posted
Here's another article describing the Christian Fundamentalists who are driving Bush's policies; if you're wondering why the US is being so provocative, there's your reason.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I see no difference between these people and the Muslim Fundamentalists who destroyed the twin towers; they both pervert the teachings of their respective religions to justfy their own cultish idelogies.
IMHO these people are the very reason that we are supposed to have the serparation of church and state in this country; when you have government policy-makers who use their positions to bring about war because they believe in biblical armageddon, then I say its time to invoke Thomas Jefferson's dictum about "altering and/or abolishing" governments which are destructive to liberty.
To me, a "war on terror" should also include a war on idelogies that encourage terror and war.
-------------------- The best way to predict the future is to create it.
quote:Originally posted by Highway Hoss: about the rest of you, but I see no difference between these people and the Muslim Fundamentalists who destroyed the twin towers; they both pervert the teachings of their respective religions to justfy their own cultish idelogies.
IMHO these people are the very reason that we are supposed to have the serparation of church and state in this country; when you have government policy-makers who use their positions to bring about war because they believe in biblical armageddon, then I say its time to invoke Thomas Jefferson's dictum about "altering and/or abolishing" governments which are destructive to liberty.
To me, a "war on terror" should also include a war on idelogies that encourage terror and war.
So...you hate Bush. But you think that we should "alter or abolish governments encourage terror and war." You sound just like him, really.
Franklin was a visionary in many respects but was also so full of shit half the time that it's a really good thing history is so forgiving towards him. Franklin wouldnt have advocated war in a million years without direct US intrest.
Yes, Church and State need (now more than ever) to be clearly seperated: mainly because people are using religion as a cause to fight anything alien to them.
Once you determine that Islam needs to be crushed because it supposedly encourages terrorist acts you'd immeadeately have to move on to Christianity for "encouraging" the KKK. For a start anyway.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Religion should be stomped out, crushed under the boot heel of the state, after all, then politicians wouldn't have anything, like greed and power, to fight about....
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
On the contrary, that would be the only things left to fight about, when you no longer have a common bond.
I discussed this yesterday in my literature class; if secularization reaches a certain point, will we invent a new calendar? Discard the old one, as defined by Dionysius Exiguus?
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Ritten: Religion should be stomped out, crushed under the boot heel of the state, after all, then politicians wouldn't have anything, like greed and power, to fight about....
That works fine on paper but it backfires and makes the government repressive in the extreme. As evidenced by the USSR.
Besides, everyone needs (at least privately) to believe in some higher power (even if it's only the unknowable physical processes of the universe).
In the Free World everyone has the right to believe in whatever the hell they want and it's unfortunate human nature to gather with like-minded (if misguided) people.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Jason: "Besides, everyone needs (at least privately) to believe in some higher power."
I think we can break it down even more, without involving deities; deep down, everyone needs to have faith. In themselves and in life.
About human nature (gathering with like-minded) being an unfortunate thing, I can say without doubt that sure, it has led to some of our greatest tragedies but also to our greatest achievements.
I just heard that 3000 people has been killed in a train crash in North Korea. Their news-services say nothing of it, instead focussing on Kim Jong-Il being awarded an honorary medal from some mexican town. There's like-minded people for you. They're so scared to do anything the Establishment dislikes, like admitting to failure and crisis, a whole nation buries their head in the sand.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Once you determine that Islam needs to be crushed because it supposedly encourages terrorist acts you'd immeadeately have to move on to Christianity for "encouraging" the KKK.
1: You're assuming that he thinks all religious ideologies encourage terror and should be eradicated. Don't.
2: "Immediately".
...then politicians wouldn't have anything, like greed and power, to fight about.
While your sarcasm is duely noted, they would also no longer have an excuse for it.
That works fine on paper but it backfires and makes the government repressive in the extreme.
By stomping out religion, yes. By secularizing the government (as it should be), no.
Besides, everyone needs (at least privately) to believe in some higher power...
1: You're assuming again.
2: I don't.
In the Free World everyone has the right to believe in whatever the hell they want...
However, people don't have the right to DO whatever the hell they want because of their beliefs. Crucial difference.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: So...you hate Bush.
