1 of 4
1
Extremism, christianity dwarfs Islam
Posted: 18 February 2012 05:08 PM   [ Ignore ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2012-02-18

A lot has been stated by Sam outlining the dangers of islamist extremism.

Reference has been made to christianity stating things such as, there are reasons that there are no christian suicide bombers.
Fair enough of a statement.

However, to be fair, we should look at the religion followed by US leaders, christianity and their use of it to justify their horrendous actions.

Christianity has in it’s scriptures verses that condone killing just as does islam.
In fact, the bible writes of killing in the name of god to be praise worthy.
In fact, millions upon millions of people across the world have been slayed over the centuries with the supposed blessing of the biblical god.

In more current times, if we are to take a look at the last several decades, christian leaders in the US have slain several million people, most being non-combatants.  This fact is grossly overlooked by Sam on a regular basis.

Islamist extremists have without a doubt committed acts that by any reasonable measure are inhuman.
However, they have done so because of massive attacks on their people by the western world.
The christian based killing of people in the muslim world has been done by what most would consider not to be extremist christians, but middle of the road christians.  That being true of the leaders and the armies who carry out the orders.  Also, this has been done without atrocities committed against them.  Even 9/11, which some believe to be the worst crime imaginable, is peanuts compared with even 1 single attack from the Americans, Faluja being a good example.  Committed against a people who have never attacked the west, and who did not support their leader Saddam.  An entire city was essentially leveled in this attack. 

I should note that I am not a christian, I’m a non-believer in all religions.  I think that religion is in itself a false and sometimes dangerous belief system.

That said, i just wanted to bring some clarity to this issue.  The most dangerous religion based on a body count, is christianity.  Also, for future dangers, christian dominated nations are the sole user of nuclear arms against defenseless cities, and also happen to possess the majority of nuclear weapons.

So to sum up, I think the most dangerous people to fear is the US government and military.  Which is easily demonstrated not by philosophical means, but by mathematics.

Mikael

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 February 2012 10:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  147
Joined  2011-05-06

The Americans weren’t operating as Christians per se. Many of them were not Christians for instance. Just because a pool of people is drawn from a nation where the majority religion- not to say majority- is X doesn’t mean that everything they do is because they are mostly X.


If the US was acting like the terrorist Muslims   in Pak. or elsewhere, then they would say “we’re dropping this bomb on all the unbelievers because they haven’t accepted Jesus Christ as their savior.


In fact they pointedly DO NOT say this or anything like it.


There are plenty of Christian terrorists in the US and elsewhere. Uganda is basically a country of Christian terrorists. The Fundamentalists and Evangelicals in the US would use violence against non-believers in the US if they could get away with it. They actively work towards a day when it will be possible to do so.


Christians aren’t any better than any other proselytizing religion, however as a historical fact of this particular moment in time, it’s the Muslim countries which are theocracies (which Christian countries were mere centuries ago) with all the persecution and violence that always accompanies any such theocracy.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 12:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  147
Joined  2011-05-06

QUOTE: However, they have done so because of massive attacks on their people by the western world.


Come on now. This has nothing to do with why they treat their women like chattel and stone them for adultery and kill people who aren’t Muslim *just because* they’re not Muslim and kill people for drawing Mohammed. Be truthful and complete. Christianity has done as bad in its day and as I said, would again if given the chance. But that doesn’t excuse Islam from being just as barbaric.


It’s not that it’s Muslim vs Christian, it’s that it’s

rational vs irrational,
conservative religion against modernism,
conservative religion against science ,
conservative religionists vs civilization.
faith vs science.
unreality vs reality.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 04:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  3
Joined  2012-02-19

The issue is religion itself.  As Hitchens said “Religion Poisons Everything”.  It is disheartening to think how much human progress has been impeded by the religious impulse.  The moment that the majority of humanity drops religion and embraces Humanism is the moment when true human progress will see an exponential rise around the world.  As long as we are brainwashed from birth to demonize “The Other”, we will never realize the true potential of the human race to solve and transcend the seemingly intractable problems plaguing us.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 February 2012 12:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2012-02-18

To softwarevisualization…

I agree that many muslim beliefs and actions are simply due to the quran. 
Treatment of women for instance, and the several you’d mentioned.
Atrocious behavior, I agree.

