or an inter-religious group were to press charges. This might cause a judge to place an order to stay this function until it can go to court. Which could cause it to be delayed until after the 11th. A group might be trying to cause this. I have not heard of one yet.

Or they could just ignore the ravings of an obvious madman.

Or more likely, will wait till it happens and scream bloody murder that it did, and why did this country allow it to happen.

NPR asked about it in the middle east and they seem to be ignoring it.


Mothman wrote:
bugleyman wrote:

I don't think any of us would say this is a good idea. Within the church member's rights to express themselves, sure, but a good idea? I doubt it.

Of course, someone will now come by and prove me wrong... :D

Hmmm, is publicly burning the holy religious text of a legitimate religion legal? Quite probably it is ... should it be? Where does freedom of expression end and displays of hatred, racism and religious intolerance begin I wonder?

Not trying to prove you wrong, just speculating out loud! :-)

I can't see how burning any text, religious or otherwise, could/should be illegal. Given the odd laws out there, it probably is someplace, but I can't see how it makes any sense. Honestly, the entire notion actually seems odd to me.

If it's your book, of course you can burn it!


The Crimson Jester, Rogue Lord wrote:
Mothman wrote:
bugleyman wrote:

I don't think any of us would say this is a good idea. Within the church member's rights to express themselves, sure, but a good idea? I doubt it.

Of course, someone will now come by and prove me wrong... :D

Hmmm, is publicly burning the holy religious text of a legitimate religion legal? Quite probably it is ... should it be? Where does freedom of expression end and displays of hatred, racism and religious intolerance begin I wonder?

The way the laws work, is when it infringes upon society on the whole. However the specifics could end up quite different.

If the police just up and stopped them, then they would be infringing upon their first amendment rights.

However if an Islamic person, group, or an inter-religious group were to press charges. This might cause a judge to place an order to stay this function until it can go to court. Which could cause it to be delayed until after the 11th. A group might be trying to cause this. I have not heard of one yet.

Or they could just ignore the ravings of an obvious madman.

Or more likely, will wait till it happens and scream bloody murder that it did, and why did this country allow it to happen.

NPR asked about it in the middle east and they seem to be ignoring it.

If you think there is some legal grounds for preventing the book burning (clearly I do not), do you think those grounds would be civil or criminal? I'm honestly can't see either, but of course IANAL.

Liberty's Edge

bugleyman wrote:

I can't see how burning any text, religious or otherwise, could/should be illegal. Given the odd laws out there, it probably is someplace, but I can't see how it makes any sense. Honestly, the entire notion actually seems odd to me.

If it's your book, of course you can burn it!

Burning books almost certainly isn’t illegal in the United States now I think on it(and possibly not anywhere else either).

Burning or defacing a national flag (either one’s own or anothers – laws differ in different countries) is illegal in many countries. I don’t see burning a holy religious text as all that different – however, I believe it is not illegal in the USA to burn the national flag either, so that particular moral / legal argument can’t really be applied in this case

Whether legal or not, historically book burning has often been used as a tool of hate, intolerance, silencing political or religious dissent, ‘erasing’ or ‘modifying’ history, de-value other cultures etc. It’s not a nice thing to do – however there are plenty of not nice things that are perfectly legal, and maybe that’s a good thing in at least some cases?

Liberty's Edge

bugleyman wrote:


If you think there is some legal grounds for preventing the book burning (clearly I do not), do you think those grounds would be civil or criminal? I'm honestly can't see either, but of course IANAL.

In (parts of) Australia (and many other countries) this may well be viewed as a from of hate speech or inspiring hatred and dealt with accordingly by the law (maybe – I’m not a lawyer either). Many countries have laws against such.

My brief research (Google and Wikipedia) indicates that the USA has few laws against hate speech (unless it is inciting people to riot and in certain other cases), so this might be very difficult to stop in the courts. Interesting.

So I think you're right, in the USA there may well be no legal grounds for preventing this.


I'm not American but I know some of the lads in the field.

I'm more worried about them. This is like stirring up a nest of hornets. This just gives more ammunition to the radicals to paint them as "Lackeys of the Crusaders come to burn your Holy Books, destroy your way of life and kill your children" which just makes their life more difficult.

In Singapore, this would have ended up with the entire congregation of that church in the slammer.

Liberty's Edge

Dies Irae wrote:

I'm not American but I know some of the lads in the field.

