NationStates Jolt Archive

if it's done by people who claim to be christians (http://www.thephoenix.com/article_ektid28087.aspx), that is.
On September 11, 2006, the fifth anniversary of the terror attacks that devastated our nation, a man crashed his car into a building in Davenport, Iowa, hoping to blow it up and kill himself in the fire.

No national newspaper, magazine, or network newscast reported this attempted suicide bombing, though an AP wire story was available. Cable news (save for MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann) was silent about this latest act of terrorism in America.

Had the criminal, David McMenemy, been Arab or Muslim, this would have been headline news for weeks. But since his target was the Edgerton Women’s Health Center, rather than, say, a bank or a police station, media have not called this terrorism — even after three decades of extreme violence by anti-abortion fanatics, mostly fundamentalist Christians who believe they’re fighting a holy war.

Since 1977, casualties from this war include seven murders, 17 attempted murders, three kidnappings, 152 assaults, 305 completed or attempted bombings and arsons, 375 invasions, 482 stalking incidents, 380 death threats, 618 bomb threats, 100 acid attacks, and 1,254 acts of vandalism, according to the National Abortion Federation.

Abortion providers and activists received 77 letters threatening anthrax attacks before 9/11, yet the media never considered anthrax threats as terrorism until after 9/11, when such letters were delivered to journalists and members of Congress.

After 9/11, Planned Parenthood and other abortion-rights groups received 554 envelopes containing white powder and messages like: “You have been exposed to anthrax. . . . We are going to kill all of you.” They were signed by the Army of God, a group that hosts Scripture-filled Web pages for “Anti-Abortion Heroes of the Faith,” including minister Paul Hill, Michael Griffin, and James Kopp, all convicted of murdering abortion providers, and a convicted clinic bomber, the Reverend Michael Bray. Another of their “martyrs,” Clayton Waagner, mailed anthrax letters while a fugitive on the FBI’s 10 most wanted list for anti-abortion related crimes.

“I am a terrorist,” Waagner declared on the Army of God’s Web site. Boasting that God “freed me to make war on his enemy,” he claimed he knew where 42 Planned Parenthood workers lived. “It doesn’t matter to me if you’re a nurse, receptionist, bookkeeper, or janitor, if you work for the murderous abortionist, I’m going to kill you.”

That’s textbook terrorism, defined by the USA Patriot Act as dangerous criminal acts that “appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population” or “to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion.”

Which brings us back to car bomber, McMenemy. According to the Detroit Free Press (the only newspaper in the Nexis news database that reported his crime), he targeted the women’s health center because he thought it provided abortions. It doesn’t. (Oops!) It provides mostly low-income patients with pap smears, ob-gyn care, testing for sexually transmitted diseases, birth control, and nutrition and immunization programs for women and children.

The attack caused $170,000 in property damage and left poor families without health care for a week. But long after Edgerton’s water-logged carpets are removed, scorched medical equipment replaced, and new doors reopened to the public, a culture of fear will linger among doctors, nurses, advocates, and patients across the country, who will worry they could be next. Some frightened workers will quit their jobs; some women will be too scared to get the health care they need.

Every fresh incident of anti-abortion terrorism is a reminder that women’s health supporters are not safe in a country where abortion is legal but mobilized zealots believe Jesus has empowered them to kill to prevent women from choosing it.

Is McMenemy a lone nut case, or a member of that network of violent extremists? We don’t know, because journalists haven’t investigated.

Nor have they reported that just last year, nearly one in five abortion clinics experienced gunfire, arson, bombings, chemical attacks, assaults, stalking, death threats, and blockades, according to the 2005 National Clinic Violence Survey. Additionally, 59 percent suffered intimidation tactics such as photo and video surveillance.

Federal efforts to hunt down these terrorists improved with the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act in 1994 and the National Task Force on Violence Against Health Care Providers, established by the Department of Justice in 1998. The feds have taken over McMenemy’s case, charging him with arson against a business affecting interstate commerce. Yet as of October 5, no news outlet on Nexis reported this, despite a second AP story.

As we continue national debates on how to keep America safe from terrorism, journalists do us — and especially women — no good pretending that the threats come only from radical Muslims outside our borders.

A lot of anti-Muslim sentiment around here is based on the idea that they're the ones who are the greatest threat to national security, and that "christians" like the ones described here aren't even a threat. When posters try to point out that these groups pose an equal threat, if not a greater threat, they're derided. Well, the numbers speak for themselves, people.

if it's done by people who claim to be christians (http://www.thephoenix.com/article_ektid28087.aspx), that is.

"Claim" to be? They are.

"Claim" to be? They are.

The term christian is very subjective.

more proof that this whole terrorism thing is something bush is using to declare war on the middle east.

I trust radical muslims more than I trust pro-lifers. At least with the fanatics, you know what's coming.

The term christian is very subjective.

Well, it's not like it's exactly been a, what do they say, "religion of peace." This isn't particularly out of character.

Well, it's not like it's exactly been a, what do they say, "religion of peace." This isn't particularly out of character.

I don't remember Jesus teaching terrorism.

if it's done by people who claim to be christians (http://www.thephoenix.com/article_ektid28087.aspx), that is.


A lot of anti-Muslim sentiment around here is based on the idea that they're the ones who are the greatest threat to national security, and that "christians" like the ones described here aren't even a threat. When posters try to point out that these groups pose an equal threat, if not a greater threat, they're derided. Well, the numbers speak for themselves, people.

Don't you get it, Nazz?!? They're killing people because all life is sacred! :mad:




















:D

Domestic terrorism only counts if it's the Fifth Column Muslim citizens within our midst.

You know, the ones we need to identify with special ID (http://jdallen.org/politics/2-out-of-5-americans-believe-muslims-should-carry-special-id/). Those are the real threats to our rac- I mean, to the fatherla- I mean, to freedom!


;)

I don't remember Jesus teaching terrorism.

You also don't remember the many urgings to kill people in the Bible, not to mention the illustriously violent history, and present, of Christianity...

I don't remember Jesus teaching terrorism.

Ahem.

Jobs 3-6:

"And lo, if some goddamn muthafucka ever invents some sort of safe, legal procedure allowing a conceived child-Let's say they call it a fetus, mmkay? Then stuff some fertilizer and some other stuff and BLOW YOSELF UP FOH GOD!"

Of course, many people believe that the only reason Jesus was against that is he knows he was an accident.:D

not just the christians - the media seems to have a tough time mentioning all the nazi terrorists we have running around. you know, the ones that have been caught with actual chemical weapons in the country.

Actually, it's because people have gotten used to it. I'm actually looking at working on some research that says people will assimilate the threat of terrorism into their everyday lives. Ya'know, kind of like how people assimilate the risks of driving on the interstates into their everyday lives.

You also don't remember the many urgings to kill people in the Bible, not to mention the illustriously violent history, and present, of Christianity...

There is practically nothing in the Bible which advocates murder. Just because it happens doesn't mean you should do it.

No, it's not Christianities violent history. It's violent autocratic monarchs/ dictators oppressing other countries and forcing Christianity onto people through force and using it as an excuse to control people. Doesn't mean christianity itself wills this to happen.

In response to the OP. Christian terrorism is nothing new, it has been happening in America for decades. People are used to it and do not find it threatening in the least bit.

"Claim" to be? They are.

You're a bigger bigot than they are.

i dont even know what to say except "what the fuck is wrong with the media that they dont report this stuff?"

its important that we know exactly how freedom of choice is being destroyed in this country. if no one is willing to provide abortion services because they fear for their lives, its the same effect as having it made illegal.

not just the christians - the media seems to have a tough time mentioning all the nazi terrorists we have running around. you know, the ones that have been caught with actual chemical weapons in the country.

Like those militia guys who were caught at the Canadian border with an assload of ricin in the late 90s?

Why, this is all very simple to understand really. Your average person isn't all that interested in things called "shades of grey" so everything has to be black and white. That includes enemies and friends. To most Americans, they're Christian. Thereby, being in that same group makes you a friend. Whereas if you're a Muslim, you're an outsider, thus easy to identify and villainize.

If you're one of the flock and do nasty shit, acknowledging that means said person has to acknowledge that the world isn't black and white anymore. That makes them scared. So they don't acknowledge that stuff, or try to go "meh" over it. Their whole world view would collapse if they didn't

There is practically nothing in the Bible which advocates murder.

except all those times where the bible says something to the effect of "and god commanded the israelites to slaughter the midianites and rape their women"

There is practically nothing in the Bible which advocates murder. Just because it happens doesn't mean you should do it.

Oh, really? (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html)

No, it's not Christianities violent history. It's violent autocratic monarchs/ dictators oppressing other countries and forcing Christianity onto people through force and using it as an excuse to control people. Doesn't mean christianity itself wills this to happen.

Oh, I see. It can't be Christianity at fault because you simply wouldn't like it to be at fault.

except all those times where the bible says something to the effect of "and god commanded the israelites to slaughter the midianites and rape their women"

Thats still not advocating others to do the same.

Pretty much all of these sorts of things happen in the old testements. You cannot say the Jews are violent or have a violent past can you?

if it's done by people who claim to be christians (http://www.thephoenix.com/article_ektid28087.aspx), that is.


A lot of anti-Muslim sentiment around here is based on the idea that they're the ones who are the greatest threat to national security, and that "christians" like the ones described here aren't even a threat. When posters try to point out that these groups pose an equal threat, if not a greater threat, they're derided. Well, the numbers speak for themselves, people.

Well indeed the numbers do speak for themselves...one attack 3000+ dead.

That FACT aside.

As an Anit-Abortion Christian I can not agree more that the ignoring of domestic terrorism of all types by any radical group(that is not Islamic) is nothing short of horrorfying.

You didnt create this thread for the Abortion debate so I wont begin it, you are pointing out an inconsistancy in the media and in the public veiws at large.
One that can not be pointed out enough.

Muslims are a Minority in this country and they have been here for generations--spekaing specifically about Arab Muslims.

They are store owners and PTA members and even Public Office Holders.

While I do not see a problem with profiling crime based on specific factors lets be realistic...if an Abortion clinic is bombed we all automatically say White, Christian, Male, 18-40 years old, and we expand from there.

When a plane is hijacked we automatically say Muslim, Arab, Terrorist, and expand from there...both are logical assumptions except the white guy...he is a fecking terrorist too--he is seeking a political gain by using violence perpetrated against civilians...terrorist.

Yes, I can be anti-abortion and a Christian and consider men terrorists, just like I consider those people holding up signs of pictures of dead babies out on the street and harrassing women to be thugs.

Just like I consider Mcveigh a terrorist, Bin laden, The suadis who commited the WTC attack, Suicide Bombers in Tel Aviv, Isreali tanks on the West Bank, and In Lebanon, Chechyn rebels in Schools, and so forth and so on.

While The Nazz may hold a different opinion of Chiristians and of the Pro-Life movement, I believe we hold the same opinion that terrorism is terrorism regardless of the brand name.

Oh, really? (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html)


Thanks for the most unreliable site ever. Where almost every passage is completely taken out of context or taken symbolism literally. Still none of them advocate others to kill people just that in that case God did, or this person did this.


Oh, I see. It can't be Christianity at fault because you simply wouldn't like it to be at fault.

As opposed to wanting christianity to be at fault to promote more hatred towards them.

if it's done by people who claim to be christians (http://www.thephoenix.com/article_ektid28087.aspx), that is.

What's your problem with Christians? You're like the anti-Christian version of Deep Kimchi.

The US media underreports US-supported terrorism no matter by whom or to who. For example, Louis Posada's terrorism is unrelated to religion, and the US harbours him, but his acts - and efforts to bring him to justice - are unreported.

The Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (formerly the School of the Americas) trains soldiers from all over Latin America. Many of them go on to commit atrocities, which makes the school more or less a terrorist training camp. The most famous example is the Contras, whose favourite targets were Christian priests and nuns. The opposition group, SOA Watch (http://www.soaw.org/new/) was founded by a priest, Fr. Roy Bourgeois.

"Claim" to be? They are.
The term christian is very subjective.
I'm a Christian, but I would reluctantly agree that they are Christians. Anyone who says they are Christian is as far as I'm concerned. That doesn't make them a good Christian, but to proclaim them to be not Christian would be too judgemental.

Well, it's not like it's exactly been a, what do they say, "religion of peace." This isn't particularly out of character.

http://www.nearlygood.com/smilies/popcorn.gif

I'm a Christian, but I would reluctantly agree that they are Christians. Anyone who says they are Christian is as far as I'm concerned. That doesn't make them a good Christian, but to proclaim them to be not Christian would be too judgemental.

So nothing constitutes being a christian other then saying you are one?

Anyone who says they are Christian is as far as I'm concerned.

By that logic, if I say I'm a duck, does that make me a duck?

Thanks for the most unreliable site ever. Where almost every passage is completely taken out of context or taken symbolism literally.

"Waah! They quote the Bible and link to the passages so you can read them! How unreliable! And they interpret it like it is written, not like how I would like to pretend it is written."

Still none of them advocate others to kill people just that in that case God did, or this person did this.

Well, we can take Mark 7.9: "And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death."

That's Jesus having no problem with parents killing their disobedient children, like the Bible tells them to do in Exodus 21.17 ("And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death"), Leviticus 20.9 ("For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him") and Deuteronomy 21.18 ("If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.)

Then we of course have all those nice passages, close to my heart, which tell you to kill us fags. How cosy, and Jesus of course agrees completely: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

Really, it's peculiar how people seem to have gotten this misconception that Jesus was a nice person; the entire religion is basically about waiting for him to come back so that he may kill all the people he doesn't like, and of course about how to avoid being one of the people he doesn't like (like, say, a homosexual or non-Christian) so as not to be killed.

As opposed to wanting christianity to be at fault to promote more hatred towards them.

I've no particular beef with Christianity; Religion is what I would like to see abandoned completely. However, I have very little patience for people who would like to ignore all the suffering and death Christianity has caused, and who like to brush it aside with "Oh, that wasn't Christianity - that was Christians! Oh, did I say Christians? I mean people who I'd like to pretend aren't Christians because I wouldn't like to be associated with them."

By that logic, if I say I'm a duck, does that make me a duck?

Do you type using your beak?

So nothing constitutes being a christian other then saying you are one?

I'd think that being a Christian would just require believing in the divinity of Jesus.

So nothing constitutes being a christian other then saying you are one?
Accepting Christ as Lord and Saviour, which is denoted by the word.

Of course, a terrorist who claims to be Christian violates many rules and commandments, but all Christians violate rules and sin. Nobody's perfect.

I'd think that being a Christian would just require believing in the divinity of Jesus.

Not even that. Many early christians believed that he was a great man, teaching a message sent by God, but not necessarily that he was part of the Trinity. *nod*

I think a christian is someone who believes Christ's message and that faith in that message will bring eternal life. *nod*

"Waah! They quote the Bible and link to the passages so you can read them! How unreliable! And they interpret it like it is written, not like how I would like to pretend it is written."


I've done that plenty of times. I looked up tonnes of them and saw they were completely taken out of context. I cannot be bothered to do it again, so I'll let you do it:


Well, we can take Mark 7.9: "And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death."
-snip-


No, you have misunderstood. That verse was pointing out the contradiction in how the pharisees use some laws to excuse their actions while contradicting other laws. I have even had to study that for coursework. I really can't be bothered to do that now.


Then we of course have all those nice passages, close to my heart, which tell you to kill us fags. How cosy, and Jesus of course agrees completely: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."


How is that what you said it was?



I've no particular beef with Christianity; Religion is what I would like to see abandoned completely. However, I have very little patience for people who would like to ignore all the suffering and death Christianity has caused, and who like to brush it aside with "Oh, that wasn't Christianity - that was Christians! Oh, did I say Christians? I mean people who I'd like to pretend aren't Christians because I wouldn't like to be associated with them."

So you have deduced from nothing that the person comitting those actions purely did it because the Bible told them too :rolleyes:

To be honest, does this really surprise you about the media? Does it surprise you that the media frequently overexagerates the stories, misleads, that they don't effeciently check the facts, etc...? It doesn't surprise me none. They do this sort of stuff all the freaking times. It depends on the times and circumstances. It depends on the story. What is a bigger story, the christian or muslim extremists? Obviously, since the majority of our country are Christian, the media reportings on muslim extremists is the bigger Headlines=more money.

As for our Federal Government, they are in fact battling our Domestic Terrorism we have here in America.

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/conplan/conplan.pdf

I've done that plenty of times. I looked up tonnes of them and saw they were completely taken out of context. I cannot be bothered to do it again, so I'll let you do it:

"I did something, but, you know, take my word for it, they really didn't quote it like I want to pretend it is written."

No, you have misunderstood. That verse was pointing out the contradiction in how the pharisees use some laws to excuse their actions while contradicting other laws. I have even had to study that for coursework. I really can't be bothered to do that now.

Ah, so now that we do have passages in the Bible that advocate murder, we'll attempt to nit-pick and use that old "symbolic pretending" to ignore them and make believe that you weren't wrong in saying that the Bible doesn't advocate murder.


How is that what you said it was?

Jesus saying that the OT laws apply, and the OT laws (not to mention of course that old huggable, feel-good fellow Paul, who really hates teh fags... and women, of course, can't forget them) saying that I should be murdered, or otherwise treated poorly.

So you have deduced from nothing that the person comitting those actions purely did it because the Bible told them too :rolleyes:

Read the OP again, please, using your eyes this time. Perhaps like you should read the Bible?

"I did something, but, you know, take my word for it, they really didn't quote it like I want to pretend it is written."


Even, when in many of the passages the verse actually says itself that it's symbolism? And it's not just symbolism. Most of it isn't, yet most of it has no "I have done this, so you shall do the same" in it either.


Ah, so now that we do have passages in the Bible that advocate murder, we'll attempt to nit-pick and use that old "symbolic pretending" to ignore them and make believe that you were wrong in saying that the Bible doesn't advocate murder.


I'm sorry, but I did not mention a single peice of symbolism in that verse. It's obvious you are pretending I am using it to make people ignore your blatent misunderstanding of that verse.


Jesus saying the the OT laws apply, and the OT laws (not to mention of course that old huggable, feel-good fellow Paul) saying that I should be murdered, or otherwise treated poorly.


It is so much more complicated then that. I am too busy to go into that now but it isn't just "oh you may stone adulterers, forget everything I said or have done in contradiction to these laws previously".


Read the OP again, please, using your eyes this time. Perhaps like you should read the Bible?

So, because some people commit terrorism and base their motives on christian ones, that makes Christianity a violent religion?

So, because some people commit terrorism and base their motives on christian ones, that makes Christianity a violent religion?
Off the top of my head I can't remember if you've ever said that personally, but plenty of others have, only about Islam.

Off the top of my head I can't remember if you've ever said that personally, but plenty of others have, only about Islam.

Well, a few months ago I would have said that about both Christianity and Islam. I have lately changed my mind though.

By that logic, if I say I'm a duck, does that make me a duck?

Depends. Do you walk like a duck and quack like a duck?

What's your problem with Christians? You're like the anti-Christian version of Deep Kimchi.
Believe that if you will, but if I really had that big of a problem with Christianity as a whole, would have I have gone to the trouble to note that the people doing these acts "claim to be christians?" Or would I rather have tarred the entire belief system with the same brush? Think on that for a minute.

The US media underreports US-supported terrorism no matter by whom or to who. For example, Louis Posada's terrorism is unrelated to religion, and the US harbours him, but his acts - and efforts to bring him to justice - are unreported.

The Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (formerly the School of the Americas) trains soldiers from all over Latin America. Many of them go on to commit atrocities, which makes the school more or less a terrorist training camp. The most famous example is the Contras, whose favourite targets were Christian priests and nuns. The opposition group, SOA Watch (http://www.soaw.org/new/) was founded by a priest, Fr. Roy Bourgeois.Agreed, and the Posada story is one of the reasons the US has such a shitty reputation int he world when it comes to terrorist policy. Posada ought to be in a Venezuelan jail right now, and it's shameful that our government hasn't turned him over, and even more shameful that the news media in this country, outside of groups like Democracy Now haven't given this story more play. My beef, after all, is with the media in this thread. You'd have noticed that if you hadn't gotten all defensive about my supposed slight against christianity.

This is NOT a thread Hijack just purely an example:

In the Middle East they are used to having daily suicide bombings and killings by extremists, but let's say an extreme Christian got together and pulled off a major attack in the Middle East. Do you think they're media won't mainly focus on that story vs the daily Islam extremists?

This is practically the same here in the USA. Muslim extremists are a bigger story here than the Christian extremists. What is important to the media, anywheres in the world, is NOT the truth or Facts. It's all about Headlines, who gets that exclusive footage, who gets that bigger story which all amounts to ratings which in return amounts to money.

if it's done by people who claim to be christians (http://www.thephoenix.com/article_ektid28087.aspx), that is.


A lot of anti-Muslim sentiment around here is based on the idea that they're the ones who are the greatest threat to national security, and that "christians" like the ones described here aren't even a threat. When posters try to point out that these groups pose an equal threat, if not a greater threat, they're derided. Well, the numbers speak for themselves, people.

Since when do those stats constitute terrorism? If that is the case, then we might as well add bullying to the list as that is also terrorism but no one talks about that either.

i dont even know what to say except "what the fuck is wrong with the media that they dont report this stuff?"

I see you don't watch news from any city do you? They report murders, robberies, home invasions, kidnappings, etc.

Since when do those stats constitute terrorism? If that is the case, then we might as well add bullying to the list as that is also terrorism but no one talks about that either.

You obviously didn't read the whole thing--can't say as I'm surprised either. But if you read even the bolded parts, you'll see some people self-identifying as terrorists.

You obviously didn't read the whole thing--can't say as I'm surprised either. But if you read even the bolded parts, you'll see some people self-identifying as terrorists.

Anyone can identify themselves as a terrorist. Does not make one a terrorist. Were they charged with terrorism or just with the crimes that they were accuse of? If it is just the crimes that they are accused of, then they are not terrorists.

Anyone can identify themselves as a terrorist. Does not make one a terrorist. Were they charged with terrorism or just with the crimes that they were accuse of? If it is just the crimes that they are accused of, then they are not terrorists.

I don't think that was the point. If a muslim said he was a terrorist and started doing those things, I bet the media would make a much bigger fuss over it.

I don't think that was the point. If a muslim said he was a terrorist and started doing those things, I bet the media would make a much bigger fuss over it.

I know what the point was. However, I was playing a word game with The Nazz. Something I do regularly :D

Even, when in many of the passages the verse actually says itself that it's symbolism? And it's not just symbolism. Most of it isn't, yet most of it has no "I have done this, so you shall do the same" in it either.

"Symbolism! Symbolism! So ignore what it actually says, pay attention to what I like to pretend it says."

I'm sorry, but I did not mention a single peice of symbolism in that verse. It's obvious you are pretending I am using it to make people ignore your blatent misunderstanding of that verse.

Yeah, "kill your children (with the age old Judeo-Christian-Islamic party game of stoning) if they don't obey you" is so prone to misunderstanding.

It is so much more complicated then that.

It's only "complicated" for those Christians who can't stomach their own religion.

I am too busy to go into that now but it isn't just "oh you may stone adulterers, forget everything I said or have done in contradiction to these laws previously".

Ah, so when the Bible says I should be killed, and Jesus (the merry old character we're waiting for to return so that he may kill most of us) says "yup, the law's the law, not one tittle (is it is just me, or is Jesus in serious need of some vocabulary updates?) shall be changed" I'm supposed to go "Oh, well, then, how nice! What a neat story."

So, because some people commit terrorism and base their motives on christian ones, that makes Christianity a violent religion?

The Bible and the behaviour of Christians is what makes Christianity a violent religion. This is just another in a long, long, long line of manifestations of that.

"Symbolism! Symbolism! So ignore what it actually says, pay attention to what I like to pretend it says."


Again, you show that you cannot read. Please re read what I said, there I admit that most of it is NOT symbolism.


Yeah, "kill your children (with the age old Judeo-Christian-Islamic party game of stoning) if they don't obey you" is so prone to misunderstanding.


Yes because he said "kill you children":rolleyes: , which he didn't. He simply said to the pharisee that you contradict yourself, nothing more, nothing less. Infact he was doing this in defence of him disobeying one of the laws of the old testement.


Ah, so when the Bible says I should be killed, and Jesus (the merry old character we're waiting for to return so that he may kill most of us) says "yup, the law's the law, not one tittle (is it is just me, or is Jesus in serious need of some vocabulary updates?) shall be changed" I'm supposed to go "Oh, well, then, how nice! What a neat story."


I am not a Christian so I am not personally waiting for Jesus to return. I just find debates like these interesting. Anyway as I said before if you want to imagine it's simply that simple, then imagine away.


The Bible and the behaviour of Christians is what makes Christianity a violent religion. This is just another in a long, long, long line of manifestations of that.

I bet you wouldn't say Islam is a violent religion however.

Again, you show that you cannot read. Please re read what I said, there I admit that most of it is NOT symbolism.

But only the parts you need to pretend away so as to avoid admitting you were wrong?

Yes because he said "kill you children":rolleyes: , which he didn't. He simply said to the pharisee that you contradict yourself, nothing more, nothing less. Infact he was doing this in defence of him disobeying one of the laws of the old testement.

See, even Jesus knew the Bible was contradictory and basically went "kill your children, or do this other nasty thing," it's all good in this religion.

I am not a Christian so I am not personally waiting for Jesus to return. I just find debates like these interesting. Anyway as I said before if you want to imagine it's simply that simple, then imagine away.

I don't need to imagine anything. It's written right there that I am an abomination that should be put to death. It's rather simple, that way, as I don't expect anything else from Christianity, and I don't need to fool myself that it's somehow "good."

I bet you wouldn't say Islam is a violent religion however.

I would, and it is. Christianity just isn't any better than its in other threads discussed brother (who, by the way, also wants me killed - us fags are popular that way).

-lame 1,000,000 year old argument snip-

I give up, we are going around in circles where your only defence is "I think you are pretending, therefor I am right and you are wrong"

The Bible and the behaviour of Christians is what makes Christianity a violent religion. This is just another in a long, long, long line of manifestations of that.
Do the parts of the Bible that preach peace not make Christianity a religion of peace?

I bet you wouldn't say Islam is a violent religion however.
I see you haven't done this before. Fass may be an irrational, biased religion hater, but at least he's an even-handed one.

I give up, we are going around in circles where your only defence is "I think you are pretending, therefor I am right and you are wrong"

Your only defence is pretending.

I see you haven't done this before. Fass may be an irrational, biased religion hater, but at least he's an even-handed one.

Now, now, there is nothing irrational in my hatred of religion.

Depends. Do you walk like a duck and quack like a duck?

No, nev- *quack* - never!

I've no particular beef with Christianity; Religion is what I would like to see abandoned completely.

:confused: You have no beef with Christianity, but you want it and all other religions abandoned? There is no logic in what you said. If you have no beef with it, why would you want to see it abandoned? :confused:

Now, now, there is nothing irrational in my hatred of religion.
Well, taking quotes out of context, ignoring symbolism when present, judging them by contemporary standards and ignoring quotes from the same book that don't suit your point make you biased at the best, and irrational at worst.

Well, taking quotes out of context, ignoring symbolism when present, judging them by contemporary standards and ignoring quotes from the same book that don't suit your point make you biased at the best, and irrational at worst.

I couldn't agree more. Of course, we are dealing with Fass here so anything logical is going to get lost in translation.

Anyone can identify themselves as a terrorist. Does not make one a terrorist. Were they charged with terrorism or just with the crimes that they were accuse of? If it is just the crimes that they are accused of, then they are not terrorists.The whole idea of terrorism is to effect others by causing terror. Using terror to cause others to change their behavior.
In the case of abortion providers it has worked. The number of abortion providers is ever shrinking. Many sdoctors who once provided safe abortions don't do so now because they fear for their lives and the safety of their families.

What is important to the media, anywheres in the world, is NOT the truth or Facts. It's all about Headlines, who gets that exclusive footage, who gets that bigger story which all amounts to ratings which in return amounts to money.

AMEN!

The whole idea of terrorism is to effect others by causing terror. Using terror to cause others to change their behavior.
In the case of abortion providers it has worked. The number of abortion providers is ever shrinking. Many sdoctors who once provided safe abortions don't do so now because they fear for their lives and the safety of their families.

True. I haven't said anything differently however most of those people who have attacked abortion clinics have not been charged with terrorism but with arson and other crimes. Very few people have actually been charged with terrorism in our history.

No, nev- *quack* - never!

Caught in the act. ;)

Now, imo we need to focus some effort into domestic terrorism. Especially groups like ALF which are funded by PETA, just because they annoy me endlessly...

:confused: You have no beef with Christianity, but you want it and all other religions abandoned? There is no logic in what you said. If you have no beef with it, why would you want to see it abandoned? :confused:

I wrote I have no particular (i.e. "distinctive among other examples or cases of the same general category") beef with it; not that I didn't have one.

[QUOTE=Fassigen;12030583



The Bible and the behaviour of Christians is what makes Christianity a violent religion. This is just another in a long, long, long line of manifestations of that.[/QUOTE]Islam is a violent religion. Christianity is a violent religion. Judeism is a violent religion. In the sense that all of the holy books advocate violence especially against unbelievers and outsiders.

Fortunately, these days most practitioners of all three religions have chosen to take the best parts of these books and forget about all the slaying. And all three have some important lessons in them.

Oops, screwed up the qoute on that one.

Well, taking quotes out of context,

I did no such thing - the quotes are all linked to in context on the website I linked to. No context is hidden.

ignoring symbolism when present,

More like ignoring apologist inventions of what it says and reading what it does actually say. "Symbolism," again, is what people who can't stomach a religion resort to.

judging them by contemporary standards

Of course I judge them by contemporary standards - Christianity exists in our contemporary time, it is thus judged in it.

and ignoring quotes from the same book that don't suit your point make you biased at the best, and irrational at worst.

What quotes? "Love all! But kill these!" Sorry, Christianity doesn't get to hide its dirty laundry behind schizophrenia.

I've no particular beef with Christianity;

Now, now, there is nothing irrational in my hatred of religion.

Ah, so you do have a beef with Christianity. You can not hate something without a beef. Also, your posts have shown that your hadred is irrational.

I wrote I have no particular (i.e. "distinctive among other examples or cases of the same general category") beef with it; not that I didn't have one.

Then your hatred of it is irrational.

Don't you get it, Nazz?!? They're killing people because all life is sacred! :mad:
:D

:D
Oh, the irony is deadly.

The whole idea of terrorism is to effect others by causing terror. Using terror to cause others to change their behavior.
In the case of abortion providers it has worked. The number of abortion providers is ever shrinking. Many sdoctors who once provided safe abortions don't do so now because they fear for their lives and the safety of their families.
That's what Amnesty considers intimidation, not terrorism. Intimidation, such as death threats, is bad, but it's not terrorism.

True. I haven't said anything differently however most of those people who have attacked abortion clinics have not been charged with terrorism but with arson and other crimes. Very few people have actually been charged with terrorism in our history.

Ever struck you as odd that they're called eco-terrorists?
I always thought the definition of eco-terrorism should be folks like Dow or Exxon.

That's what Amnesty considers intimidation, not terrorism. Intimidation, such as death threats, is bad, but it's not terrorism.Then I think Amnesty needs to update their definition. If spreading terror doesn't count as terrorism then there's something wrong with the definition.

Ever struck you as odd that they're called eco-terrorists?
I always thought the definition of eco-terrorism should be folks like Dow or Exxon.

Why should it strike me as odd? We could label anything as something terrorist these days. We seem to have a knack for labeling things terrorism when in fact it is not terrorism.

Do the parts of the Bible that preach peace not make Christianity a religion of peace?Not if they're contradicted by intolerance and calls for annihilation in other parts. Unless you can figure out a good rationale to separate the two tendancies.
Ignoring the old testament might be a place to start, Jesus is a bit more mellow than the OT god.

Then your hatred of it is irrational.Hatred, and all attitudes, are irrational. Rationalizing them, as people may be prone to do, doesn't actually change that

Why should it strike me as odd? We could label anything as something terrorist these days. We seem to have a knack for labeling things terrorism when in fact it is not terrorism.

If burning automobile dealerships and construction sites is not terrorism, then what is it? Oh, yes I forgot it's crime. So the eco-terrorists are not attempting to intimidate people by burning things, they are just a group who loves fire. Humm...where are the marshmellows? :rolleyes:

Then I think Amnesty needs to update their definition. If spreading terror doesn't count as terrorism then there's something wrong with the definition.
Both intimidation and terrorism are older than Amnesty International. Contrary to what you may think, 9/11 did not "change everything".

Not if they're contradicted by intolerance and calls for annihilation in other parts.
Why does "bad stuff" rule out "good stuff", but not vice versa? Just a question.

I don't remember Jesus teaching terrorism.
His terrorizing of the honest, working-their-butts-off businessmen at that temple may be interpreted as terrorism. He also terrorized the authorities, by forcing them to crucify him, and by feeding the fivethousand with that single tuna sandwich, he terrorized the economic growth of the Roman Empire. Therefor, Jesus did indeed teach terrorism, if only by example.

Hatred, and all attitudes, are irrational. Rationalizing them, as people may be prone to do, doesn't actually change that

So, you agree FASS has an irrational hatred of Christianity?

His terrorizing of the honest, working-their-butts-off businessmen at that temple may be interpreted as terrorism. He also terrorized the authorities, by forcing them to crucify him, and by feeding the fivethousand with that single tuna sandwich, he terrorized the economic growth of the Roman Empire. Therefor, Jesus did indeed teach terrorism, if only by example.

WTF http://www.nearlygood.com/smilies/horse.gif

As for our Federal Government, they are in fact battling our Domestic Terrorism we have here in America.

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/conplan/conplan.pdf


Well, when they aren't sponsoring it at least.

"Hi! We're the CIA! Mind if we kill Marilyn Monroe?"

If burning automobile dealerships and construction sites is not terrorism, then what is it? Oh, yes I forgot it's crime. So the eco-terrorists are not attempting to intimidate people by burning things, they are just a group who loves fire. Humm...where are the marshmellows? :rolleyes:

Those domestic terror groups do get press coverage when they do something. The groups you are referring too are the Animal Liberation Force and the Earth Liberation Force. Both ALF and ELF are on the FBI's domestic Terrorist Organization list.

Why does "bad stuff" rule out "good stuff", but not vice versa? Just a question.It depends on the quantity and quality.
If I go out and start wars, kill people, and at the same time preach pacifism; that doesn't make me a pacifist.
Peace is a different issue from pacifism of course; the latter is much mor eextreme. You can be peacefull without doing everything possible to keep peace; you just have to do anything tolerable (for some reasonable notion of tolerable).
So the quention is, does the bible ever advocate war in cases where it oughtn't? It's a moral question, so opinions may differ. I'm leaning toward that it does. At least in the OT.
Of course, the current stance of the religion "Christianity" may be something altogether different. We're certainly not the crusading religion we were 800 years again.

So, you agree FASS has an irrational hatred of Christianity?Only in as far as all hatred is irrational. I suppose I should better define my notion of rationality. It is in terms of logic, so motivation does not factor into it.
I do think he has grounds for hatred against religion in general though. (And I think he mentioned it wasn't in particular towards Christianity, but most religions)

No, nev- *quack* - never!

How about WALKING like a duck?

How about WALKING like a duck?

*waddles* No, not at all! I nev- QUACK!

*waddles* No, not at all! I nev- QUACK!

Well... Walks like a duck... Quacks like a duck... It's a duck!

if it's done by people who claim to be christians (http://www.thephoenix.com/article_ektid28087.aspx), that is.


A lot of anti-Muslim sentiment around here is based on the idea that they're the ones who are the greatest threat to national security, and that "christians" like the ones described here aren't even a threat. When posters try to point out that these groups pose an equal threat, if not a greater threat, they're derided. Well, the numbers speak for themselves, people.except Nazz... when those idiots are put on trial for their crimes, you don't see people on the street crying "Religous Profiling" "unfair to Christians" nor do you see rioting and fires started by rioting Christians. and when the church that the idiot belongs to is investigated, do you hear cries all over talking about unfair treatment?

so there really isn't anything Newsworthy for the media to make a buck off of.

And to be fair, people who cry "All terrorists are Muslims" also get derided. and Anti Muslim Sentiment is maybe as fequent as anti Christian and perhaps the same as Anti-American. fact is, there is alot of Anti [whatevers] threads out there.

No, nev- *quack* - never!

*waddles* No, not at all! I nev- QUACK!Well... Walks like a duck... Quacks like a duck... It's a duck!
doesn't prove a thing, we have to see if CK weighs the same as a witch.

Why should it strike me as odd? We could label anything as something terrorist these days. We seem to have a knack for labeling things terrorism when in fact it is not terrorism.Damn. Is nobody paying attention? I thought it was funny.

Eco-terrorist sounds like someone who terrorizes the ecosystem. Ya know- Dow? Exxon?

Damn. Is nobody paying attention? I thought it was funny.

Eco-terrorist sounds like someone who terrorizes the ecosystem. Ya know- Dow? Exxon?

More like ALF and ELF are the Eco-terrorists which is why I ignored your quip about Dow and Exxon.

More like ALF and ELF are the Eco-terrorists which is why I ignored your quip about Dow and Exxon.:p You have no sense of humor.

Well... Walks like a duck... Quacks like a duck... It's a duck!

No, I am not.

Anyhoo, I gotta fly South for the winter. We'll continue this when I get quack - I mean, back! :p

:p You have no sense of humor.

Actually I do but on here, what one thinks is sense of humor may not actually be a sense of humor.

No, I am not.

Anyhoo, I gotta fly South for the winter. We'll continue this when I get quack - I mean, back! :p

careful, don't Quack up now, you hear?

Give me a ring when you get back, we'll get down together.