My point about the suicide bombers was intended to reflect upon just that activity.
I’ve been researching world political and US foreign policy issues for awhile now and anyone who has understands that people who blow themselves up in an attack are doing so because of a couple things.  They are being suppressed, and don’t have weaponry that can fight against the weaponry used against them.  Suicide bombing isn’t solely a muslim action btw.  As we all know it was used by Japan against the Americans. 

It can be said that this is a lone exception to the rule, and that’s fair enough.  But the main issue here is not whether someone kills themselves in the attack.  For as long as war has been fought there has been aggression and retaliation.  When discussing suicide bombers in the past several decades which is what Sam is referring to, it is ‘always’ an action in response to aggression and suppression.  Remove those two factors and the suicide bombing stops, it really is that simple.

Again, I do agree with you that the quran does teach some nasty stuff, as do the other biblical religions.

 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 February 2012 06:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  147
Joined  2011-05-06

Mikael:
Here are the points you made that I disagree with:


*christian leaders in the US have slain several million people, most being non-combatants. 


Not as christians for christianity, so the point is a non-point.


*Islamist extremists have without a doubt committed acts that by any reasonable measure are inhuman.
However, they have done so because of massive attacks on their people by the western world.


This is untrue. No one attacked Saudi, the Americans just showed up b.c they were invited by the Saudis and this is what pissed off UBL and led to 9-11.


Remember, the US fought FOR the Taliban in the 70s and 80s and has fought on the side of Muslims in the Bosnian War and ALSO the Afghanistan Wars and Iraq war since all those people whom we were trying freeing were also Muslims.

 

Then we come to the Arab Uprising . is this other than what the hated neocons predicted would happen if we toppled Saddam? Put it this way, if countries leaders were being toppled and dictators put in their place, would the anti_US crowd blame it on the US? Say they were secretly behind it, the way they are behind everything else int he ME ? Yes, they would, you know they would.

 

So now when longstanding dictators are being overthrown after 9-11 and the Iraq War and it’‘s an article of faith amongst the intelligence agencies and also the US public that the seeds of extremism in the ME are the oppressive anti-democratic regimes there, why do you doubt that the US is instigating the overthrow of these regimes? But helping that along, which we’re doing, is nothing but helping Muslims obtain their freedom.

 

*The christian based killing of people in the muslim world has been done by what most would consider not to be extremist christians, but middle of the road christians. 


No one is killing anyone because they are christians.


*Faluja etc etc


Please give the world your formula, which for some reason yo’re hiding, on how a war can be fought with zero civilian casualties. The US doesn’t know how, so please, let us in on your secret.

 


*Committed against a people who have never attacked the west, and who did not support their leader Saddam.  An entire city was essentially leveled in this attack.


A city yes, the people living in it, mostly, no. They fled, probably 70-90% of them.


*.  The most dangerous religion based on a body count, is christianity. 


Once again, no one is attacking anyone as christians. They are not trying to impose Christianity on the populations and they are not fighting for their religion. That is not what the US does.


* Also, for future dangers, christian dominated nations are the sole user of nuclear arms against defenseless cities, and also happen to possess the majority of nuclear weapons.


A remnant of WWII. We have never used nukes except against Japan to end WWII. No one has any reason to believe we would. Moreover, most people would like to get rid of them b.c they’re fundamentally unusable as a weapon at least by the US . The problem is, other nations have them so disarmament removes the possibility of retaliatory deterrence. This is basic stuff I believe you understand.

 

[ Edited: 20 February 2012 06:50 AM by softwarevisualization]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 February 2012 04:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2012-02-18

In response….


“”“*christian leaders in the US have slain several million people, most being non-combatants.

Not as christians for christianity, so the point is a non-point.”“”

That was not my point.  Sam talks about islam being a greater threat than christianity.  The examples he gives point to suicide bombers and acts of terrorism.  If you look at what the US has done worldwide, it dwarfs any and all actions by radical islamists.
Now I understand that the US actions were not done ‘as’ christians and done by some non-christians, but the actions were consistent with these leaders’ understanding of their faith, just as is the case with islam.  I ask you this, if radical islamists commit crimes in the name of islam and christians do 1000 times more crimes in the name of peace (this is fairly accurate), which side would you feel is more threatening?  It’s an easy answer for me.

