Kenya

[Chinahand]

The massacre in Kenya is a terrible crime, but what makes it even more sinister is that I don't doubt that there are people planning and aspiring to do the same thing in the UK and elsewhere ... and all for a distorted religious vision which promises glory in a supposed afterlife for committing violence in the here now.

 

Ah religious violence, isn't it frightening that religious dogma can be so twisted that people believe they are improving the world by doing such things and receive a supernatural entity's approval for committing them.

[Mr. Sausages]

If someone does it on their own it's called "mental illness".

[Lonan3]

The massacre in Kenya is a terrible crime, but what makes it even more sinister is that I don't doubt that there are people planning and aspiring to do the same thing in the UK and elsewhere ... and all for a distorted religious vision which promises glory in a supposed afterlife for committing violence in the here now.

 

Ah religious violence, isn't it frightening that religious dogma can be so twisted that people believe they are improving the world by doing such things and receive a supernatural entity's approval for committing them.

As bad, perhaps, as those who performed hideous experiments on prisoners in the concentration camps in order to advance the cause of science?

[Lxxx]

 

The massacre in Kenya is a terrible crime, but what makes it even more sinister is that I don't doubt that there are people planning and aspiring to do the same thing in the UK and elsewhere ... and all for a distorted religious vision which promises glory in a supposed afterlife for committing violence in the here now.

 

Ah religious violence, isn't it frightening that religious dogma can be so twisted that people believe they are improving the world by doing such things and receive a supernatural entity's approval for committing them.

As bad, perhaps, as those who performed hideous experiments on prisoners in the concentration camps in order to advance the cause of science?

 

Or those who perpetuate the ongoing suffering of all those who were unfortunate to be born into the worlds largest prison camp in Gaza.

[doc.fixit]

The media is reporting it was masterminded by a white convert female from London who was married to an extremist who had been killed.

[Chinahand]

As bad, perhaps, as those who performed hideous experiments on prisoners in the concentration camps in order to advance the cause of science?

Bit of an unnecessary thread derail, do you really want to try to diminish the horror of what is happening by trying to claim some moral equivalence between this and the cause of science? - but anyway.

 

If you were to ask me the people who did the experiments in the concentration camps are in some ways worse. Science is essentially a humanistic process - trying to deal with all the complexity of not only the outside world, but also the biases of the experimenter. The scientist should be ever asking what if I am wrong, and trying to find ways to recognize and account for this. To torture a fellow human being, when you should be concentrating on your fallibility is really a distortion of the philosophy you are claiming to represent.

 

With religions the meme reinforces the behaviour - doubt is to be rejected and replaced with faith and the importance of the afterlife put before the here and now.

 

A person infected with a fanatical meme may be unable to see the horror of what they do.

 

Science should work against inhumanity - the torturing scientist has had to destort the ideal terribly to justify what they are doing. They betray not only their humanity, but also their philosophy to do what they do. That is a greater perversion than someone in the thrall of a religion which demands obedience and submission.

 

People have used science to commit terrible crimes - but not usually in the name of science (though programmes like the syphilis trials in the US were pretty much that). More often the distortion comes from an inhuman ideology which dominates - Nazism, etc.

 

The really difficult cases are things like the development of the nuclear bomb - was that moral, does it depend upon context?

 

David Grossman an Israeli author wrote: "I do not comprehend people who set history in motion. They amuse themselves, I feel with overly large toys."

 

Over Gaza, I think both sides have responsibilities for the human misery they create - de-escalating that is beyond my ken, but there are both Palestinians and Israelis who actively ferment the "perpetuation of the ongoing suffering" for their ends. Both sides should be condemned for that.

 

I think a person who plans and carries out a deliberate attack on a shopping mall, for the sole reason of creating spectacle and influence from the horror of what they do, is evil and people should stand and say it is evil.

 

There are a lot of blurry lines in politics, and in the waging of war. Machiavelli said that at best in war we commit honourable acts of evil. Many a politician has decided that it is a lesser evil to use military force than to appease.

 

I would not appease someone who takes a gun into a shopping mall to kill indiscriminately.

 

Lonan3, Lxxx, do you really want to argue against that specific point?

[Whatsername]

The world has gone fuckin nuts!!

[Domino]

 

As bad, perhaps, as those who performed hideous experiments on prisoners in the concentration camps in order to advance the cause of science?

Bit of an unnecessary thread derail, do you really want to try to diminish the horror of what is happening by trying to claim some moral equivalence between this and the cause of science? - but anyway.

 

If you were to ask me the people who did the experiments in the concentration camps are in some ways worse. Science is essentially a humanistic process - trying to deal with all the complexity of not only the outside world, but also the biases of the experimenter. The scientist should be ever asking what if I am wrong, and trying to find ways to recognize and account for this. To torture a fellow human being, when you should be concentrating on your fallibility is really a distortion of the philosophy you are claiming to represent.

 

With religions the meme reinforces the behaviour - doubt is to be rejected and replaced with faith and the importance of the afterlife put before the here and now.

 

A person infected with a fanatical meme may be unable to see the horror of what they do.

 

Science should work against inhumanity - the torturing scientist has had to destort the ideal terribly to justify what they are doing. They betray not only their humanity, but also their philosophy to do what they do. That is a greater perversion than someone in the thrall of a religion which demands obedience and submission.

 

People have used science to commit terrible crimes - but not usually in the name of science (though programmes like the syphilis trials in the US were pretty much that). More often the distortion comes from an inhuman ideology which dominates - Nazism, etc.

 

The really difficult cases are things like the development of the nuclear bomb - was that moral, does it depend upon context?

 

David Grossman an Israeli author wrote: "I do not comprehend people who set history in motion. They amuse themselves, I feel with overly large toys."

 

Over Gaza, I think both sides have responsibilities for the human misery they create - de-escalating that is beyond my ken, but there are both Palestinians and Israelis who actively ferment the "perpetuation of the ongoing suffering" for their ends. Both sides should be condemned for that.

 

I think a person who plans and carries out a deliberate attack on a shopping mall, for the sole reason of creating spectacle and influence from the horror of what they do, is evil and people should stand and say it is evil.

 

There are a lot of blurry lines in politics, and in the waging of war. Machiavelli said that at best in war we commit honourable acts of evil. Many a politician has decided that it is a lesser evil to use military force than to appease.

 

I would not appease someone who takes a gun into a shopping mall to kill indiscriminately.

 

Lonan3, Lxxx, do you really want to argue against that specific point?

 

Holy fukstix

[Karellen]

Islamic Terrorists have carried out 21,629 deadly terror attacks since 9/11 (source and list: www.thereligionofpeace.com)

 

 

The world has gone fuckin nuts!!

 

+1

[Thomas Jefferson]

The Qu'ran, in Surat Al-Baqarah, says:

 

'Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error. Whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.'

 

One of the fundamental truths established by the sacred texts is that no one can be compelled to accept Islam. It is the duty of Muslims to establish the proof of Islam to the people so that truth can be made clear from falsehood. After that, whoever wishes to accept Islam may do so and whoever wishes to continue upon unbelief may do so. No one should be threatened or harmed in any way if he does not wish to accept Islam.

This verse is decisive in establishing that each person has the right to make his or her own choice about embracing Islam. There is other equally decisive evidence in the Qur’an, among which are the following verses:

Allah says: “If it had been your Lord’s will, all of the people on Earth would have believed. Would you then compel the people so to have them believe?” [Sûrah Yûnus: 99]

Allah says: “So if they dispute with you, say ‘I have submitted my whole self to Allah, and so have those who follow me.’ And say to the People of the Scripture and to the unlearned: ‘Do you also submit yourselves?’ If they do, then they are on right guidance. But if they turn away, your duty is only to convey the Message. And in Allah’s sight are all of His servants.” [Sûrah Âl `Imrân: 20]

Allah says: “The Messenger’s duty is but to proclaim the Message.” [Sûrah al-Mâ’idah: 99]

It is important to note that these last two verses were revealed in Madinah. This is significant, since it shows that the ruling they gave was not just contingent on the Muslims being in Mecca in a state of weakness, but is valid for all time.

Some people might be wondering that if Islam indeed advocates such an approach, then what is all this we hear about jihad? How can we explain the warfare that the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his Companions waged against the pagans?

The answer to this is that jihad in Islamic Law can be waged for a number of reasons, but compelling people to accept Islam is simply not one of them.

The reason why jihad was first permitted in Islam was so the Muslims could defend themselves against persecution and expulsion from their homes.

 

Source: http://en.islamtoday.net/artshow-262-3441.htm

[Thomas Jefferson]

 

 

The massacre in Kenya is a terrible crime, but what makes it even more sinister is that I don't doubt that there are people planning and aspiring to do the same thing in the UK and elsewhere ... and all for a distorted religious vision which promises glory in a supposed afterlife for committing violence in the here now.

 

Ah religious violence, isn't it frightening that religious dogma can be so twisted that people believe they are improving the world by doing such things and receive a supernatural entity's approval for committing them.

As bad, perhaps, as those who performed hideous experiments on prisoners in the concentration camps in order to advance the cause of science?

 

Or those who perpetuate the ongoing suffering of all those who were unfortunate to be born into the worlds largest prison camp in Gaza.

 

Prison camp? They've got luxury hotels, mansions and shopping malls.

[quilp]

Allah will be pleased.

 

BBC dealing with it in their usual manner, Obama, the biggest useful-idiot/dhimmi saying it does not represent islam, muslims fear backlash, those edl nutters etc etc.

 

Religion at its best/worst/most indiscriminate....

[Thomas Jefferson]

Allah will be pleased.

 

BBC dealing with it in their usual manner, Obama, the biggest useful-idiot/dhimmi saying it does not represent islam, muslims fear backlash, those edl nutters etc etc.

 

Religion at its best/worst/most indiscriminate....

 

I don't think it does represent Islam. It represents a version of Islam which has been promoted by the Saudis and by the US and British governments since the late 19th century and which has escalated since the Second World War. At the same time, they've been working to thwart liberal, progressive and modernising forces in the Islamic world. Radical Islam is not only a reaction to but also a manufactured product of western imperialism.

[Cliff]

Seems weird to me after reading TJ's post 10 which quotes 'One of the fundamental truths established by the sacred texts is that no one can be compelled to accept Islam'

 

If these extremists are not following the 'Will of Allah', then they must be doing the opposite of Allah's Will and must therefore be Anti Allah supporters, possibly Satanists or some other Anti God religion.

 

 

[Chinahand]

Cliff - it is bull - no one can be compelled in religion, but if a muslim decides they want to change their religion the Koran says they should be killed. Yeah, no compulsion there at all, facing execution in no way inhibits you freely exercising your religious choice.

 

And if you are a non-muslim you are presented with this gem from 9.29 of the Quran:

 

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

 

So no compulsion, to convert, but if you don't you either have to pay the jizya tax or face war. Erm ... doesn't that sound a little bit coercive to you?

 

Oh and over the jizya tax - well no compulsion, you can be free to practice your religion, but you have to pay up or you and your family will be enslaved.

 

Totally up to you - no compulsion there what so ever - you can happily remain a non-Muslim as long as are willing to be enslaved or taxed.