I'm more worried about them. This is like stirring up a nest of hornets. This just gives more ammunition to the radicals to paint them as "Lackeys of the Crusaders come to burn your Holy Books, destroy your way of life and kill your children" which just makes their life more difficult.

In Singapore, this would have ended up with the entire congregation of that church in the slammer.

Yes, how this will impact on soldiers on the ground in places like Iraq and Afghanistan is one of the things that concern me about this.

And yes, from what I know of Singapore, something like this would be highly, highly illegal! The Religious Harmony Act would cover it right?


Yep. Pretty much. The government here has been touchy about race and religion since... forever.

Don't blame them really. We've seen some really nasty racially motivated blowups before.

I spoke to a friend in Afghanistan with the medical corps about this yesterday. His one word response;

"F***".

Silver Crusade

Dies Irae wrote:

Yep. Pretty much. The government here has been touchy about race and religion since... forever.

Don't blame them really. We've seen some really nasty racially motivated blowups before.

I spoke to a friend in Afghanistan with the medical corps about this yesterday. His one word response;

"F***".

I've a feeling that's the general sentiment amongst the people in the field right now.

"Thanks a heap, jackasses."


bugleyman wrote:
The Crimson Jester, Rogue Lord wrote:
Mothman wrote:
bugleyman wrote:

I don't think any of us would say this is a good idea. Within the church member's rights to express themselves, sure, but a good idea? I doubt it.

Of course, someone will now come by and prove me wrong... :D

Hmmm, is publicly burning the holy religious text of a legitimate religion legal? Quite probably it is ... should it be? Where does freedom of expression end and displays of hatred, racism and religious intolerance begin I wonder?

The way the laws work, is when it infringes upon society on the whole. However the specifics could end up quite different.

If the police just up and stopped them, then they would be infringing upon their first amendment rights.

However if an Islamic person, group, or an inter-religious group were to press charges. This might cause a judge to place an order to stay this function until it can go to court. Which could cause it to be delayed until after the 11th. A group might be trying to cause this. I have not heard of one yet.

Or they could just ignore the ravings of an obvious madman.

Or more likely, will wait till it happens and scream bloody murder that it did, and why did this country allow it to happen.

NPR asked about it in the middle east and they seem to be ignoring it.

If you think there is some legal grounds for preventing the book burning (clearly I do not), do you think those grounds would be civil or criminal? I'm honestly can't see either, but of course IANAL.

I am not sure that they would actually find in favor of any who would bring up a law suit. That being said I think a properly time suit could cause an injunction and adjust their timetable a bit for when they have the burning.

I could see a civil case being made. Sticking is another matter.


Can I burn a Bible next time some whack job kills an abortion doctor or blows up a clinic?

Check yo'self before you wreck yo'self.

Scarab Sages

CourtFool wrote:

Can I burn a Bible next time some whack job kills an abortion doctor or blows up a clinic?

Check yo'self before you wreck yo'self.

Naah, just stick it in a glass jar filled with excrement. That way you can sell it to a museum or art gallery and make money.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Am I the only one who keeps reading this as burn a Korean, and thinking well they will get arrested for that.


Justin Franklin wrote:
Am I the only one who keeps reading this as burn a Korean, and thinking well they will get arrested for that.

North or South Korean.

What?! It makes a difference.

Liberty's Edge

If they go through with it prosecute them for criminally negligent homicide or manslaughter. They know from past experience (Muhammed cartoon, Dutch filmmaker, etc.) that this will cause increased violence in the form of riots as well as attacks on American troops in the middle east. They know that this is likely to happen, but are continuing anyway--they are un-American, hypocritical (in both their patriotism and their faith) @ssholes. This is a treasonous act IMO.


By that logic, should we prosecute gun manufacturers?


I don't think it is smart but it certainty isn't wrong, in a moral sense.

If anything I think they either shouldn't burn even one book or burn a book from ever major religion. I mean fair is fair.

I know this isn't the case but I thought that if I were doing it I would get the books, announce my plans to burn, watch the reaction and stop just before lighting them on fire. Then I would explain that the plan was never to burn them but to show the intolerance and violence that is inherit in some of the people that believe in that book.

Show the vipers as vipers if you will.


Aberzombie wrote:
CourtFool wrote:

Can I burn a Bible next time some whack job kills an abortion doctor or blows up a clinic?

Check yo'self before you wreck yo'self.