Yes, the US supported, trained, armed, financed etc the mujahideen in their fight against Russia.  They had many on the payroll leading right up to 9/11.  This is nothing new to the US.  The school of the america’s was essentially a training base for death squads.  Many people in S.A. have fought against it as well as Americans, and finally won, only to have new schools open up under different names.  They have taken down many peaceful leaders in South America, Asia, the M.E. for decades.
The bigger threat worldwide comes from christians, regardless of whether they do it in the name of their religion or some other bullshit facade.  I can’t blame christianity directly, but I could point to countless passages in the bible that condone slaughter, just as Sam points to passages in the Quran which condone and support killing in the name of allah.  The point I’m making here is that if christians (all US presidents since ww1) run around the planet killing anyone who dares to stand up for their own rights against US interests, as they’ve done for decades, This threat is orders of magnitude greater than the threat of an isolated group of extremists, by any measure.  You can even take christianity out of my argument and replace it with the US.
My point remains the same.

For Sam to take such extreme issue with islam while leaving out the threat the US poses to the world is greatly irresponsible.


“*Islamist extremists have without a doubt committed acts that by any reasonable measure are inhuman.
However, they have done so because of massive attacks on their people by the western world.

This is untrue. No one attacked Saudi, the Americans just showed up b.c they were invited by the Saudis and this is what pissed off UBL and led to 9-11.”

If you believe that UBL was responsible for 9/11, well then I’ve been writing this for nothing.  You really need to do some honest research instead of parroting the official story.  That’s truly sad.  And UBL immediately after the attacks went on record saying that this was not his work, widely reported in Europe, not mentioned here.  One thing we know for sure about the attacks, the US gov and military did ‘nothing’ to stop it.  Including before it happened when, among others, Sibel Edmonds, an FBI agent was screaming bloody murder about an impending attack like the one that came, was silenced along with like minded people in her field.  The heads of the official report on the issue, the commission report stated openly after it was released that the government, military and the faa lied to them, covered up and omitted much of the truth.


“Then we come to the Arab Uprising . is this other than what the hated neocons predicted would happen if we toppled Saddam? Put it this way, if countries leaders were being toppled and dictators put in their place, would the anti_US crowd blame it on the US? Say they were secretly behind it, the way they are behind everything else int he ME ? Yes, they would, you know they would.”

The West ‘is’ involved in ‘all’ of the m.e. uprisings.  I can’t say they were involved in its fruition, but since they’ve been sending in weapons and bombing the shit out of those people.  Peace by Bombs.  The American way.  And your point about the anti-us crowd is telling of where you stand. 


Any way, if you can find it in yourself to support what the US is and has been doing worldwide for decades, which is essentially Empire building, then go ahead. 

I remain with the facts.  The US is an imperial worldwide superpower that will crush any group with whatever force or atrocity is deemed necessary should they feel resistance to their domination.  A far greater threat than a relic group of fringe extremists who btw, were trained, armed and financed by none other than…..you know who. 

 

 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 February 2012 03:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  147
Joined  2011-05-06

You’re contradicting yourself within the SAME sentence with this:

*Now I understand that the US actions were not done ‘as’ christians and done by some non-christians*...


and then you finish the sentence with this!


*but the actions were consistent with these leaders’ understanding of their faith, just as is the case with islam. *


Gotta make up your own mind about what you’re saying b4 you say it.


Either they were acting as christians or they weren’t If you think they were, then you’re just wrong. They were acting as agents of the United States of America.  It’s the height of irrationality and nonsense making to let you contradict yourself at will.


*  I ask you this, if radical islamists commit crimes in the name of islam and christians do 1000 times more crimes in the name of peace (this is fairly accurate), which side would you feel is more threatening?  It’s an easy answer for me.*

 

The US went into Iraq b/c they perceived it to be a threat to their national security, correctly or otherwise. It’s interesting that no ne who is allegedly sympathetic to the people in the ME gives a shit that the US killed the dictator and toppled the regime the people in ME were living under. Were YOU going to do that? Was ANYONE going to do that.. some day… one year and meanwhile all those people would go on suffering under Uday and Cusay.

 


The golden rule is , do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If I were lvingin under Saddam, I would want the Americans to come and fuck him up good, even if it meant I might die or my family might die.


Doing nothing about Saddam- generations of people suffer into perpetuity.


Killing Saddam- some people from one generation suffer a lot , all generations forward have a chance at being free.


You choose. I know what I’d choose.


