Pakistani mob torches dozens of Christian homes

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Not much I need to say about this, It just a bunch of jackass burning down some house just because the people inside it believe in something diffident from them.

http://bostonglobe.com/news/world/2013/03/10/mob-torches-dozens-pakistani-christian-homes/VjiFbFur18ajC3igUcf0cI/story.html

There's actually a lot to be said here. Such as how blasphemy laws are dumb. Or how vigilante justice can be a terrible thing, especially when it becomes mob justice, and even more so when it is in defense of unjust laws. But what will inevitably be said here is how ass-backwards Muslims are. While it may be a pointless and often hateful subject, that is the topic that will be delved into. That is why you should have said something OP.

Revnak:
There's actually a lot to be said here. Such as how blasphemy laws are dumb. Or how vigilante justice can be a terrible thing, especially when it becomes mob justice, and even more so when it is in defense of unjust laws. But what will inevitably be said here is how ass-backwards Muslims are. While it may be a pointless and often hateful subject, that is the topic that will be delved into. That is why you should have said something OP.

Sorry for not posting my OP.

but I do 90% agree with you about this, but i don't think Muslims are the only ones to be this stupid sometime

Revnak:
There's actually a lot to be said here. Such as how blasphemy laws are dumb. Or how vigilante justice can be a terrible thing, especially when it becomes mob justice, and even more so when it is in defense of unjust laws. But what will inevitably be said here is how ass-backwards Muslims are. While it may be a pointless and often hateful subject, that is the topic that will be delved into. That is why you should have said something OP.

This tends to happen when you link religion with ethnicity and the state, as was the partition of British India at the time. You can't be surprised when Religion then turns to serve such a major role in people's lives and in their sense of unity. Other countries don't have such a history or have it in the past (30 years war, anyone?), and they also have no state religion. Take China for example - they've been suppressing religions of all kinds equally despite being the victim of the Taiping rebellion. Brother of Jesus Christ my ass.

tf2godz:

Revnak:
There's actually a lot to be said here. Such as how blasphemy laws are dumb. Or how vigilante justice can be a terrible thing, especially when it becomes mob justice, and even more so when it is in defense of unjust laws. But what will inevitably be said here is how ass-backwards Muslims are. While it may be a pointless and often hateful subject, that is the topic that will be delved into. That is why you should have said something OP.

Sorry for not posting my OP.

but I do 90% agree with you about this, but i don't think Muslims are the only ones to be this stupid sometime

Oh, well I guess you aren't pulling a Danyal then. That's reassuring. Any rude implications from my post can be ignored then.

Glasgow:

Revnak:
There's actually a lot to be said here. Such as how blasphemy laws are dumb. Or how vigilante justice can be a terrible thing, especially when it becomes mob justice, and even more so when it is in defense of unjust laws. But what will inevitably be said here is how ass-backwards Muslims are. While it may be a pointless and often hateful subject, that is the topic that will be delved into. That is why you should have said something OP.

This tends to happen when you link religion with ethnicity and the state, as was the partition of British India at the time. You can't be surprised when Religion then turns to serve such a major role in people's lives and in their sense of unity. Other countries don't have such a history or have it in the past (30 years war, anyone?), and they also have no state religion. Take China for example - they've been suppressing religions of all kinds equally despite being the victim of the Taiping rebellion. Brother of Jesus Christ my ass.

Yeah, tying any view on religion to the state can be extremely harmful. Virtually any religious perspective, even atheism, can become harmful when it is enforced as the law of the land.

Well, Christians in those places are generally of the conservative variety, so I find it hard to take pity on them for receiving a less cruel fate than that reserved for innocent gays and atheists in their scriptures. I'll start to care once their suffering has surpassed that. The more time Abrahamics spend on taking out their faith on each other, the less time they'll spend taking it out on decent people.