Naah, just stick it in a glass jar filled with excrement. That way you can sell it to a museum or art gallery and make money.

I think that the saddest part of that statement is just how true it is. It seems like Christianity is just the "in" religion to bash on. People can burn Bibles, urinate on them, stuff them in jars of excrement, write insulting and flat-out bigoted remarks in them, etc., and most people consider it some kind of artistic statement.

However, if anyone tried to publicly do something like this with the Qur'an, the Torah, the Talmud, the Baghavad Gita, etc., I think there'd (rightfully) be a lot of condemnation of that kind of treatment of the holy text of another religious faith, regardless of how right or wrong you believe their belief system to be.

As an evangelical Christian, it upsets me to hear about people burning Bibles and doing the kinds of things that people do with them, but it also upsets me to hear about things like this happening. Neither is a good idea and neither is going to do anything to bridge the gap between those faith systems. I just wish that the rest of the country, and the world, would treat Christian-bashing as equally deplorable as Muslim-bashing, Jew-bashing, Hindu-bashing, or what have you.


There was a retired journalist for one of the free papers in New York City that would write stories about the things he did when he was younger or what was going on in his life and one story he had was when he and a friend put up protest flyers saying that in protest of the Persian Gulf War (or some similar military engagement) they were going to kill a kitten in public on a certain date and time. They expected to go and reveal that there never was any kitten and draw attention to the fact that everyone was upset about this one animal being killed and not about all the people being killed overseas on a daily basis or something like that.

But then the day came and they saw the huge mob of people waiting for them in the park, ready to tear them limb for limb for even suggesting they would kill a kitten. So they did the only reasonable thing: they joined the angry mob and pretended that they, too were there to get those kitten murdering monsters.

I don't really know what the moral of that story is.

Liberty's Edge

CourtFool wrote:
By that logic, should we prosecute gun manufacturers?

If they made a "Muhammed-inator 5000" yes. Otherwise, no...they make a tool. If we prosecuted gun manufacturers we'd have to prosecute knife makers, hammer makers, car makers, etc.

Whether or not the reaction of the Muslim world is commensurate with the "crime" is irrelevant. These idiots know how they're going to react, know people will be killed (including soldiers), and are proceeding anyway. It's negligent, and all that blood is on their hands.

Liberty's Edge

Phillip0614 wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:
CourtFool wrote:

Can I burn a Bible next time some whack job kills an abortion doctor or blows up a clinic?

Check yo'self before you wreck yo'self.

Naah, just stick it in a glass jar filled with excrement. That way you can sell it to a museum or art gallery and make money.

I think that the saddest part of that statement is just how true it is. It seems like Christianity is just the "in" religion to bash on. People can burn Bibles, urinate on them, stuff them in jars of excrement, write insulting and flat-out bigoted remarks in them, etc., and most people consider it some kind of artistic statement.

However, if anyone tried to publicly do something like this with the Qur'an, the Torah, the Talmud, the Baghavad Gita, etc., I think there'd (rightfully) be a lot of condemnation of that kind of treatment of the holy text of another religious faith, regardless of how right or wrong you believe their belief system to be.

As an evangelical Christian, it upsets me to hear about people burning Bibles and doing the kinds of things that people do with them, but it also upsets me to hear about things like this happening. Neither is a good idea and neither is going to do anything to bridge the gap between those faith systems. I just wish that the rest of the country, and the world, would treat Christian-bashing as equally deplorable as Muslim-bashing, Jew-bashing, Hindu-bashing, or what have you.

I'm equal opportunity...I believe all organized religions are idiotic and nothing more than belief in fairy tales. Am I going to willfuly disrespect one of those (a la burning)? Nope. But if I were so inclined I would make sure they all got an equal level of disrespect.


I agree a gun is a tool, but one with a very singular purpose. I am not advocating gun control. But we all know what guns are used for.

You are suggesting these people will be responsible for the actions of Islamic militants and that is what I take exception to. It is a flaw common in America to try and displace the responsibility. Islamic militants are responsible for Islamic militants' actions. Burning the Qu'ran is controversial and is likely to stir people up, but those people are still responsible for their own actions.

I see manufacturing a gun much the same. We all know it is likely, at least, one of the guns manufactured will be used to harm someone. Sure, you can argue they are just for target practice and home defense and I am sure a number of other possible uses. But the fact remains many guns will be used on humans. It seems dishonest to suggest this reasoning does not apply equally.