* The school of the america’s was essentially a training base for death squads. *


Now you’re dragging something new into the conversation. Stay focused. We are talking about the ME not SA or Chile in 72 or anything else. I am not going to have a convo if you’re going to randomly drag everything into it by claiming “it’s all connected, don’t ya se???!!” Talk about one thing at a time.


*christians (all US presidents since ww1) *


There you go again we’re back to our first point. No one acted with christianity as a motive. You have to understand what that fact means to your argument It nullifies it.  If they had said “and here’s one for Jesus Christ, fuckers, now believe or die!!” the way the Islamicists and Bin Dead For A’While Now had done, you’d have a point. But they didn’t. So you don’t have a point. So quit saying it or tell me why I am wrong on this specific point without dragging into the argument how much you hate the US generally.

 

*You can even take christianity out of my argument and replace it with the US.
My point remains the same.*

 


Finally. Now we can move on in the conversation

 


Well I agree that the US for years pursued a foreign policy that was horrendous. TO understand the US you have to understand the internal politics of the US. Essentially, there are the sane rational peace loving tolerant egalitarian people who want things to be fair and generally good for everyone , that’s their goal. They go by the name of liberals.


Then there are the bellicose, xenophobic, greedy, sociopaths who are looking to exploit everything and everyone and could give a shit about who gets abused or what as long as they get theirs. These people are called conservatives, they are christians for sure but also they go under other names like “libertarian” and “republican” and always dress their ideas up as either god’s will or a fight for “freedom” .

 


These two groups of people hate each other completely. The conservatives would kill every liberal if they ever got the chance. 

Everything you’re complaining about is the actions of the latter group. They are about 25% of the US population, but about 50% of the voters. They   vote, nearly all of them. This is not true of liberals, especially young liberals.  They don’t vote nearly as much. This is why the conservatives engage in voter suppression tactics, as seen this election. They know they’re a minority but they win elections because the liberals don’t vote and they want to keep it that way.

 

I do what I can to stop conservatives in this country. In a sense, all science is one long journey leading to the extinction of their “belief system” whether it’s some jihadi in Afghanistan who wants to suppress women’s rights in his country or it’s some 19th century conservative American who wants to suppress women’s rights in the US , it’s all the same conservative mind. Conservatism is a disease and the people who practice it anywhere on earth bring war and destruction and violence to other people and to the earth. The purpose of civilization is to roll back conservatives and make the world inhospitable to them and the things they do.

 

We’re not there yet anywhere on earth as far as I can see. It will probably require genetic manipulation to really extinguish conservatives because they might, possibly, just be born that way. This is who human beings are in part and there’s nothing we can do about it to wipe it out right now. 


Every conservative is at heart a suicide wielding jihadi with some sort of bomb strapped to his or her chest. If it’s not killing infidels in the ME or killing women or supressing working people or jacking he tax code to favor themselves or reading Ayn Rand and deciding all that “altruism shit” is just garbage, then it’s reading some holy book and deciding god wants you to kill other people or it’s killing the earth with global warming so you can go on making money.. Conservatism is a disease. America has its share of conservatives but so does every other nation, especially in the ME. 

 

Your argument is not with America, your argument is with conservatives anywhere at all times and places.

 

 

 

 

[ Edited: 22 February 2012 04:00 AM by softwarevisualization]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 February 2012 05:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  147
Joined  2011-05-06

If you believe that UBL was responsible for 9/11, well then I’ve been writing this for nothing.  You really need to do some honest research instead of parroting the official story.

I wish conspiracy whackjobs would start their posts with “some people consider me a conspiracy whackjob but…” I take it you belong to the LIHOP conspiracy. You have zero material evidence only isolated facts that you then put together to suit your preferred narrative.

 

And you’re wrong about me. I DID look into whether LIHOP was a serious possibility, for a long time,  and it’s just not.  Case closed. If you want to talk about it, go talk to someone else. I did my civic duty and take it too seriously to give any credence to what amounts to fantasy projections of conspiracies superimposed over tragic but expected levels of incompetence which is what 9-11 was.

The West ‘is’ involved in ‘all’ of the m.e. uprisings.  I can’t say they were involved in its fruition, but since they’ve been sending in weapons and bombing the shit out of those people.  Peace by Bombs.  The American way.

 

OK so you admit The US is involved in what goes on in the ME and you’re consciously electing to totally ignore the fact that US activities have been to free people in Tunisia, Afg , Iraq , Libya , Egypt and if my Congressional members and President will listen to me - Syria.

