-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Charlie Hebdo Muslim hypocrisy still not cured
Evidence?
I didnt expect all Catholics to apologise for thw IRA, or all Christians to apologise for anti balaka. No apology needed. Just recognition that terrorism exists in most religions
The same Imran Khan who become more fundamentalist after the death of his mother, has backing of the Army, and is known by liberals in Pakistan as 'Taliban Khan' and refers to Osama Bin Laden as a martyr?
Meh...I'm not rolling with Wiki on this one...
He was one heck of a cricketer, and a bit of a party boy in his youth. My mum had a crush on him.
Well...I'm not claiming Imran Khan is the world's most dangerous man. Just that he has the credibility of a turnip when arguing about how Western cartoons are the height of insults to Islam, and he's playing to his audience. If he was interested in respect for religion, he has far bigger issues closer to home.
I'll have a crack at your questions, but I'm an Aussie, in case that matters.
No, but my threshold for 'hate' is fairly high.
Depends on the country, but generally no. Although my issue isn't whether they can peddle 'hate'. It's what the threshold for hate is.
Yes. But not much.
Agreed.
Breivik is bizarre in that he did pretend to be some sort of crusading Christian knight in his manifesto but he later admitted that that was just a ruse to dupe the Christian Islamophobes, and that he actually views Jesus as a weakling and prays to Odin instead.
I will add that Norse Paganism is very popular among extremist white supremacists. So we do have our own problems with violence and bigotry within the scene.
Hah! It sounds right to me. Pew Research has 16% of the world's population as non religious, so...
Not sure that's what he meant though.
Last edited:
Are they nice atheists? Then it would. But if they're violent arses, not so much.
The violent ones, I think.
stvdv
Veteran Member
Oh, I read in the news that certain countries were banned. I must have read it wrong. Amazing that "no one was ever banned from immigrating".
stvdv
Veteran Member
No, that is not what I meant. There are now ca. 1100 million Atheist, with an average violence. Multiply that by 7. Compare that to what we have now
Perhaps they gave no thought to how
they'd live in & react to another culture?
People often do things without thinking.
stvdv
Veteran Member
84% of the world population is said to be religious, hence I said 84%
I assumed that violence is spread evenly among religious as well as non-religious
stvdv
Veteran Member
But a good Christian would IMO. I agree that this is of vital importance, and it should be put in words too.
Most of the Muslim terrorists in the West recently, IIRC, have been second generation immigrants. First generation immigrants are usually very patriotic and happy to assimilate (in terms of working hard and being successful in society), at least in America. It's their children being radicalized for some reason. It may be a backlash against society because they feel they don't belong due to bigotry or they're lashing out due to being failures in life (lack of employment or marital prospects, not meeting expectations, etc.). They're similar to other mass murderers and even school shooters, psychologically.
firedragon
Veteran Member
How about Pirabakaran? Well, he was the worst kind of terrorist in the world. Was he in this 84% you assumed? How about his whole group? Are they all "religious"?
Please explain.
stvdv
Veteran Member
Exactly right. That is what I meant. The exact number 84 must have given it away
Regarding the Charlie Hebdo assaults, the violence is
rooted in anger over treatment of Islam. Whether 1st
or 2nd generation, it's still about religion & culture.
stvdv
Veteran Member
This specific issue, Hate-Imams teaching little Muslim kids is of course quite different. You are a grown up, brainwashing impact is less.
Exactly. Here it was about little children who are being brainwashed by a Hate-Imam
I also value Freedom of Speech. But suppose Freedom of Speech e.g. Wilders announcing a "Muhammad drawing contest" would lead to the whole world being nuked (Pakistan Imam actually said this; probably brainwashes all his little Muslim students with the same), then Freedom of Speech leads to destruction of the world, and it might be worth to consider if "Freedom of Speech" was worth it.
Freedom of Speech as long as it does not hurt others, is the best. Especially if everyone follows it; preferably out of their free will
I'm more interested in the root causes of their actions rather than their claimed ideological reasons. Those don't really tell us anything.
And whether they're first generation immigrants or not matters, for obvious reasons.
Here's an example: Breivik was 'already damaged by the age of two'
I would like to see such informative investigations for all such terrorists and mass murderers, not just for the white ones. What we learn from their backgrounds and upbringing, we can use to prevent such failures of the system in the future. Most of these cases could've been prevented.
Last edited:
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
No, I don't think that.