David ([info]braddogg) wrote,
2006-02-04 14:21:00
Embassies Torched as Cartoon Furor Grows

Summary: A Danish newspaper printed a cartoon of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban. It is apparently against Muslim idolatry laws to create a picture or depiction of the Prophet (a claim Field Marshal of Rationality [info]erniecu73 has thoroughly refuted, showing that medieval Muslims had no problem depicting the Prophet, and that modern depictions have not caused violent protest). In Syria, the local Muslim population is torching the Norwegian and Danish embassies.

Where were the massive protests when Muslims killed a few thousand civilians on 9/11 on behalf of their religion?

There's only one proper response to these firebombings: Turn off the computer, close your eyes, cover your ears, and chant to yourself, "Islam is a religion of peace. Islam is a religion of peace. Islam is a religion of peace. Islam is a religion of peace. Islam is a religion...."

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    switch

    Your IP address will be recorded 

     
    Help
  • 14 comments

[info]_luaineach

February 4 2006, 23:36:10 UTC 6 years ago

Field Marshal of Rationality erniecu73

ahahahahaha. Ernie knows how much I LOVE that 'Field Marshal Rational" business and this usage made me literally burst out laughing.

[info]erniecu73

February 5 2006, 06:15:56 UTC 6 years ago

LOL =o)

[info]blazinator

February 5 2006, 08:29:26 UTC 6 years ago

Islam is a religion of peace as much as christianity is. As christians we say "Thou shalt not kill" yet christians had crusades, have firebombed planned parenthood. Hell, Hitler killed 10 million people saying it was God's will. During the Vietnam War, christian groups who supported the war held rallies with the wonderful catch phrase of "Kill a Commie for Christ!". And at the risk of sounding like a lefty liberal, President Bush has done the same thing.

The point is, you can't just make generalizations about 2 billion people. Islam is a religion of peace in theory, just like Christianity. Just as some people have used Christianity as a reason to kill and gain power, there are groups of Muslims who use Islam as a reason to kill and gain power.

[info]erniecu73

February 5 2006, 17:32:53 UTC 6 years ago

Why do people always feel the need to bring in any other religion when the topic is Islam?

[info]braddogg

February 5 2006, 17:59:31 UTC 6 years ago

No one except the extreme left claims Christianity as a religion of peace, whereas any time someone tries to say, "Wait a minute, all the terrorists have been Muslim, here, in Israel, in Europe, plus the Iranian president....." the stock response is "RELIGION OF PEACE." Bam, end of discussion, no need for further conversation. Well, this is starting to show that the desire for violence ("Behead those who insult Islam") may be a little more widespread in Islam. In contrast, you've got major Christian leaders saying, "Yeah, war's cool, yo!" You're correct when you say Christianity has a history (and present) soaked in blood. But that does not make the Islamic condition any better. The phrase "religion of peace" doesn't come up every time the subject is discussed. Instead, the discussion on Christianity focuses on explaining away Christ's call for peace, through "just war" theory.

Deleted comment

[info]erniecu73

February 5 2006, 20:32:16 UTC 6 years ago

Er, dude, it was a Danish newspaper, not a Dutch one. Do you even know what's going on?

[info]braddogg

February 5 2006, 20:56:57 UTC 6 years ago

No, I believe that Christianity is pacifist. I believe (truly) believe that Christ would not have tried to assassinate Hitler and would rather have seen the entire Jewish people wiped from the face of the earth than lead Britain into war with the nation. And he would have let the Japanese bomb the tar out of us without retaliating. But do many Christians believe that? I doubt it. The actual message of Christ was not my focus in the comment you're addressing, but rather the belief of most "adherents" to Christ's teachings. There are precious few that would give a man their cell phone when he robs them of their wallet. This isn't a problem (in ALL religions) of a few stupid people, but rather in the incredibly vast majority of adherents.

I won't claim to speak for Mike, but what I was saying is that these religious extremists aren't killing for NO reason, but rather that they are killing in order to fulfill their obligations to their god. When you say that they "actually CARE about their religion," you're neglecting that they are resorting to violence to get their point across, when that same religion they "actually CARE about" so deeply is a "religion of peace." There is a deep hypocrisy in that.

Deleted comment

[info]braddogg

February 5 2006, 21:10:17 UTC 6 years ago

We should distinguish between the religion and the Man. Jesus was a pacifist, and all those who truly follow him are men of peace. But Christianity is not pacifist, and all those who are Christians (as members of the institution, not as the literal meaning of "Little Christs") are not necessarily pacifists. In short, Jesus was a pacifist, but Christianity is not a religion of peace. It's the difference between the Man and the institution that claims Him.

Deleted comment

[info]braddogg

February 5 2006, 21:14:06 UTC 6 years ago

Heh. Absolutely nothing. Mohammed may have preached a message of peace, but his followers have not all taken up that message. What I said about Christianity applies to Islam.

[info]erniecu73

February 5 2006, 20:17:55 UTC 6 years ago

Reading those two responses to your topic, and those on that similar topic in [info]libertarianism, I can't help but notice the ugly face of fear and frustration. It shows on both sides. Let's see, in Syria and Pakistan and other muslim countries, people have taken advantage of this situation to let their anger run free. Their anger is subconsciously directed at their tyrannical governments. Since they are scared shitless (a feeling I have known) of their governments, for obvious reasons, they direct their anger outwardly towards those who they know will take it without exerting a bloody and merciless revenge on them.

This is not to deny the existence of the many religious fanatics, like those in London. One cannot deny the extistence of radical Islam. It is just another one of the multiple complexities of the problem.

OTOH, we have these semi-apologists of Islam who prefer to criticize Christianity instead. Why? Simple, they are scared shitless of muslims and muslim terrorists. So it is easier for them to bring Christianity into the blame or make look like they are criticizing all religions evenly even if it's completely unrelated to the topic at hand. They know that no Jew, Christian, Hindu or Bhuddist will ask for their behading were they to criticize their religions.

Deleted comment

[info]erniecu73

February 5 2006, 20:59:51 UTC 6 years ago

Life in fear is not life at all.

[info]braddogg

February 5 2006, 21:04:45 UTC 6 years ago

Mmm, that's a complexity I hadn't really given its due. That may explain why the protests have turned to more violence in the Arab autocracies as opposed to the more peaceful protests in the Western democracies.

I think they criticize Christianity also because it's what they know best and because it makes them appear more fair. I've been known to do the same thing. It's a valid point if one is hoping to predict future development, but it's not a good absolute moral justification or explanation of what's happening.

Anonymous

February 6 2006, 22:24:45 UTC 6 years ago

I very much liked this post, David.

A general comment on the other comments: To seriously debate this topic, it is important to study the history of Islam. Check out the controversy over the 6th pillar of Islam and the Koran before claiming that the fundamentalists have no religious backing (is Islam truly a religion of peace? Internally yes, but in its interaction with other faiths?).

Let's not blindly glorify "Pure" Islam, let's be aware of its anti-Semitism and arguable distaste for tolerance.

At the same time it's important to remember that just because the extremists are most visible does not mean that they represent every Moslem. It would be a mistake to say that peace is not possible, yet David you are entirely correct in juxtaposing the media's mantra with the reality of the current situation.

[info]braddogg

February 7 2006, 05:29:36 UTC 6 years ago

Hey, thanks for the comment; next time, could you just give a quick signature to the comment so I know who's making it?
Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Facebook Twitter More login options
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…