 

If US is to be blamed for shit they did in the 50s 60s and 70s then to be honest and consistent you have to praise them for what they’re doing now.

 

Oh but that contradicts your “bad America narrative”, so you ignore it. That’s called “intellectual dishonesty”. No one can argue with someone who is intellectually dishonest because they refuse to abide by any rules except those that please them. They essentially make up the rules as they go along and then - inevitably- declare that they have won the argument.

 

Can I ask you a question? People here are here because they’re dedicated to reason and where it takes them and they think we need more of it in the world and not less. Your kind of thinking represents the “less” part of that.  So why are you here thinking that contradicting yourself and cherry picking evidence and engaging in conspiracy mongering is going to be well received? Because it’s not.

 

Any way, if you can find it in yourself to support what the US is and has been doing worldwide for decades, which is essentially Empire building, then go ahead.

Stop reading Chomsky. Stop reading Chomsky. Stop reading Chomsky.

The US is an imperial worldwide superpower that will crush any group with whatever force or atrocity is deemed necessary should they feel resistance to their domination.  A far greater threat than a relic group of fringe extremists who btw, were trained, armed and financed by none other than…..you know who.

 

This is the kind of non-thought that just falls out of your brain like a horse taking a shit on a dusty road if you make the fatal mistake of immersing yourself in Chomsky-esque “non-analysis analysis”  all the time. 

 

Don’t do that. Put the Chomsky pipe down and then swear it off forever. Learn to think like thinking mattered, like what you thought had some import and could influence the world. Respect yourself enough to be skeptical about your own preferred way of viewing the world- the one that just feels right in your gut. Respect other people’s time and attention enough to not go off on them with a bunch of cherry picked facts whose only purpose is to decorate some pre-existing narrative that, quite frankly, just gets you off.

 

I have to say it’s hard to imagine what you’re thinking when you accuse me of being some sort of thoughtless flag waver when I totally agreed with you about our interventions in Chile and Iran , SA and elsewhere in the 50s 60s 70s and beyond. . All those actions were morally wrong and there’s more like them we could site from that time,  but- here’s the the thing- the guys who did that are dead or dying and their way of thinking about the world is totally dead. Think Kissinger and his ilk.

 


Get clear on something. America is not a entity with a unitary mind that persists over the course of time. I call this the Persistent Mind Fallacy of history.  Essentially we start talking about nations as though they had the properties of people - a single seat of will and consciousness, a persistent identity that endures over time and doesn’t change or changes only very slowly and not in fundamental ways, the bearer of character that expresses itself thorough its actions. Yeah shit like that. Nations are not so constituted and especially democracies are not so constituted. A dictatorship like Egypt that functions as the agent of a single man or family , maybe that nation acts like that while that man reigns and then continues when the man’s son takes over. This is clearly what is going on in Syria right now.

 


But a democracy is going to change with changing administrations and changing public perceptions. That’s why civil society is where the REAL battle is in a democracy. Whoever influences the populace influences eventually the leaders and what the populace will permit them to do once they get into office not to mention that the leaders are themselves drawn from the populace and therefore share their general perception of current events broadly speaking.

 

IMO America is up to its balls in the overthrow of dictators in the ME right now, just because, as we agree, we’re never disinterested parties. To make sure that these movements are seen as indigenous and are considered legitimate, we’re trying hard not to be seen instigating and assisting them.  This is just my opinion but I also have circumstantial evidence which I freely admit is inconclusive. There was a visit by students from Tunisia where they met with US Congressmen extensively just before the revolution.  There is the basic fact that all US intelligence agencies and analysts are in agreement that the ultimate cause of 9-11 was the fucking swamp of dictators in the ME and the repressive societies they oversaw. There’s the actual expression of the desire and determination to start dictator dominoes falling in the ME by senior executives of the Bush Admin who themselves would have been advised by senior people in the military who would still be in place and influential… call it the contiguity of foreign policy objectives owing to an agreed upon perception of the problem.

 

 

 

 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 February 2012 06:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2012-02-18

Look, I disagree with so much of what you’ve said that I think it’s waste of my time.
I’m sure you feel the same way.

I’m not even responding to your message, please afford me the same.

Mikael

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 February 2012 07:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  147
Joined  2011-05-06

Hey buddy you were the one who came   here making these gigantic pronouncements about the US and christianity and islam and everything else in the world weren’t you?


