arma virumque cano (et alia)
I'm pretty much the type of person who just focuses on the person committing the crime. Our form of justice is supposed to be based on that. We did ourselves no credit during WW II and hopefully we can do better this time around. Perhaps we should adopt this philosophy in the area of our rights and not speak of a group of people who some believe are criminals who just haven't committed a crime, yet. Perhaps we should give the same presumption of innocence to both different cultures and different lifestyles.
I think it's fair to talk about terrorists as a group, as well as the Westboro Baptist Church members, and let's face it, gun-rights fanatics.
Ah yes, gun rights fanatics, the ISIS of the West.Any other groups you want to add that "lets face it" to?Homeschoolers--terrorists, along with private schools, trying to take down public education.Free speech fanatics who fought to let the Wesboro cult exercise their free speech rights.Foodies who oppress cattle for delicious free range cheese.
I said "talk about," as in generalize.
Take a look at was happened to your home country. Yikes!
Oh?:.@YasiraJaan Divide the membership of Al Qaeda and ISIS by the membership of Westboro Baptist; how many THOUSANDS would the dividend be?Guess it's back to the drawing board for Yasira.
And furthermore . . . .@YasiraJaan By the way, how many people has Westboro Baptist killed? None? Shouldn't Islamic terrorists be viewed as somewhat WORSE, then?But thank you for playing, however poorly. You at least provided a good chuckle.
You're really slipping lately, Kurt. She didn't say that ISIS was equivalent to the WBC. Maybe you should read the statement again before you embarrass yourself with further.
She didn't say that ISIS was equivalent to the WBCYes, I used a subset of Islamic terrorists, rather than all of them. In so doing, I gave her the benefit of the doubt. If I'd included all Islamic terrorists, that would represent an even larger percentage of Muslims, as opposed to the tiny percentage of "Christians" who constitute the Westboro Baptist "Church."
As I said, you're slippin'. That's definitely not up to your usual standards.
You have no comprehension of my "usual standards" (just one more thing of which you have no comprehension).
Ah, so Kurt is slipping by not living up to the irrational standard of the crazy version of him that lives in your head?
Yasira Jaan and many others view them this way. True. And good on them. I have many friends who fall into that camp with her.The problem is that many others in other parts of the world and even some in parts of the US (usually clumped in certain communities around certain bad mosques) view ISIS and their doctrines as orthodoxy. Unfortunately, this camp is a higher percentage than the percentage of people in other churches who support the Westboro heretics.This isn't an indictment of all Muslims, it is just a realistic evaluation that is pretty evident as Isis has gathered an army whereas Westboro has pretty much just a portion of an extended family.We need to protect the peace loving Muslims and not attack them for the actions of others. At the same time, and as part of this, we need to look at the other camp realistically and fight and oppose it any way we can.
I don't think your analysis is correct. The extreme views of the Westboro Baptist nuts, as ugly as it is, is shared by many.
Which views are you talking about?Belief that Homosexuality is a sin? Shared by pretty much all theological conservatives, and at least some of the theological moderates, uncommon among theological liberals, but there may be some.Belief that God kills US soldiers, celebrities, school kids, and whoever else Westboro wants to picket because of Gays in America? Not common outside Westboro.Belief in picketing funerals the way Westboro does, or to make it more specific, belief in Celebrating these deaths and praying for more? Unheard of outside Westboro.Belief that everyone who doesn't take part in Westboro's activities or similar ones, and who disagrees with them in any way is an infidel? Pretty self evidently confined to them.If the idea of homosexuality being a sin, and not adopting any of their heretical and plainly unbiblical doctrines, is enough to lump a person in with Westboro, then you're going to have to lump this girl in with ISIS.Why do I say that? She's a theological conservative--look at the hijab--theological liberals almost never wear them except to prayer; theological moderates sometimes wear them, sometimes do not--when they do, it's often loosely wrapped, hair showing, etc. This girl, however, has two hijabs carefully wrapped to prevent any stray hairs showing, as is common in more conservative communities here in America where people are not so ultra conservative as to add in a niquab (veil).Spend enough time getting to know Muslims and being a guest in their community and you pick up on these cues kinda like how, when hanging around Anabaptists, you pick up on cues that let you tell whether they're Amish, somewhere on the spectrum of Mennonites, or Church of the Brethren.A theologically conservative Muslim will still believe that homosexual behavior is a sin, as it's taught in al Quran. They may not vote that way (in fact, most of them still vote Democratic) but they share that view. They may even share a longing for some form of longing for an eventual khilafa as some idealized state in a Muslim world of the future.In spite of all of that, they can still disagree strongly, even vehemently, with ISIS just as the theologically conservative Christians strongly and vehemently disagree with the Westboro heretics.If you're going to lump all conservative Christians in with Wesboro based on one item that you disagree with, then you'll have to lump this girl in with ISIS on the basis of sharing that same tenant.
You can nuance it all you want, but the Westboro beliefs are not very different than those of Pat Robertson and his millions of followers.Most Christians, however, view those extremists with disdain and disapproval, much like most Muslims view the terrorists. That's what the post says.
That's what the post says.Well, except for the inconvenient little fact that the post says nothing about "Pat Robertson and his millions of followers," but I know you're not lying--you just think "snuff" means "sniff."
The theological difference and difference in behavior are wide and plain to see if you were open minded enough to actually look at issue with a fair mind--which you claim to be doing with Islam, though I think you're just towing the party line because it sounds like "common sense" to you without actually looking into it.If Pat Robertson = Fred Phelps and any argument is just Semantic Nuance then any conservative Muslim, like this girl, = ISIS and any argument is just Semantic Nuance.Why do you insist on keeping a straw man that would paint all theologically conservative Christians as equal to Fred Phelps, while, at the same time, rejecting the straw man that would paint all theologically conservative Muslims as equal to ISIS?Especially when the conservative Muslims share the same opinion that makes you so angry at the conservative Christians?
Actions are different than words. Like Bush using the word crusade. But it was Bush who attacked, killed people, and invaded a country that did not attack us. To enforce our way of government on them at the point of a gun. Sounds Stalinistic. We ousted the leader of Iran, who was democratically elected. Then imposed our own puppet (Shaw) who tortured and killed those people. Churchill himself drew the lines with no regard to culture, or history of the people.Our imperialistic acts have killed millions around world, then we wonder why they hate us. So why was it again we sought freedom from British rule? What made us take up arms against our oppressors?