07 Jun 09
Originally posted by FMFOf course there is no direct answer. Obviously, if the mainstream of each religion renounces it fringe, then no religion can directly be held culpable under that standard.
The nail, its head, on.
No on the money answers yet, I notice.
The question, though, is one of degree.
1) Are there more Christians that condone murder of abortionist doctors or more Muslims who condone the murder of civilians for political purposes?
2) In both cases, does the rest of the religious organization do enough to disavow and eradicate the ideas of the fringe component?
It's s bit simplistic to say "Well, you can't say anything bad about the fringe element of my religion because your religion has a fringe element too."
07 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76Mainstream Christians condone the murder of civilians for political purposes all the time - they just don't call it murder (just like radical Muslims don't).
Of course there is no direct answer. Obviously, if the mainstream of each religion renounces it fringe, then no religion can directly be held culpable under that standard.
The question, though, is one of degree.
1) Are there more Christians that condone murder of abortionist doctors or more Muslims who condone the murder of civilians for political purpose bad about the fringe element of my religion because your religion has a fringe element too."
Start a thread about Hiroshima.
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by FMFI'm not going to sit here and defend right wing Christians who murder doctors; nor am I going to assess whether Christians do enough to rein them in. I wasn't the one debating those issues on this thread anyway.
Go on then. what is "the degree"?
I was merely pointing out that the point that you praised as "hitting the nail on the head" was a bit of an oversimplification, in my view.
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by sh76I'll try again. Because you brought it up, not me. What is "the degree"?
I'm not going to sit here and defend right wing Christians who murder doctors; nor am I going to assess whether Christians do enough to rein them in. I wasn't the one debating those issues on this thread anyway. I was merely pointing out that the point that you praised as "hitting the nail on the head" was a bit of an oversimplification, in my view.
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderWhat does Hiroshima have to do with Christianity? I see no evidence that Harry Truman was a Christian ideologue or that Hiroshima was done in the name of Christianity.
Mainstream Christians condone the murder of civilians for political purposes all the time - they just don't call it murder (just like radical Muslims don't).
Start a thread about Hiroshima.
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by FMFI don't have enough information at my disposal to make that judgment.
I'll try again. Because you brought it up, not me. What is "the degree"?
If you want me to sit here and start debating Islam vs. Christianity, you're wasting your time. I'm not going to do it. I don't belong to either religion and I'm not going to pass judgment on either one.
07 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76That's moving the goalposts (though I'm pretty sure I'd find mention of God in Truman's speech justifying Hiroshima). You said:
What does Hiroshima have to do with Christianity? I see no evidence that Harry Truman was a Christian ideologue or that Hiroshima was done in the name of Christianity.
) Are there more Christians that condone murder of abortionist doctors or more Muslims who condone the murder of civilians for political purposes?
But condoning the murder of civilians for political purposes is hardly the sole position of Muslims as you implied. That's my point.
07 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderOkay; fair point.
That's moving the goalposts (though I'm pretty sure I'd find mention of God in Truman's speech justifying Hiroshima). You said:
) Are there more Christians that condone murder of abortionist doctors or more Muslims who condone the murder of civilians for political purposes?
But condoning the murder of civilians for political purposes is hardly the sole position of Muslims as you implied. That's my point.
I meant in the name of their religion.
If a Christian kills someone to steal his money or a Muslim rapes a woman to satisfy his lust, I don't blame Christianity or Islam or any adherents thereto.
I guess I could have added that phrase to my point, but that was my underlying assumption.
My point about Hiroshima is that I do not believe it was done in the name of Christianity.
07 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76I don't "want" anything in particular except to perhaps rein you you in when you make throwaway loaded political comments that seem to point to something you are manifestly unable to folow through on.
If you want me to sit here and start debating Islam vs. Christianity, you're wasting your time. I'm not going to do it. I don't belong to either religion and I'm not going to pass judgment on either one.
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by sh76Are you saying that the crew of Enola Gay didn't cross themselves as they went in on the bombing run? Haven't you read anything at all about this event?
My point about Hiroshima is that I do not believe it was done in the name of Christianity.
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by FMFThe intent of the people that ordered it is what matters. It was done with the intent to end the war and spare the United States the need to invade Japan, which would have cost hundreds of thousands of casualties. Justified or not, comparing it to the murder of an abortion doctor in the name of preventing abortions because they are antithetical to Christian doctrine is not accurate.
Are you saying that the crew of Enola Gay didn't cross themselves as they went in on the bombing run? Haven't you read anything at all about this event?
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by FMFBy the way, for all your claims that I abandon discussions, when are you going justify your assertion that I "airbrushed Canada out of D-Day" when, in fact, I did no such thing?
I don't "want" anything in particular except to perhaps rein you you in when you make throwaway loaded political comments that seem to point to something you are manifestly unable to folow through on.