EDIT:

Since the above somehow seem to have been misunderstood by some as a call for global genocide, I should probably qualify: It's a statement of indifference towards a group of Coptic Christians being subjected to arson, due to their dogmatic and oppressive homophobia, which have caused innocent people much suffering. No sympathy for the devil god.

...or maybe, if they'd actually fix the incitement of violence against gays still found in their official and authoritative scriptures to this day, it would not be necessary to direct equally harsh words at them, to teach them what it's like to be subjected to such. If Christians get this riled up about an internet forum post expressing indifference towards them, how on earth do they think gay people feel seeing commandments to stone them in the official scripture of the largest religion in the world?

The log in your own eye...

Imperator_DK:
Well, Christians in those places are generally of the conservative variety, so I find it hard to take pity on them for receiving a less cruel fate than that reserved for innocent gays and atheists in their scriptures. I'll start to care once their suffering has surpassed that. The more time Abrahamics spend on taking out their faith on each other, the less time they'll spend taking it out on decent people.

That has to be one of the more sadistic veiws of the situation I've heard. If you don't think gays and atheists should go through suffering, I'd expect a little empathy when it happens to other groups.

Shadowstar38:

Imperator_DK:
Well, Christians in those places are generally of the conservative variety, so I find it hard to take pity on them for receiving a less cruel fate than that reserved for innocent gays and atheists in their scriptures. I'll start to care once their suffering has surpassed that. The more time Abrahamics spend on taking out their faith on each other, the less time they'll spend taking it out on decent people.

That has to be one of the more sadistic veiws of the situation I've heard. If you don't think gays and atheists should go through suffering, I'd expect a little empathy when it happens to other groups.

You seem to forget it's Imperator. Lacking empathy towards other people is pretty much par of the course. I highly recommend just ignoring him and moving on.

Witty Name Here:

You seem to forget it's Imperator. Lacking empathy towards other people is pretty much par of the course. I highly recommend just ignoring him and moving on.

I don't know, I think that's a little more than par. This one was particularly inflamatory, because first the post assumes because they're Christian that they would burn down atheists and homosexuals' houses, and then decides that they deserve that themselves having hurt nobody.

I don't ever report anything but spam because I feel like reporting people for their opinions ruins the environment here, but "I don't care if people burn down Christians' houses" is as tempting as anything. If I said that I don't care if people burn down atheists' houses, it would probably be the apocalypse.

Imperator_DK:
snip.

Quoted so as not to be rude talking about you without notice.

Imperator_DK:
Well, Christians in those places are generally of the conservative variety, so I find it hard to take pity on them for receiving a less cruel fate than that reserved for innocent gays and atheists in their scriptures. I'll start to care once their suffering has surpassed that. The more time Abrahamics spend on taking out their faith on each other, the less time they'll spend taking it out on decent people.

That is truly an enlightened view that you hold there, one that in no way is prejudiced, myopic, ignorant, petty or just flat out dickish.

If I may though, I noticed one or two small things in your post which may do with a bit of sprucing up.

Imperator_DK:
Well, Christians in those places are generally of the conservative variety,

So you know these people who are losing their houses. You know what their stances are, How about the ones in Jakarta, or Maluku, or one of the many other places that this is happening.

so I find it hard to take pity on them for receiving a less cruel fate than that reserved for innocent gays and atheists in their scriptures.

So you equate a hypothetical hatred that they may or may not hold to them being actually forced out of their home.

I'll start to care once their suffering has surpassed that.

I kind of doubt that, suffering does not work on a scoring system and it defiantly does not work on a tandem scoring system.

The more time Abrahamics spend on taking out their faith on each other,

Treating all of these people as one group kind of ignores the myriad social and historical factors that lead to events like this.

the less time they'll spend taking it out on decent people.

Making the assumption that they are not decent based upon your own ignorance.

Fix those up, and you are well on your way to a decent post.