Liberty's Edge

CourtFool wrote:

I agree a gun is a tool, but one with a very singular purpose. I am not advocating gun control. But we all know what guns are used for.

You are suggesting these people will be responsible for the actions of Islamic militants and that is what I take exception to. It is a flaw common in America to try and displace the responsibility. Islamic militants are responsible for Islamic militants' actions. Burning the Qu'ran is controversial and is likely to stir people up, but those people are still responsible for their own actions.

I see manufacturing a gun much the same. We all know it is likely, at least, one of the guns manufactured will be used to harm someone. Sure, you can argue they are just for target practice and home defense and I am sure a number of other possible uses. But the fact remains many guns will be used on humans. It seems dishonest to suggest this reasoning does not apply equally.

I guess I'm not explaining myself adequately. Yes, I know that the whack-jobs that get all butt-hurt and go out and kill people because a book is being burnt are wrong. Their actions are inexcusable. That being said, anybody with half a brain cell and access to the news knows that some things (like burning a Qu'ran) are going to set those events in motion. The fact that they continue on with their plan is willful negligence on their part.

We are at war in countries where Islam is the majority (if not the sole) religion, and a major element of that war is "winning the hearts and minds" of the population at large. The actions that we, as citizens, take are going to influence those people's opinions of our country as a whole. By doing something like this, the pastor of that church is purposely undermining an ongoing war effort. That is treason and I personally believe he should hang for it.

Maybe my view is skewed because I have friends and family deployed to the region (and was in the army not so long ago), but it shouldn't matter...any true patriot who loved their country as much as this pastor purports to would never do something like this.

EDIT: Seriously? B.u.t.t is not allowed through the profanity filters? WTF paizo?


Xpltvdeleted wrote:
Maybe my view is skewed because I have friends and family deployed to the region (and was in the army not so long ago)…

I understand you have strong feelings about the war. I have an old Army buddy who is now a civilian contractor in Iraq.

Xpltvdeleted wrote:
...any true patriot who loved their country…

I take exception to this point as well. Just because someone disagrees with you on a certain point does not immediately call their patriotism into question. This is just shy of name calling and is not a very compelling argument.

Just so I am clear, I believe they should have the right to burn the Qu'ran and I also believe it to be a colossally bad idea. I do not think they should be held accountable for the actions of other people who 'act out' in response to this.

Xpltvdeleted wrote:
That being said, anybody with half a brain cell and access to the news knows that some things (like burning a Qu'ran) are going to set those events in motion.

Anyone with half a brain knows that guns are used to injure and kill people. In fact, burning the Qu'ran does not impart any more capacity to do harm, whereas, a gun, does in fact imbue individuals with an increased capacity to harm another.

Liberty's Edge

CourtFool wrote:
I take exception to this point as well. Just because someone disagrees with you on a certain point does not immediately call their patriotism into question. This is just shy of name calling and is not a very compelling argument.

They are actively hindering a war effort...that is treason.

CourtFool wrote:
Just so I am clear, I believe they should have the right to burn the Qu'ran and I also believe it to be a colossally bad idea. I do not think they should be held accountable for the actions of other people who 'act out' in response to this.

This is one of those instances where speech should be abridged as a matter of safety (fire in a theather and all).

CourtFool wrote:
Anyone with half a brain knows that guns are used to injure and kill people. In fact, burning the Qu'ran does not impart any more capacity to do harm, whereas, a gun, does in fact imbue individuals with an increased capacity to harm another.

OK, let's look at it a different way...you set a gun down in front of person A and sit down across from him. You sit down in front of person B and begin to insult their mother, their family, their religion, etc. Which is more likely to cause you harm? Making inflammatory comments, in my mind, is more dangerous than simply making an object.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
CourtFool wrote:

I agree a gun is a tool, but one with a very singular purpose. I am not advocating gun control. But we all know what guns are used for.

Hunting?

Sczarni

Radical fundamentalists celebrate a victory over the US by burning a flag.

They protest the US's (and allies) actions by burning flags.

They are willing and eager to strap on explosives and suicide for the greater good of their side.

A few radical fundamentalists (of the Christian persuasion) burning their "enemy's" holy book doesn't seem out of character for this kind of exchange.

When you have Christian suicide bombers taking out marketplaces and police stations, then we'll have something to dialogue about.