And now that your solicitation has elicited a response you can’t cope with, you really wish the whole thing would just go away.


I love it when people with anti-rational world views show up to public forums thinking that everyone is one of their crazy friends and is going to accord their non-reality some measure of respect. OR they think they’re really on to something , or their position is unassailable.

So why did you come to a discussion forum and start making all these assertions about the world if not to discuss them? Oh I see, you only want to discuss them with people who agree with you and people who wont’ point out the logical fallacies which compose your world view.


Well, see ya pal.  Thanks for giving me the opportunity to pull the wheels off the   smelly little shit wagon you rumble around the world in and call home.  I love it when a fool gives mouth to completely asinine ideas that for one reason or another actually have some purchase in the larger world. How else would I ever be afforded the opportunity to perform the public service of kicking their ass from hell to breakfast?


So…... thanks, Mikal !

 

 

[ Edited: 23 February 2012 07:29 AM by softwarevisualization]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 February 2012 01:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  106
Joined  2012-01-09

Its definitely a mistake to attribute to christianity the actions of the “west” at large.  That said, comparing the atrocities of different religions is wasted effort.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 February 2012 03:43 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  12
Joined  2012-02-23

Softwarevisualization

I like your point about the developmental ‘nature’ of liberal democracies but I think you are simplistic in your claim that all that is good is liberal / all that is bad is conservative. These political dispositions may reflect deeper evolutionary impulses and I suspect that they both have their uses. In short, sometimes it is adaptive for us to be cautious (conservative) and sometimes it is adaptive to be adventurous ( liberal.) 

Also, you said that much US. foreign policy during the Cold War had been unacceptable. I agree with you but if you are referring to American aggression in Indochina or support for numerous vicious dictatorships, then you must acknowledge that Truman, Kennedy and LBJ are just as culpable in these deeds as Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan. Or don’t those Democratic presidents count as liberal in your eyes? 

 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 February 2012 03:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2012-02-18

To QuakePhil…

I agree, the actions of western countries can’t be blamed on their predominant religion, being christianity.
Also, the same goes for other countries, or course.
My point in bringing up the US positions on foreign policy issues is because religious people attribute their morality to their religious beliefs.  Certainly there are christians within the US that vehemently oppose these policies, and those that favour them.
But being that there is room within the faith and scripture to justify such slaughter is damning imo.
It’s easier to point the finger at islamic extremists because they wrap themselves in allah like a robe.
Though if you were to ask US presidents past and present if they thought god was on their side the answer would be yes.
This has even been stated by several presidents.
So one side believes it’s god’s work to kill the other, and vise versa.  Not much difference there.


Some might not call it slaughter, but I feel that when the body count is at a ratio of 100’s - 1, that is something more than a battle.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2012 04:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  147
Joined  2011-05-06
cosmobonobo - 23 February 2012 03:43 PM

Softwarevisualization

I like your point about the developmental ‘nature’ of liberal democracies but I think you are simplistic in your claim that all that is good is liberal / all that is bad is conservative. These political dispositions may reflect deeper evolutionary impulses and I suspect that they both have their uses. In short, sometimes it is adaptive for us to be cautious (conservative) and sometimes it is adaptive to be adventurous ( liberal.)

I am really talking about the present day situation in the American political scene when I am talking about conservative (Santorum, Koch brothers, Rush Limbaugh , Fox News) vs liberal (MS-NBC, scientists and Al Gore) . I thought I was trying to explain the current inner workings of the us politiscape to someone who is foreign to them (Mikhal).


There are as many lunatics on the left in the world as there are on the right.; I think I was just talking to one of them. 9-11 conspiracy mongers and Chomsky -imbued America-haters.  I don’t consider those lunatics to be liberals in the sense of “the great liberal tradition”  of tolerance, concern for community and environment, evidence based reasoning and egalitarianism. These are the things that most of liberal America is *about* today.

 

For whatever reason all the authoritarian / reality-denying energy is on the right in the US today. Elsewhere at other times it has in fact been on the left, although as I said, I don’t consider this to be “liberal”.

 

I really can’t imagine a civilization in which the Rick Santorum people will ever be relevant again unless we do ourselves in through nukes or global warming.