Witty Name Here:

Shadowstar38:

Imperator_DK:
Well, Christians in those places are generally of the conservative variety, so I find it hard to take pity on them for receiving a less cruel fate than that reserved for innocent gays and atheists in their scriptures. I'll start to care once their suffering has surpassed that. The more time Abrahamics spend on taking out their faith on each other, the less time they'll spend taking it out on decent people.

That has to be one of the more sadistic veiws of the situation I've heard. If you don't think gays and atheists should go through suffering, I'd expect a little empathy when it happens to other groups.

You seem to forget it's Imperator. Lacking empathy towards other people is pretty much par of the course. I highly recommend just ignoring him and moving on.

He just doesn't care for those with destructive views, like many people.

For example, if they believe gay people should go to hell and are abominations, he thinks it's fine for them to receive a punishment equivalent to whatever they imagine hell to be, since they're so ready to condemn people to said place.

It's like how a lot of people don't actually care about terrorists being tortured, or criminals being shot.

To me it makes sense. If someone believes you should burn in hell for being gay, I'm not going to cry if they literally burn themselves, since they were so easy to condemn someone to it for such a dumb reason.

Though it's a pretty dumb thing to say unless he knew for an absolute fact what the Christians in OP story even believed in regards to gay people, or EVERYTHING. Seems to be a massive fucking assumption to me, though I only skimmed the article so maybe it says the Christians in question frequently practiced witch-burnings or something.

Gold:

He just doesn't care for those with destructive views, like many people.

For example, if they believe gay people should go to hell and are abominations, he thinks it's fine for them to receive a punishment equivalent to whatever they imagine hell to be, since they're so ready to condemn people to said place.

It's like how a lot of people don't actually care about terrorists being tortured, or criminals being shot.

To me it makes sense. If someone believes you should burn in hell for being gay, I'm not going to cry if they literally burn themselves, since they were so easy to condemn someone to it for such a dumb reason.

How is the belief that they will go to hell alone a destructive view?

The deference being the terrorist and criminal are actually doing something destructive. The belief itself that people are going to hell isn't destructive.

An Evangelist can walk up to an atheist and tell them they will burn in hell after they die and it won't affect a damn thing because, to an atheist, its an imaginary place.

But because someone believes that doesn't mean someone can come along and burned down real ass houses with real ass fire and make them live on the real ass streets.

the clockmaker:
How about the ones in Jakarta, or Maluku, or one of the many other places that this is happening.

In Indonesia there's a lot of ethnic tension added into the mix.

Outside of Jakarta, most of the violence between Christians and Muslims on Java is as much about ethnic blow ups between Chinese and Javanese groups as it is about religion... with an added dash of Class Warfare just to keep it interesting.

Shadowstar38:
with real ass fire

Tragic fart-lighting accident?

RhombusHatesYou:

Shadowstar38:
with real ass fire

Tragic fart-lighting accident?

image

I was thinking in ebonics and unfortunately typed it out like that without realizing.

Saying that 'gays will burn in hell' is about as destructive as a child shooting me with an imaginary gun. Now, I'm not going to defend any real action that some religious nut takes based on their religion, but saying that you're ok with people tearing each other apart because they have twisted fantasy constructs of everlasting torture for people that aren't like them smacks of a tinge of... oddness, to put it gently. I am sorta curious as to what Imp's definition of a decent person is, and whether he counts himself as one.

RhombusHatesYou:

the clockmaker:
How about the ones in Jakarta, or Maluku, or one of the many other places that this is happening.

In Indonesia there's a lot of ethnic tension added into the mix.

Outside of Jakarta, most of the violence between Christians and Muslims on Java is as much about ethnic blow ups between Chinese and Javanese groups as it is about religion... with an added dash of Class Warfare just to keep it interesting.

Well Indonesia is a bit of a Javanese empire, so the Balinese hate the Javanese, the Papuans hate the ethnic Malays and the Achenese hate everyone who doesn't bow to Mecca. My point was that Imperator was making a big call claiming to know the thoughts behind the victims in this.

tf2godz:
Not much I need to say about this, It just a bunch of jackass burning down some house just because the people inside it believe in something diffident from them.

http://bostonglobe.com/news/world/2013/03/10/mob-torches-dozens-pakistani-christian-homes/VjiFbFur18ajC3igUcf0cI/story.html

The former British India is called a subcontinent not only for its geographical diversity, but for the diversity found in it's people, and this amount of cultural diversity has caused quite a number of conflicts.
For example you have:
Maoist atheists fighting a brutal insurgency in the center of India
Hindus slaughtering Muslims
Muslims slaughtering Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, Christians, and everyone else
Multiple race conflicts due to so many people being of different races being forced to stay in the same barely functioning republics.

Not sure about Sikhs, Christians, or Jews though, I'm thinking they're doing their best to lie low and not get killed by the majority, or joining self defensive militias; who probably do their fair share of questionable killings.

Jux:
Saying that 'gays will burn in hell' is about as destructive as a child shooting me with an imaginary gun.

It'd be more accurate to say it's like an aggressive grown man pointing a gun at you, and you can't sure whether it's real and loaded or just a realistic replica. You might be able to laugh it off, but it might also scare you shitless, leave you with emotional trauma, and coerce you into doing things you wouldn't willingly have done otherwise.

The idea of Hell does real psychological damage to people, especially young and impressionable children.

Anyway, my thoughts on the story - I think this illustrates why blasphemy as a legitimate crime ought to be relegated to the Dark Ages. In justifying a murderous attack it's up there with "he was looking at me funny" - brutish, immature ignorance of the highest order. There's also the suggestion that this was an entirely fabricated accusation which highlights more of the many flaws integral to this (remember the Downs Syndrome girl who was framed for ripping up a Koran?).

And, if I may be so bold, I think we in the enlightened liberal West are in many ways no better. We've appropriated the frothing mob mentality and the principle of "guilty until proven innocent" in our own up-to-date version of blasphemy - "hate speech" and political correctness. It's every bit as subjective and open to abuse.

Batou667:

Jux:
Saying that 'gays will burn in hell' is about as destructive as a child shooting me with an imaginary gun.

It'd be more accurate to say it's like an aggressive grown man pointing a gun at you, and you can't sure whether it's real and loaded or just a realistic replica. You might be able to laugh it off, but it might also scare you shitless, leave you with emotional trauma, and coerce you into doing things you wouldn't willingly have done otherwise.

The idea of Hell does real psychological damage to people, especially young and impressionable children.

A good point, I was approaching it from the perspective of an adult that was confident in his lack of belief.

Jux:
A good point, I was approaching it from the perspective of an adult that was confident in his lack of belief.

Even from the PoV of a secure adult, being told you're going to hell can be worrying. In of itself it's harmless, but it's a statement with a lot of hatred/distrust behind it. When there's an entire demographic saying that you will (and be extension, should) go to hell, that can be a problem, even if you don't believe hell exists.

Fair enough, I still think Imp's response is extreme though, on a couple of different levels.

the clockmaker:
....
If I may though, I noticed one or two small things in your post which may do with a bit of sprucing up.

Sounds great!

So you know these people who are losing their houses. You know what their stances are, How about the ones in Jakarta, or Maluku, or one of the many other places that this is happening.

I know the dogma of the religious denomination they proclaim to worship. If it isn't accurate reflection of their beliefs, that's really their own problem. Not to mention that christianity is part of the system instituting and legitimizing an instituted discrimination of gays and atheists in Pakistan. Which each and every person knowingly and willingly keeping it in place is of course responsible for, regardless of whether they've gone out and stoned some gays themselves.

Or perhaps you know of a dogmatically gay-friendly Pakistani christian denomination I do not?

So you equate a hypothetical hatred that they may or may not hold to them being actually forced out of their home.

I equate the harm the system they knowingly and willing help uphold cause - which to Pakistani gays is anything but hypothetical - to these worshippers of it deserving similar harm.

I kind of doubt that, suffering does not work on a scoring system and it defiantly does not work on a tandem scoring system.

Pretty sure we can roughly categorize that murder is worse than arson, which is again worse than theft.

Treating all of these people as one group kind of ignores the myriad social and historical factors that lead to events like this.

So?

Explanations are not excuses. If, for whatever reason, they willingly uphold systemic harm to innocents, then they deserve to suffer reciprocally.

Making the assumption that they are not decent based upon your own ignorance.

No, making in on knowledge of the dogmatic view of the denomination they knowingly and willingly have proclaimed worship to. If they've silently cherry picked from it, they should've done so openly instead. Open resistance to the vile parts of their dogma would also be the only way to alleviate their responsibility for helping to keep it in place.

Fix those up, and you are well on your way to a decent post.

In accordance with how you view religion, that is. It's already quite in accordance with how I view the concept, and I've seen nothing to suggest that your approach is (theo)logically superior.

You seem to think that people can just affiliate themselves with/support a religious denomination, then simply choose their own views independently from its theology, and without any responsibility for what calamities the theology of the organization they support brings.

For all you've noticed, you seem to have missed entirely that I don't.

Witty Name Here:
...
You seem to forget it's Imperator. Lacking empathy towards other people is pretty much par of the course.

Lacking empathy towards those who knowingly and willingly subscribe to - and thus help keep in place - oppressive and discriminatory dogma is par for the course. As somebody who every day choose to subscribe to Catholicism, you wouldn't know the difference though.

Jux:
Saying that 'gays will burn in hell' is about as destructive as a child shooting me with an imaginary gun.

That's only enough to deny them the respect they refuse gays... and show similar schadenfreude when harm comes to them. It's the harmfulness of the system they help uphold which makes them deserve to have similar harm inflicted upon themselves.

Notice that I haven't actually caused any harm to these people though, merely stated my indifference towards their own little "burning in hell house" seance here.

I am sorta curious as to what Imp's definition of a decent person is, and whether he counts himself as one.

"A person who only cause harm reciprocally". Which I stay within.

I'd obviously fall short of "christian morality" (or morality inspired by it), with all its mercy and forgiveness stuff it (...selectively) invokes; but why on earth would I care about what the archaic thing I endlessly despise has to say?

Shadowstar38:

An Evangelist can walk up to an atheist and tell them they will burn in hell after they die and it won't affect a damn thing because, to an atheist, its an imaginary place.

But because someone believes that doesn't mean someone can come along and burned down real ass houses with real ass fire and make them live on the real ass streets.

Well, I don't think there's much advocacy that people should be allowed to go around setting fires.

The religion of peace show it true face yet again. I know that most muslim are peaceful people, but why didn't they try to stop these barbarians from burning down those homes? Why I ask.

Yeah, pretty fucked up. Blasphemy against Islam's prophet? Doing a great job representing Muslims everywhere else there, guys. I'm sure the moderates will love you for it.

You know, I don't care what these Christians believe specifically. If they didn't do anything to oppress others, then they don't deserve any of this. Just because they are part of a group, some or even many of which are guilty of oppression themselves, doesn't mean that all of them are; even less so their children, who presumably didn't even have a serious opportunity to oppress, even if they had wanted to. Plenty of innocents suffer here.

Let's not put a general suspicion on an entire population just because parts of that population are known for oppressive views and behaviour, okay? And lets furthermore not forget that even if they were guilty of oppression or anything, that doesn't make vigilantee actions and mob rule any more okay. Two wrongs don't make a right; if people do something wrong, they need to be punished justly, not through the random acts of another violent and oppressive group rampaging through their area.

Skeleon in reference to the last paragraph and the "entire population" comment i think you kinda have to take into account what Pakistan actually is.

at some point you have to factor in that Pakistan is basically and a kind of Islamic version of Israel in that it was born out of pretty fucking hard-line Islam that was basically saying "we can't live with any of you fucking people so we're going to start our own country over there..." as a solidly Islamic state.

the resultant "partition" of India resulted in the largest migration of people in recorded history (in both directions...because pretty much anyone with a brain who wasn't a Muslim up and left what became Pakistan...on foot if necessary...million and millions and millions of them...) and ever since the two resultant countries they have almost been at war with each other (up to and including nuclear MAD).

as such it's probably not really a good idea to live there at all if you "don't belong".

i will never understand how anyone with a decent understanding of history can expect such a state born out of such religious fervour and conviction to be religiously "moderate" or resemble anything even approaching "secularism".

practically the only thing that has injected any kind of "moderation" into Pakistans existence has been the direct intervention of the army in politics...

i mean ffs if the people who live there were generally willing & able to live within those kinds of propositions the country of Pakistan WOULD NOT EVEN EXIST.

oh and ps "the British" did not do this (ie create Pakistan) the population of Pakistan/India/Bangladesh came up with this pretty much by themselves.

I was talking about the entire Christian population in reference to Imperator_DK's posts in this thread.

Imperator_DK:

I know the dogma of the religious denomination they proclaim to worship. If it isn't accurate reflection of their beliefs, that's really their own problem.

The Christians you are imagining don't exist. They just don't. You have made up your own version of Christianity to strawman, and it applies to literally not a single person. You are the hateful one.

Imperator_DK:
I will talk to you at your face

I cannot express my disgust and my fear at Imperator_DK post adequately.

Human beings are having their rights trampled on, but..their Christians, so it's OK.

You have reduced these people to being less then human beings because they hold views counter to you, or that are different then you. Can you not comprehend what this attitude leads to, what it HAS led to throughout history? Human history is dripping with blood because people have reduced other people into 'not people' for having a different view of the world then them. That's where my fear springs up, that in modern society we still have people who can do this, and reduce the other man to less then a man with barely a moments thought, even more so with someone who claims an intellectual and moral superiority to their 'enemies'.

Indeed, this is the very attitude that you claim Christians have that your espousing. You have literally reduced yourself to the level of your 'enemy'. How can you even begin to claim you have any moral high ground in any discussion if your going to spout things like that?

It doesn't matter who they are, they are being denied three basic human rights: Property, association, and worship. Rights GUARANTEED by the universal declaration of human, article 17, 20, and 18.

And yes, I know gays are being denied their right to marriage under civil law, which is a violation of article 16. And that's just as bad. That's my point. It doesn't matter WHO the violations are happening to, just that they're happening.

Dear muslims.

I actually like your religion. I think it has nice aestethics. I think your buildings look cool and with the exception of the Niqab and the Burka I actually think the way you dress looks nice. And I love your carpets, they're awesome.

Would you please stop acting like goblins or at least make a reformation style split from the ones that do so I can enjoy your nice carpets in peace?

Nobody likes to get murdered. But people do like new things. And there are loads of churches here in Europe that are almost empty. There is incidentally also loads of muslims here. I'm sure there are loads of churches on the brink of collapse that wouldn't mind throwing in some nice ass carpets for you to pray on every once in a while. Your imams could hang with some priests, in time maybe you could even have a few joint non-denominational sermons in common a few times a month. So that we could bridge gaps rather than create them. God knows (see what I did there) the churches would be grateful for the increased traffic.

I know that the muslims in Europe aren't the ones that did this but the thing is you guys, nobody in Pakistan cares if we judge them. They count on it. Many of them probably feed on it. You will be judged by their actions and (hopefully) you will care. So you know, make some attempts at real compromise every once in a while and I'm sure you'll see things cool off quickly. Not in Pakistan. Those guys will still be retards. Buy you can chose not to be.

Imperator_DK:
Well, Christians in those places are generally of the conservative variety, so I find it hard to take pity on them for receiving a less cruel fate than that reserved for innocent gays and atheists in their scriptures. I'll start to care once their suffering has surpassed that. The more time Abrahamics spend on taking out their faith on each other, the less time they'll spend taking it out on decent people.

Actually most of the Christians in those areas are eastern Christians, which means that they are much less conservative than you think since their faith did not get an injection of European up-tightness over the past 2000 years.
Alternatively they are missionaries which in most case sacrifice their lives to make some one elses a little better, and no i don't care if they teach children that being gay is a crime if they vaccinate and teach them to read. An a live literate child is preferable to a dead one, gay hating or not.

[double post, my bad]
[this kid is noob f....!]

Imperator_DK:
"A person who only cause harm reciprocally". Which I stay within.

I'd obviously fall short of "christian morality" (or morality inspired by it), with all its mercy and forgiveness stuff it (...selectively) invokes; but why on earth would I care about what the archaic thing I endlessly despise has to say?

I find it hard to believe that all these people that lost their homes caused enough harm to warrant their homes being burned to the ground. And let's not kid ourselves, we all cause harm, sometimes unintentionally, sometimes unknowingly, outside of reciprocity. Your definition speaks nothing to intent, or to what degree of harm must be caused to no longer be considered a decent person, or even if one might become a decent person again after fucking up.

Imperator_DK:

I know the dogma of the religious denomination they proclaim to worship. If it isn't accurate reflection of their beliefs, that's really their own problem. Not to mention that christianity is part of the system instituting and legitimizing an instituted discrimination of gays and atheists in Pakistan. Which each and every person knowingly and willingly keeping it in place is of course responsible for, regardless of whether they've gone out and stoned some gays themselves.

You don't fucking know though, you don't know how many of them were pro-gay, how many anti-gay how many secretly atheist etc etc.

Or perhaps you know of a dogmatically gay-friendly Pakistani Christian denomination I do not?

or perhaps I am able to look past one factor of a person to the actual person beneath. Even if they are homophobic, one shit stain does not define your entire personality.

I equate the harm the system they knowingly and willing help uphold cause - which to Pakistani gays is anything but hypothetical - to these worshippers of it deserving similar harm.

So due to your belief that people who you don't know deserve to lose everything that they have due to a position that you don't know for sure that they hold, you deserve to have someone burn down your house.

Pretty sure we can roughly categorize that murder is worse than arson, which is again worse than theft.

So holding objectionable views is now the worst crime of all, worse than having your home burned to the ground? Even then, If I were to punch you in the face, would you ignore it because to my mind it is worse than wishing the loss of hearth and home on dozens of inocents.

Even if I held to your nonsense view that simply being a Christian is worse than arson and forced evictions, one crime does not invalidate the other,

So?

Explanations are not excuses. If, for whatever reason, they willingly uphold systemic harm to innocents, then they deserve to suffer reciprocally.

Maybe the point is that there is going to be communal violence regardless of what god people worship and religion is only a convenient excuse.

No, making in on knowledge of the dogmatic view of the denomination they knowingly and willingly have proclaimed worship to. If they've silently cherry picked from it, they should've done so openly instead. Open resistance to the vile parts of their dogma would also be the only way to alleviate their responsibility for helping to keep it in place.

So you are saying that they should start shouting against the only support group likely to come to the support while simultaneously enraging the group that is already intending to burn down their house. I'm sure that will give them a lovely fuzzy feeling as they are beaten to death.

In accordance with how you view religion, that is. It's already quite in accordance with how I view the concept, and I've seen nothing to suggest that your approach is (theo)logically superior.

You seem to think that people can just affiliate themselves with/support a religious denomination, then simply choose their own views independently from its theology, and without any responsibility for what calamities the theology of the organization they support brings.

You mean I don't subscribe to collective guilt, rather believing in personal morality whereas you are happy for secterian violence occurs to people that you know literally two factiods about (pakistani christian) so long as they are the 'wrong' group? Well, Thanks for showing me the moral superiority of Atheism.

but why on earth would I care about what the archaic thing I endlessly despise has to say?

And doesn't that just sum it up. Why listen when you already hate.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here