Free speech means you have to suck up those bits you don't like, in order to keep all the bits you do, simple as that. These guys in Fla. are crazy, money-hungry, and short-sighted, but still operating within the paradigm of "dialogue" begun by their Iranian/Afghani counterparts, as well as within the letter of the law in the US.

As far as prosecuting them for treason or negligent homicide....I find the direct connection between this group's actions and the actions of already hostile insurgents tenuous at best.


Xpltvdeleted wrote:
They are actively hindering a war effort...that is treason.

Abandon hope, all ye who enter here...

Dark Archive

psionichamster wrote:


When you have Christian suicide bombers taking out marketplaces and police stations, then we'll have something to dialogue about.

Northern Ireland, the abortion clinic bomber, the man who shot Dr. George Tiler in church, etc..


psionichamster wrote:
When you have Christian suicide bombers taking out marketplaces and police stations, then we'll have something to dialogue about.

Gods, I should know better, but:

1. Does blowing up abortion clinics count?
2. Please don't ever use "dialogue" as a verb again. A kitten is tortured every time you do. ;)

Liberty's Edge

CourtFool wrote:
I understand you have strong feelings about the war.

Missed this. Yes, I do have strong feelings about the war but, surprisingly, they are negative. We went into Afghanistan going after Osama (Usama-never understood the two different spellings). It's been 9 years...if we were going to find him we would have done it by now. Americans are dying over there and they don't even want our help. We need to move away from being world police and back toward a more isolationist policy (IMO). Everybody hates us, so lets stop helping them.

Liberty's Edge

Jeremy Mcgillan wrote:
psionichamster wrote:


When you have Christian suicide bombers taking out marketplaces and police stations, then we'll have something to dialogue about.

Northern Ireland, the abortion clinic bomber, the man who shot Dr. George Tiler in church, etc..

Timothy McVeigh...but I guess these won't fit the "suicide" descriptor. If anything that makes x-ian terrorists more dangerous b/c they live to bomb another day.

Liberty's Edge

bugleyman wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
They are actively hindering a war effort...that is treason.

Abandon hope, all ye who enter here...

What?! It's true...

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

While we are dialoguing about this, consider ...

How many of us had actually heard of the "Dove World Outreach Center" before this incident.


I'm going to take a fairly radical stance at first here. Understand that I'm not committed to this point of view, but I don't want to throw it away unexamined, as it were:

What if this crazy preacher's logic has merit, even if his act seems atrocious? Basically what the guy is saying is that "Muslims tell us not to draw cartoons, or to make South Park parodies, and we back down out of fear. Well, it's that kind of appeasement [at the risk of committing a Godwin] that led to WWII. Coexistence is fine, but this total submission by gradual degrees isn't working -- so it's time to make a firm stand that we're not going to let them dictate to us anymore. If an innocent cartoon spurs so many people to murder, let's see what burning their book will do."

How much is enough? For the U.S. to censor South Park because it might offend Muslims is apparently fine. Refusing to print cartoons in the newspaper because they might offend Muslims seems to be official policy for most of the Western world. Telling topless women on the beach in France that they have to cover up, because they're offending Muslims, has already begun. Parts of London have gone so far as to allow Sharia law.

Is all that not enough? Maybe we should start requiring the burqua for all women, too, so as not to offend Muslims? And maybe we need to scrap the Constitution, too -- at first just the parts we're afraid might offend Muslims, then the parts that conflict with Sharia, and then the rest?

Or is it so crazy to say, "Guess what? It's time to call their bluff! Let's see what happens if not only to we fail to meet their demands, but we deliberately provoke them?"

Feel free to discuss.


Xpltvdeleted wrote:
We need to move away from being world police and back toward a more isolationist policy (IMO).

I agree, although, I do not think we can afford to be completely isolated.

Liberty's Edge

CourtFool wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
We need to move away from being world police and back toward a more isolationist policy (IMO).
I agree, although, I do not think we can afford to be completely isolated.

Well, pulling out of any foreign engagements and putting an end to free trade agreements that hurt us more than help us would be a good start.


Xpltvdeleted wrote:
CourtFool wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
We need to move away from being world police and back toward a more isolationist policy (IMO).
I agree, although, I do not think we can afford to be completely isolated.
Well, pulling out of any foreign engagements and putting an end to free trade agreements that hurt us more than help us would be a good start.

No offense but from what I have seen the US rarely actually follows the entirety of free trade agreements in the first place... but that is a discussion for a different thread.


Kirth Gersen wrote:

I'm going to take a fairly radical stance at first here. Understand that I'm not committed to this point of view, but I don't want to throw it away unexamined, as it were:

What if this crazy preacher's logic has merit, even if his act seems atrocious? Basically what the guy is saying is that "Muslims tell us not to draw cartoons, or to make South Park parodies, and we back down out of fear. Well, it's that kind of appeasement [at the risk of committing a Godwin] that led to WWII. Coexistence is fine, but this total submission by gradual degrees isn't working -- so it's time to make a firm stand that we're not going to let them dictate to us anymore. If an innocent cartoon spurs so many people to murder, let's see what burning their book will do."

How much is enough? For the U.S. to censor South Park because it might offend Muslims is apparently fine. Refusing to print cartoons in the newspaper because they might offend Muslims seems to be official policy for most of the Western world. Telling topless women on the beach in France that they have to cover up, because they're offending Muslims, has already begun. Parts of London have gone so far as to allow Sharia law.

Is all that not enough? Maybe we should start requiring the burqua for all women, too, so as not to offend Muslims? And maybe we need to scrap the Constitution, too -- at first just the parts we're afraid might offend Muslims, then the parts that conflict with Sharia, and then the rest?

Or is it so crazy to say, "Guess what? It's time to call their bluff! Let's see what happens if not only to we fail to meet their demands, but we deliberately provoke them?"

Feel free to discuss.

Ah, Kirth. Always a fount of radical ideas that are NOT used to bludgeon the opposition into unconsciousness. I'm glad you're here for this one.

I'm all for failing to meet demands, I'm not into deliberate provocation. I'd rather have disappointed Muslims as opposed to ones who feel their anger is justified.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Or is it so crazy to say, "Guess what? It's time to call their bluff! Let's see what happens if not only to we fail to meet their demands, but we deliberately provoke them?"

The problem I have with it is, in this specific example, I believe it to be hugely hypocritical. I doubt the pastor would be as open to a Bible burning.


Kirth Gersen wrote:

I'm going to take a fairly radical stance at first here. Understand that I'm not committed to this point of view, but I don't want to throw it away unexamined, as it were:

What if this crazy preacher's logic has merit, even if his act seems atrocious? Basically what the guy is saying is that "Muslims tell us not to draw cartoons, or to make South Park parodies, and we back down out of fear. Well, it's that kind of appeasement [at the risk of committing a Godwin] that led to WWII. Coexistence is fine, but this total submission by gradual degrees isn't working -- so it's time to make a firm stand that we're not going to let them dictate to us anymore. If an innocent cartoon spurs so many people to murder, let's see what burning their book will do."

How much is enough? For the U.S. to censor South Park because it might offend Muslims is apparently fine. Refusing to print cartoons in the newspaper because they might offend Muslims seems to be official policy for most of the Western world. Telling topless women on the beach in France that they have to cover up, because they're offending Muslims, has already begun. Parts of London have gone so far as to allow Sharia law.

Is all that not enough? Maybe we should start requiring the burqua for all women, too, so as not to offend Muslims? And maybe we need to scrap the Constitution, too -- at first just the parts we're afraid might offend Muslims, then the parts that conflict with Sharia, and then the rest?

Or is it so crazy to say, "Guess what? It's time to call their bluff! Let's see what happens if not only to we fail to meet their demands, but we deliberately provoke them?"

Feel free to discuss.

Bravo.

Though I doubt their reasons are that well thought out.

Sovereign Court

Xpltvdeleted wrote:
Jeremy Mcgillan wrote:
psionichamster wrote:


When you have Christian suicide bombers taking out marketplaces and police stations, then we'll have something to dialogue about.

Northern Ireland, the abortion clinic bomber, the man who shot Dr. George Tiler in church, etc..
Timothy McVeigh...but I guess these won't fit the "suicide" descriptor. If anything that makes x-ian terrorists more dangerous b/c they live to bomb another day.

I would think there would be some difference between the organized terrorism of muslim extremists who number in the thousands vs. the occasional lunatic who decides to take his anger out on abortion clinics.

Because by that logic, we can now lump all environmentalists and atheists as terrorists too because of the Discovery Channel gunman.

And for the record, McVeigh was raised Catholic but became an agnostic and some stuff I read about him suggested he was an atheist.

1 to 50 of 642 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / This makes no sense to me [political / religious] All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.