Wrong, Jason...I do not hate Bush the person; what I hate is the ideology that he is championing...there is a difference.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: But you think that we should "alter or abolish governments encourage terror and war." You sound just like him, really.
Franklin was a visionary in many respects but was also so full of shit half the time that it's a really good thing history is so forgiving towards him. Franklin wouldnt have advocated war in a million years without direct US intrest.
First of all, that quote was from Thomas Jefferson, not Ben Franklin, OK? It's in the Declaration of Independence. As for altering/ abolishing governments, Jefferson meant it to refer to one's own government when it becomes hazardous to the people's interests; that is what elections are for.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Yes, Church and State need (now more than ever) to be clearly seperated: mainly because people are using religion as a cause to fight anything alien to them.
Something we both agree on....the founding fathers were well aware of the many bloody religious wars that had wracked Europe for centuries and wanted to avoid that.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Once you determine that Islam needs to be crushed because it supposedly encourages terrorist acts you'd immeadeately have to move on to Christianity for "encouraging" the KKK. For a start anyway.
The thing is it is not the religions per s� that is the problem; rather it is the cultish ideologies based on selected passages of both the Koran and the Bible. Basically the Christian Fundamentalists picked out certain passages from the bible and quoted them "out of context" to justify their own ideology.
-------------------- The best way to predict the future is to create it.
Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Cartman: Once you determine that Islam needs to be crushed because it supposedly encourages terrorist acts you'd immeadeately have to move on to Christianity for "encouraging" the KKK.
1: You're assuming that he thinks all religious ideologies encourage terror and should be eradicated. Don't.
No so: I'm pointing out that ALL religons and faiths have their violent extremists that can be used to villify the whole, thus making them all targets for his notion of "targeting those who encourage terror".
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Highway Hoss: The thing is it is not the religions per s� that is the problem; rather it is the cultish ideologies based on selected passages of both the Koran and the Bible. Basically the Christian Fundamentalists picked out certain passages from the bible and quoted them "out of context" to justify their own ideology.
Therein lies the crux of the issue: how does one determine where harmless zealotry and deep faith would become violent extremism?
There's plenty of "holy rollers" out there preaching hate, and it's their right to express their viewpoints, yet we're supposed to know where the line is between expressing one's viewpoint in a belief and enciting violence? Who's to say what['s "out of context" in a belief system?
Usually social and racial prejeduce will make that determination: how many times have you heard that "Islam is a violent belief" in the past year alone?
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Jason: "I'm pointing out that ALL religons and faiths have their violent extremists that can be used to villify the whole"
Name one aggressively fundamental Buddhist faction, please.
I'm not claiming rulers in buddhist countries haven't committed atrocities (Japan 1940's), I just haven't seen anyone committing atrocities in the name of Buddhism.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
You've got to watch out for those wiley Buddhists. Turn your back for a second, and they might just up and immolate themselves at you.
"Who's to say what['s 'out of context' in a belief system?"
"Out of context" means your quoting something in such a way that it seems to have a different meaning than it does when quoted along with its surrounding material. I don't see how a "belief system" can change that.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Nim the Fanciful: Jason: "I'm pointing out that ALL religons and faiths have their violent extremists that can be used to villify the whole"
Name one aggressively fundamental Buddhist faction, please.
I'm not claiming rulers in buddhist countries haven't committed atrocities (Japan 1940's), I just haven't seen anyone committing atrocities in the name of Buddhism.
Now that's splitting hairs. I wouldnt have wanted to be a parish priest in Viet Nam once the french split.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Yes, but Buddhist priests, holy men and representatives are seldom seen making 'fire and brimstone' speeches to a zealous and swayed crowd, like the kind of african and middle-eastern apes we see tearing unlucky people to shreds, or crowning them with burning car tires. (I don't say "apes" as a racist term but because their psyches are reduced to frothing primate levels, going on instinct and crowd-mentality; european soccer hooligans can be apes too)
Even Falun Gong, which can be considered a coercive mind-control cult, advocates non-violent opposition. It isn't part of Buddhism, but it is naturally connected with Asia and China, in these discussions.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