 

Essentially Ricky’s brain was good for the following situation. When were were small tribes living in closely knit communities where unconstrained expressions of individual jealousy could easily leave the best two hunters dead and the rest of the tribe hating each other, which male was entitled to copulatory rights with which female was something that had to be agreed upon by all lest jealousy driven warfare erupt between suitors.

 

In THAT situation, the best tactic might be 1) treat women like chattel 2) have unions be indissoluble 3) punish adultery and make it a sin 4) have a Supreme Being sanctify each union- just so potential rivals could feel properly intimidated.


But that really hasn’t been necessary for a five, ten   thousand years now.


Yet Ricky’s brain still tells Ricky that that’s the way it has to be.


Ditto the processing of new evidence from climatologists that says we’re all going to die if we don’t do something fast about global warming. It’s cute when fundies and evangelicals reject evolution ; it’s not so cute when they form an effective political block to taking action needed to stop us all from dying . How do they go about this? By using the same intellectually dishonest debating techniques and evidence defying narratives they’ve been trained up in by proponents of Intelligent Design and Creationism. All the while theyremain smugly protected from serious public scrutiny by the “liberal”  media which lets pass their astonishing claims which amount to nothing more than lying about the nature of objective, provable reality.


Well, at least that’s going to come to very violent end within our lifetimes If this is where religious freedom takes humanity, then religious freedom is fucked. The first organizing principle of any society is survival, not religion. The second organizing principle of any society is the public administration of justice. Show yourself to be on the opposite side of either of those principles, as fundies and evangelicals currently are,  and see how it goes for you.


I actually pity evangelicals and fundies for what society is going to do to them presently.

 

This type of conservatism is a fucking disease that will literally kill us all. Mao’s agricultural plans were a fucking disease that killed a few, tens of millions. Big difference.


Besides, Mao was a doctrinaire conservative. He believed in the eternal veracity and universal applicability of a certain set of fixed, unchanging truths and was immune to reasoned argument from any source including science. The great liberal tradition of evidence based reasoning is just the opposite of this.

 

 


Also, you said that much US. foreign policy during the Cold War had been unacceptable. I agree with you but if you are referring to American aggression in Indochina or support for numerous vicious dictatorships, then you must acknowledge that Truman, Kennedy and LBJ are just as culpable in these deeds as Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan. Or don’t those Democratic presidents count as liberal in your eyes?

 

It’s partly what I said before I am explaining the current politiscape .

 

Also, Kennedy probably did want out of Indochina. LBJ found liberal race-relations religion after the long hot summers of the 60s when it became apparent that the South was not going to be swayed by any of ” that Mah-tin Lutha’ Niggah’s Mahches an’ whatnot”  and Bobby Seal put a gun into the hands of the Black Panthers and cities started to burn.

 

I don’t count him as a liberal despite his legislative efforts and the truth is the whole country including all our leaders used to be a lot more socially conservative. Blacks were niggers and women were chattel. It’s only after the 60s that you even have the possibility for a liberal leader to emerge and take power.

 

If you look over the history of American society it’s cutting edge liberal ideas that have moved us forward socially and of course in science, and those have always been fought tooth and nail by conservatives. Slavery, suffrage 40 hour week, workplace safety, product safety, environmentalism all were controversial cutting edge ideas that conservatives screamed would result the end of the world.  Recall that Ford and GM both swore that forcing manufacturers to install air bags would kill the industry- no doubt. This was years after they were in Europe.  Remember what they did to Nader.  It’s always the same thing from conservatives - government regulation will just destroy industry.

 

Global warming is this era’s civil rights, except it’s even more important than that since the entire fate of all the world’s peoples for all times lies in the balance now. . What it is is fucking WWIII. You either understand how that statement’s exactly right now or you’ll come to admit it later. Yet nothing’s changed with them thye still are screaming about the “great global warming hoax” and denying science same as they always have because by definition they don’t change.

 

A creature that can’t change in a changing world is the definition of an extinction in process.

 

 

 

 

[ Edited: 24 February 2012 06:36 AM by softwarevisualization]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 April 2012 08:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  51
Joined  2009-06-26

I have always understood Sam to mean Islam is a bigger threat because it is in their teachings of the Koran that they SHOULD murder infidels…not only should be MUST. Christianity, flawed as it is, doesn’t have scriptures that order christians to kill infidels, that it is their duty to do so and that doing so will get them into heaven.

Can’t speak for Sam obviously, but that has been my take on what he has said.

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 4
1
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed