Posting Towards Gomorrah

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Spanky
Hindus can be violent. They killed Ghandi, the Airline Pilot Prime minister, they razed that Mosque, and have killed quite a few Muslims in riots. That is why the conflict in the Sub continent is so nasty because both Islam and Hinduism can be very violent religions. Where as you don't see many Buddhist suicide bombers. They may kill themselves, but not other people.

However, since most of the Hindus live in Hindustan (India) they tend not to mess with other countrys that much. The exception being Ceylon. Bali is Hindu, and even though it is part of Indonesia, since they are all concentrated on that one Island, there isn't that much conflict. I don't believe there are a lot of Hindus on the other islands of Indonesia, or in South East Asia, but as usual, I really don't know what I am talking about.

Violent? Really? They always seem so polite on the phone.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Notwithstanding that I am unfamiliar with said leash or its length and would -- if I lived in the Pacific NW and drank more Washington State boxed wine, like yourself -- decry the sort of politics of personal destruction involved in making that sort of remark, I am so convinced by the truth of what you say here that henceforth I will not engage in public displays of images of the [putative] prophet Mohammed.

Kumbayah, y'all.

Kumbayah indeed playa, Kumbayah.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Violent? Really? They always seem so polite on the phone.

:shrug:

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I'm open to an argument that Islam has characteristics that promote violence, relative to other religions. But I'm with wonk when he points out that other religions have been violent, too. Ten years or so of suicide bombings doesn't seem to me to make the case.

eta: I see something in the suggestion that the problem is not Islam per se, but in the Islamic world's encounter with modernity. Fundamentalism is, perversely, a modern phenomenom.

Your eta is on the mark. Personally, if you try to blame the problem on "Islam" -- defined as the religion going back to its roots -- and then you try to prove your point by arguing about Islam's long history of violence, then you immediately must confront Christianity's similarly long (and longer) history of violence.

To me, that's a pointless endeavor.

The violence is rooted in how Islam is taught, how it is preached, what young Muslims are told is the way to promote Islam. Call that fundamentalism, Wahhabism, whatever. It is the religion as it appears to exist today.

And the reason I keep harping on the lack of dissenting voices is that the absence of those makes it a lot easier to say "Islam" is to blame, and not "a few crazy Muslims."

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Violent? Really? They always seem so polite on the phone.

They get meaner when they use their real names and don't pretend to be living in Nebraska.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
They get meaner when they use their real names and don't pretend to be living in Nebraska.

You mean my call really isn't important to them?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Your eta is on the mark. Personally, if you try to blame the problem on "Islam" -- defined as the religion going back to its roots -- and then you try to prove your point by arguing about Islam's long history of violence, then you immediately must confront Christianity's similarly long (and longer) history of violence.

Other than acknowledge that Christianity haD a history of violence what's the point? Essentially Christianity reformed, in part, and in the areas of the world where it is dominant, secular governments subsumed/assumed parts of its former role. Notwitshtanding lots of criticisms that can be made of doctrine or policy or influence on people, Christianity, in any organised form, doesn't really have the power to subjugate people, govern people, wage war or semi-organised terror campaigns. It doesn't control government apparati. States don't have law that subordinates to or incorporates directly religous law. Priests, ministers, rabbis etc et al are not government officials by virtue of their religious position.

Christianity has a history of violence, but to any material affect, its over. Long over. Islam, radical Islam, Wahhabism etc et al has a history of violence and its having a major affect on the world now. And people are dying and being oppressed by governments and religious bodies in significant numbers in its name. No?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Other than acknowledge that Christianity haD a history of violence what's the point? Essentially Christianity reformed, in part, and in the areas of the world where it is dominant, secular governments subsumed/assumed parts of its former role. Notwitshtanding lots of criticisms that can be made of doctrine or policy or influence on people, Christianity, in any organised form, doesn't really have the power to subjugate people, govern people, wage war or semi-organised terror campaigns. It doesn't control government apparati. States don't have law that subordinates to or incorporates directly religous law. Priests, ministers, rabbis etc et al are not government officials by virtue of their religious position.

Christianity has a history of violence, but to any material affect, its over. Long over. Islam, radical Islam, Wahhabism etc et al has a history of violence and its having a major affect on the world now. And people are dying and being oppressed by governments and religious bodies in significant numbers in its name. No?

Yes. But you are tying the current/recent situation to the historical roots of Islam. In essence, if you are saying that Islamic violence will end only when Islam ends.

That seems, first, completely unrealistic (to say the very, very least. One could say much harsher things.) And the historical roots of Christianity are also extremely violent, yet Christianity did not need to be eliminated for that violence to end.

As for Wahhabism, I think -- though I'm not sure -- that this is a relatively recent phenomenon. Not the sect (?) itself, but its extremely strong influence.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Yes. But you are tying the current/recent situation to the historical roots of Islam. In essence, if you are saying that Islamic violence will end only when Islam ends.

That seems, first, completely unrealistic (to say the very, very least. One could say much harsher things.) And the historical roots of Christianity are also extremely violent, yet Christianity did not need to be eliminated for that violence to end.

As for Wahhabism, I think -- though I'm not sure -- that this is a relatively recent phenomenon. Not the sect (?) itself, but its extremely strong influence.

No. I am not saying that Islam has to end. Yes, I did point out certain unsavoury aspects of its founder, although there is certainly critical analysis and questioning and skepticism that can be applied to any of the world's major religions. That said, most of the other major religions have matured/evolved to a point where they or factions of them are not threats to world peace. Islam on the other hand does not necessarily seemed to have acheived that maturity and evolutionary end point, and as I believe you pointed out above (although I am too lazy to scroll) has issues with modernity, and to an extent, as a result, a vocal minourity of Islam is a threat to world peace and is becoming a bigger threat. As many of us have seemed to agree, the Moderates of the religion, who intuitively would seem to form a majority, do not appear to be exercising a moderate force in the places they could. Thus it seems to me, that unlike the other major religions of the world, Christianty, Judiaism ,, Budhism, Hinduism (nothwtihstanding the Tamil Tigers), Islam is sort of a problem. Although I am not sure what the solution is. Maybe impeach Bush.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
No. I am not saying that Islam has to end. Yes, I did point out certain unsavoury aspects of its founder, although there is certainly critical analysis and questioning and skepticism that can be applied to any of the world's major religions. That said, most of the other major religions have matured/evolved to a point where they or factions of them are not threats to world peace. Islam on the other hand does not necessarily seemed to have acheived that maturity and evolutionary end point, and as I believe you pointed out above (although I am too lazy to scroll) has issues with modernity, and to an extent, as a result, a vocal minourity of Islam is a threat to world peace and is becoming a bigger threat. As many of us have seemed to agree, the Moderates of the religion, who intuitively would seem to form a majority, do not appear to be exercising a moderate force in the places they could. Thus it seems to me, that unlike the other major religions of the world, Christianty, Judiaism ,, Budhism, Hinduism (nothwtihstanding the Tamil Tigers), Islam is sort of a problem. Although I am not sure what the solution is. Maybe impeach Bush.

In the movie Snakes On A Plane, the people who got bit w/o warning seemed the luckiest. Maybe we should just assume it will settle down, then when it doesn't, it will take us suddenly?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
In the movie Snakes On A Plane, the people who got bit w/o warning seemed the luckiest. Maybe we should just assume it will settle down, then when it doesn't, it will take us suddenly?

Spoiler alert!?!?!? Not helpful!:shame:

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Those are the goods?

"Send me a picture" and "what would you like for your birthday"?

Any given five minutes on the FB is more offensive than that. Sheesh.

I just watched an ABC clip on the newest revelations.

Let's just say, it goes a wee bit beyond "send me a picture" and "what would you like for your birthday." He sent messages that would make Toaster Boy blush -- and he sent them to high school kids.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I just watched an ABC clip on the newest revelations.

Let's just say, it goes a wee bit beyond "send me a picture" and "what would you like for your birthday." He sent messages that would make Toaster Boy blush -- and he sent them to high school kids.

Yes, but what is the age of consent in the state?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Spoiler alert!?!?!? Not helpful!:shame:

my lawtalkers mentor was big on long lunches and short on teaching me stuff.:blush: :blush: thanks for the advice.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
my lawtalkers mentor was big on long lunches and short on teaching me stuff.:blush: :blush: thanks for the advice.

Anything for a BFF, right?