Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 2 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Egyptian TV airs slow beheading of Tunisian Muslim who converted to Christianity
6 years ago  ::  Nov 26, 2012 - 3:24AM #11
Miraj
Posts: 5,021

Quite possibly, considering the source.

Disclaimer: The opinions of this member are not primarily informed by western ethnocentric paradigms, stereotypes rooted in anti-Muslim/Islam hysteria, "Israel can do no wrong" intransigence, or the perceived need to protect the Judeo-Christian world from invading foreign religions and legal concepts.  By expressing such views, no inherent attempt is being made to derail or hijack threads, but that may be the result.  The result is not the responsibility of this member.


PhotobucketPhotobucket
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Nov 27, 2012 - 9:48AM #12
REteach
Posts: 16,577

IMO, there are a lot of Christians in the US who would do the same thing if they could get away with it. Fred Phelps is just one of the more obvious examples.  This is the reason the founding fathers separated US church and state--they actually saw what Christians were willing and able to do to other Christians of different sects.  


It wasn't that long ago we were burning "witches".  It was even more recent that blacks were not welcome at white churches, and a black man could be (and was) killed for looking at white women. 


This should be a lesson to us, not about how bad Islam is, but about how bad humans can be to outgroups.  

I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard was not what I meant...
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Nov 27, 2012 - 10:56AM #13
TemplarS
Posts: 7,522

Nov 27, 2012 -- 9:48AM, REteach wrote:


This should be a lesson to us, not about how bad Islam is, but about how bad humans can be to outgroups.  





I agree about humans of whatever faith or culture being bad or xenophobic. This is not an Islamic phenomenon.


But, I think, the lesson is not about individuals, but about the role of the state.


In the West, the state no longer carries out or supports the burning of witches or blasphemers or apostates. Ideally, the state should be protective of the rights of minorities.  It is of course true that even in the West we are not yet as universally protective as we might be, so it is premature to be entirely self-congratulatory.


But this is quite different from the perceived role of the state is some other countries; where there are laws prescribing death for things like blasphemy or apostasy.  In these theocratic-leaning states, the role of the  state is not seen as protecting the rights of minorities, but as protecting the religion of the majority. 


This will be the true test of the "Arab Spring."  What sorts of constitutions and laws will be forthcoming in places such as Egypt?  Will they move forwards, or backwards?


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Nov 27, 2012 - 11:57AM #14
d_p_m
Posts: 11,236

Nov 27, 2012 -- 9:48AM, REteach wrote:


IMO, there are a lot of Christians in the US who would do the same thing if they could get away with it. Fred Phelps is just one of the more obvious examples.  This is the reason the founding fathers separated US church and state--they actually saw what Christians were willing and able to do to other Christians of different sects.  


It wasn't that long ago we were burning "witches".  It was even more recent that blacks were not welcome at white churches, and a black man could be (and was) killed for looking at white women. 


This should be a lesson to us, not about how bad Islam is, but about how bad humans can be to outgroups.  




In some parts of the US, it is probably safer to be black than to be known to be a witch.

"If you aren't confused by quantum physics, you haven't really understood it."
― Niels Bohr

"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."
-- Albert Einstein

"If one is going to engage with the primordial forces of darkness, one must expect a bit of social awkwardness."
-- Penny Dreadful, season one, episode two
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Nov 27, 2012 - 12:50PM #15
Erey
Posts: 21,730

Nov 27, 2012 -- 10:56AM, TemplarS wrote:


Nov 27, 2012 -- 9:48AM, REteach wrote:


This should be a lesson to us, not about how bad Islam is, but about how bad humans can be to outgroups.  





I agree about humans of whatever faith or culture being bad or xenophobic. This is not an Islamic phenomenon.


But, I think, the lesson is not about individuals, but about the role of the state.


In the West, the state no longer carries out or supports the burning of witches or blasphemers or apostates. Ideally, the state should be protective of the rights of minorities.  It is of course true that even in the West we are not yet as universally protective as we might be, so it is premature to be entirely self-congratulatory.


But this is quite different from the perceived role of the state is some other countries; where there are laws prescribing death for things like blasphemy or apostasy.  In these theocratic-leaning states, the role of the  state is not seen as protecting the rights of minorities, but as protecting the religion of the majority. 


This will be the true test of the "Arab Spring."  What sorts of constitutions and laws will be forthcoming in places such as Egypt?  Will they move forwards, or backwards?


 





I don't like this moral relativism that just because someone, somewhere wants or has ideas to  chop off heads that the seeming celebration of having an apostates head cut off is OK or relatively acceptable.  I think it is perfectly allowed to call barbarism out when you see it. 


 


Yes I don't think we can call the end game of the Arab Spring yet.  Could bring in enlightenment, could bring in Islamist rule.   I am thinking of Iran that had a revolution with lots of optimistic and progressive intentions and we can see how that worked out.

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Nov 27, 2012 - 1:26PM #16
TemplarS
Posts: 7,522

Nov 27, 2012 -- 12:50PM, Erey wrote:


Yes I don't think we can call the end game of the Arab Spring yet.  Could bring in enlightenment, could bring in Islamist rule.   I am thinking of Iran that had a revolution with lots of optimistic and progressive intentions and we can see how that worked out.





Here is the problem with revolutions.  By definition, they are against something (the existing order), and a lot of people do not think much beyond that to what they want instead. So the groups (often a minority) who do think very hard about this have an advantage when it comes to picking up the pieces and instituting the new order. This is why you have Ayatollahs in power in Teheran, the reign of terror in Paris, Castro in Havana, Communist bloodbaths in Russia, Ba'athist tyrants who were much worst than the corrupt monarchs they replaced, and so on.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Nov 27, 2012 - 2:40PM #17
Erey
Posts: 21,730

Nov 27, 2012 -- 1:26PM, TemplarS wrote:


Nov 27, 2012 -- 12:50PM, Erey wrote:


Yes I don't think we can call the end game of the Arab Spring yet.  Could bring in enlightenment, could bring in Islamist rule.   I am thinking of Iran that had a revolution with lots of optimistic and progressive intentions and we can see how that worked out.





Here is the problem with revolutions.  By definition, they are against something (the existing order), and a lot of people do not think much beyond that to what they want instead. So the groups (often a minority) who do think very hard about this have an advantage when it comes to picking up the pieces and instituting the new order. This is why you have Ayatollahs in power in Teheran, the reign of terror in Paris, Castro in Havana, Communist bloodbaths in Russia, Ba'athist tyrants who were much worst than the corrupt monarchs they replaced, and so on.


 




So True, and scary

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Nov 29, 2012 - 12:37AM #18
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

Nov 20, 2012 -- 1:51PM, Ken wrote:


Nov 20, 2012 -- 1:47PM, rocketjsquirell wrote:



any suggestions?


Abolish Islam. Who needs it?




Be my guest, Ken.
Petition the governments  of the Muslim States to abolish Islam.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Nov 29, 2012 - 3:31AM #19
Ebon
Posts: 10,148

One cannot simply abolish a religion, any religion. Those who believe in it will continue to cling to it as one might cling to a piece of driftwood when drowning. Oh, religions will come and go, of course. Some will become fashionable (for lack of a better term) and others will fade into history just as the pantheons of the Greek or Roman religions have been abandoned today (mostly and with all respect to the minority who still practice those faiths). Perhaps, in time, Islam will fade from teh world and become something studied only by historians. Perhaps Christianity will or Judaism or, well, pick a religion.


But what you can't do is surpress it. Firstly, the American Bill of Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights (which does much the same for EU nations) and the UN Decaration of Human Rights all guarantee freedom of religion. Yes, some nations ignore that, that doesn't mean we can ignore it for exactly the same reasons that, although some countries torture, we cannot: Because we are better than them and better than that. Secondly, the USSR tried to surpress religion. It didn't work and it can't work because people who believe will always find ways to practice their faith. While the Roman Empire was persecuting Christians, the Christians continued to meet and practice their faith in private.


You can't surpress faith. You can try to convince people of it's error by reason and logic but if you try and tear it away from them by force, they will find ways to fight you and, if you're either very stupid or unlucky, that fight turns into a holy war. Now, that's not to say that we should just ignore atrocities like this but we cannot respond in kind, we cannot beat barbarism by becoming barbarians ourselves.

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. ~ Proverbs 14:31

Fiat justitia, ruat caelum

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Nov 29, 2012 - 9:17AM #20
TemplarS
Posts: 7,522

Right, Ebon. It is not the role of government to suppress religion (neither is it the role of government to promote religion).  Further, it is not the role of government to try to force everybody to love black people, or gays, or Muslims, or any other minority; in any case this will likewise prove impossible (Goldwater was right, you cannot legislate morality).


What government in a liberal democracy can legislate, and enforce, is equal treatment under the law.  This means not only enacting tolerance and civil rights laws, it means vigorously acting against personal acts of bias and violence; regarding lynchings in the US and the like, this is why the feds had to step in in the South back in the 50s and 60s; because the  local sheriff in many cases was one of the guys under the hoods.


But this is the antithesis of the situation in other places in the world; where laws exist criminalizing (and in the worst case, prescribing death for) acts of such minorities.  This is equally offensive in  places like Uganda, where it is directed against gays, and places like Pakistan or Saudi Arabia where it is directed against non-Muslims.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook