NationStates Jolt Archive

American policies are doing what more than a millenium of Islam has failed to do: eradicate Christianity in the Middle East.

It's sick that now that we've taken out Saddam, Christians are being persecuted on an unprecedented scale in Iraq.

"A onetime Iraqi liquor store owner now living in Syria lamented that “before the war there was no separation between Christian and Muslim. Under Saddam no one asked you your religion, and we used to attend each other’s religious services and weddings. After the invasion we hoped democracy would come; but instead all that came was bombs, kidnapping and killing. Now at least 75% of my Christian friends have fled. There is no future for us in Iraq.” "

http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_vanishing_christians_of_iraq/

So sad...:(

thank god for atheism

thank god for atheism
XD

I cannot pretend to be remotely sad about the demise of Christianity. However, I am sad to hear of the deaths of human beings who happen to also be Christian.

I cannot pretend to be remotely sad about the demise of Christianity. However, I am sad to hear of the deaths of human beings who happen to also be Christian.

QFT.

I cannot pretend to be remotely sad about the demise of Christianity. However, I am sad to hear of the deaths of human beings who happen to also be Christian.

Because Islam's so much better! :rolleyes:

Because Islam's so much better! :rolleyes:
Calm down, darling. Just because I'm content to watch one boring superstitious belief structure perish doesn't mean I automatically want any other boring superstitious to replace it. Remember, I'm bummed about the murder of all those human beings who happen to be Christian...I'm not likely to be delighted with the belief structure that is specifically encouraging these killings.

It's sick that now that we've taken out Saddam, Christians are being persecuted on an unprecedented scale in Iraq.Why would you have expected anything else?

Why would you have expected anything else?
Because those who refuse to read history are doomed to be shocked--SHOCKED!--when it repeats itself?

Because those who refuse to read history are doomed to be shocked--SHOCKED!--when it repeats itself?


QFT

Because those who refuse to read history are doomed to be shocked--SHOCKED!--when it repeats itself?Then maybe the US should have worked towards keeping Iraq secular instead of creating the mess that they did. But what do US Americans know or care for such matters so far beyond their own borders?

Then maybe the US should have worked towards keeping Iraq secular instead of creating the mess that they did. But what do US Americans know or care for such matters so far beyond their own borders?
Hey, you're preaching to the converted here. I'm a US American who has loathed this vile and doomed "War On Terror" since back when it was all about Afghanistan (remember them?).

What the hell, is UB saying that the eradication of Christians is a bad thing?

American policies are doing what more than a millenium of Islam has failed to do: eradicate Christianity in the Middle East.

You seem to imply that Islam has actively pursued the total eradication of Christianity for over a millennium, if this were true they would have succeeded wouldn’t you think.

Second, this has little to do with the secular or religious nature of the Iraqi state, but rather the war induced lawlessness and resulting sectarian violence. Additionally, US missionaries that tried to convert Muslims did not really help the local Christian minorities, as the latter got blamed for these activities.

I cannot pretend to be remotely sad about the demise of Christianity. However, I am sad to hear of the deaths of human beings who happen to also be Christian.

I would rather think that these smaller religions add to the cultural diversity and therefore richness of the Middle East. Consequently I would be sorry if these local religions were to disappear entirely.

Same goes for localized forms of Islam for that matter.

I would rather think that these smaller religions add to the cultural diversity and therefore richness of the Middle East. Consequently I would be sorry if these local religions were to disappear entirely.

Same goes for localized forms of Islam for that matter.
One hardly needs religions to have cultural diversity. Frankly, I think you're more likely to have more diversity if you have less religiosity, since the latter all too often is predicated on the destruction of the former.

I bet Donald Ali bin Rumsfeld loves it when a plan comes together.

I do not really think less religiosity is a bad thing, I’d rather not see whole subcultures disappear because of violence or oppression. If they do have to go extinct let them fade away naturally.

anyone who kills another over something as stupid as religion were chemically imbalanced to begin with. feebleminded ppl should be treated in institutions to help them regain their own thoughts and to purge the idea that there is 'an all powerful being'. gods r for weak minded ppl who NEED something to believe in. why cant they just live life as it is without wasting it on worshipping a fable?

:rolleyes: :sniper:

I would rather think that these smaller religions add to the cultural diversity and therefore richness of the Middle East. Consequently I would be sorry if these local religions were to disappear entirely.

Same goes for localized forms of Islam for that matter.
Personally, I'm much more sad when smaller languages die out than when smaller religions do. Languages are much prettier.

American policies are doing what more than a millenium of Islam has failed to do: eradicate Christianity in the Middle East.

It's sick that now that we've taken out Saddam, Christians are being persecuted on an unprecedented scale in Iraq.

"A onetime Iraqi liquor store owner now living in Syria lamented that “before the war there was no separation between Christian and Muslim. Under Saddam no one asked you your religion, and we used to attend each other’s religious services and weddings. After the invasion we hoped democracy would come; but instead all that came was bombs, kidnapping and killing. Now at least 75% of my Christian friends have fled. There is no future for us in Iraq.” "

http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_vanishing_christians_of_iraq/

Next you'll be saying there's no future for Muslims in the US because of what a few aggressive righties say.

Because Islam's so much better! :rolleyes:

Who said we're playing favourites. I, for one, am glad to see christianity declining (but not the deaths of christians), because I want religion as whole to cease.

*A single tear rolls down GPN's cheek*

I cannot pretend to be remotely sad about the demise of Christianity. However, I am sad to hear of the deaths of human beings who happen to also be Christian.

I gotta agree with ya, man.

With asny luck, Islam and the other religions will vanish too.

you guys are such humanitarians.

its a terrible thing to be driven from your home because of your religious beliefs.

you guys are such humanitarians.

its a terrible thing to be driven from your home because of your religious beliefs.
It's a stupid thing to be driven anywhere because of your religious beliefs. Things like race and gender suck when being discriminated, because these are innate, and consequent of no choice on one's own part. But religion? It's dumb. It is 100% in your head. Nobody can tell you are a christian, you have to tell them first (or show them). Getting persecuted? Stop overtly displaying your faith. Nobody can read your mind.

Or better yet, do the world a favour, and drop it altogether.

It's a stupid thing to be driven anywhere because of your religious beliefs. Things like race and gender suck when being discriminated, because these are innate, and consequent of no choice on one's own part. But religion? It's dumb. It is 100% in your head. Nobody can tell you are a christian, you have to tell them first (or show them). Getting persecuted? Stop overtly displaying your faith. Nobody can read your mind.

Or better yet, do the world a favour, and drop it altogether.

yeah that makes sense, its really all THEIR fault for being christians to begin with. what should they expect when in their whole lives and the lives of their parents and grandparents is has never been an issue that they are christians?

I cannot pretend to be remotely sad about the demise of Christianity. However, I am sad to hear of the deaths of human beings who happen to also be Christian.


*Shakes fist at Bottle*

Why must you always steal my thunder? Why must post so often and so well? I might as well just stick to lurking and watching The Glorious Bottle say it all.

It's a stupid thing to be driven anywhere because of your religious beliefs. Things like race and gender suck when being discriminated, because these are innate, and consequent of no choice on one's own part. But religion? It's dumb. It is 100% in your head. Nobody can tell you are a christian, you have to tell them first (or show them). Getting persecuted? Stop overtly displaying your faith. Nobody can read your mind.

Or better yet, do the world a favour, and drop it altogether.

I don't think that going to your local place of worship once a week can be classed as 'overtly displaying' their faith, and that's all they'd need to do to be identified as a member of another religion. There's also the fact that they were open about their religion pre-Saddam and presumably other people can remember that far back. Finally, there are reports of religious gangs asking theological questions to see whether somebody really was Sunni/Shia etc. For example, a Shiite gang might ask people to name the twelve Imams and kill them if they can't answer.

It's a stupid thing to be driven anywhere because of your religious beliefs. Things like race and gender suck when being discriminated, because these are innate, and consequent of no choice on one's own part. But religion? It's dumb. It is 100% in your head. Nobody can tell you are a christian, you have to tell them first (or show them). Getting persecuted? Stop overtly displaying your faith. Nobody can read your mind.

Or better yet, do the world a favour, and drop it altogether.

It is reassuring to know that one need not turn to religion to find examples of intolerant extremism. :rolleyes:

*Shakes fist at Bottle*

Why must you always steal my thunder? Why must post so often and so well? I might as well just stick to lurking and watching The Glorious Bottle say it all.

She'll be able to do that without breaking a sweat.

yeah that makes sense, its really all THEIR fault for being christians to begin with. what should they expect when in their whole lives and the lives of their parents and grandparents is has never been an issue that they are christians? It isn't their fault. I mean it sucks to be discriminated against, but religion is one of those things you only really have to allow to be a problem if you let people know.

If they started persecuting atheists in Australia, when the G-man knocks on my door I say "God bless you". Thats the point. It sucks that I couldn't be open about my atheism, but wouldn't it just be self-effacingly stupid to allow myself to be persecuted for something nobody can tell I have?

I don't think that going to your local place of worship once a week can be classed as 'overtly displaying' their faith, and that's all they'd need to do to be identified as a member of another religion. There's also the fact that they were open about their religion pre-Saddam and presumably other people can remember that far back. Finally, there are reports of religious gangs asking theological questions to see whether somebody really was Sunni/Shia etc. For example, a Shiite gang might ask people to name the twelve Imams and kill them if they can't answer. And that sucks. However, if it just comes down to keeping your mouth shut and leaving you crucifix at home, why make a martyr out of yourself? For most people, this would work, unless there are people investigating specifically you- you would have to pop on their radar first.

It is reassuring to know that one need not turn to religion to find examples of intolerant extremism. :rolleyes:
It's not intolerant, or extreme. It is reason. Group A wants to harrass group B. I am group B. Group B is defined by it's mythological beliefs. I don't let group A know what I believe.

or, if I don't like keeping it a secret more than I like living here, I leave.

No need for persecution.

And that sucks. However, if it just comes down to keeping your mouth shut and leaving you crucifix at home, why make a martyr out of yourself? For most people, this would work, unless there are people investigating specifically you- you would have to pop on their radar first.

Again, there would be a lot of people who knew you before the fall of Saddam who would know your religion; the article explicitly said that there was a lot of inter-religion mingling.

It's not intolerant, or extreme. It is reason. Group A wants to harrass group B. I am group B. Group B is defined by it's mythological beliefs. I don't let group A know what I believe.

or, if I don't like keeping it a secret more than I like living here, I leave.

No need for persecution.

being driven out of your home IS persecution.

they cant hide what they are. everyone knows that they are christians. they have all known all their lives. they used to be friends. they used to go to each others weddings and funerals. its to late to pretend to be something else.

nor should they ever have to.

its a sad effect of the iraq invasion that these people can no longer live as neighbors.

So sad...:(

thank god for atheism
I -WOULD- say "Win."
But I prefer Agnosticism. Or however you'd say it.

No one should have to hide who they are and what faith they follow.. in Iraq Iran the middle east or in the USA or Canada. I have family that lived in west papua who were missionaries, they had to live a very strict life and were very restricted in what they could do becuase of a high Muslim presence. They never hid that they were Christian and they could have been killed for it. If it takes dieing for your faith for others to realize its not just a religion its a life style then all the power to the marters.. just dont kill others in the proces..

If there are two things that NSG has trouble respecting and understanding, they are religion and warfare.

Again, there would be a lot of people who knew you before the fall of Saddam who would know your religion; the article explicitly said that there was a lot of inter-religion mingling. Specifically you? I'm sure a lot of people could have just blended in. Anyhow, if there is a specific vendetta against you, either 'convert' to islam, or if they won't have that, leave.

being driven out of your home IS persecution. Ok, let me rephrase, no need for 'violent persecution'. I'd rather skip town than be martyred.

they cant hide what they are. everyone knows that they are christians. they have all known all their lives. they used to be friends. they used to go to each others weddings and funerals. its to late to pretend to be something else. Look, if some christian slaps on a kufi and a bedsheet, who is going to know who he was in his previous life amongst all the chaos and upheaval? Obviously the priest is fucked, as well as a couple of personalities, but the vast majority are just nameless memories.

nor should they ever have to. Indeed, but that is what sucks about life, sometimes things aren't as they should be. Do you act accordingly, or demand things be as they should be?

its a sad effect of the iraq invasion that these people can no longer live as neighbors. You can't do much, from what I hear.

I -WOULD- say "Win."
But I prefer Agnosticism. Or however you'd say it.

'Fence-sitting'

'Fence-sitting'

Fences can be comfortable to sit on. Unless they're chain link or those kind with the vertical boards.

Ok, let me rephrase, no need for 'violent persecution'. I'd rather skip town than be martyred.

Look, if some christian slaps on a kufi and a bedsheet, who is going to know who he was in his previous life amongst all the chaos and upheaval? Obviously the priest is fucked, as well as a couple of personalities, but the vast majority are just nameless memories.

Indeed, but that is what sucks about life, sometimes things aren't as they should be. Do you act accordingly, or demand things be as they should be?

You can't do much, from what I hear.

i seem to have lost your point.

the people involved have done just what you suggest--they have saved their lives by fleeing iraq.

No one should have to hide who they are and what faith they follow.. in Iraq Iran the middle east or in the USA or Canada. I have family that lived in west papua who were missionaries, they had to live a very strict life and were very restricted in what they could do becuase of a high Muslim presence. They never hid that they were Christian and they could have been killed for it. If it takes dieing for your faith for others to realize its not just a religion its a life style then all the power to the marters.. just dont kill others in the proces..Obviously missionaries would stick out like a sore thumb. Also, their priorities are different- rather than wanting to live their lives and mind their own business, your olds were into the business of risking their lives to cram their values down the throats of others by blackmailing them with 'aid'. They probably would have been quite pleased with a martyrs death, unlike the common man.

Fences can be comfortable to sit on. Unless they're chain link or those kind with the vertical boards.
See, there is an art to both. The chain fences it's all about pushing back against it, where as the planked, it is about sitting diagonally.

Anyhow, yes certain fences are worth sitting on, like; "Will I support the government, or the revolution? Pick a side, and I risk dying...". However, other fences are silly to sit on "There may in fact be a teacup orbiting pluto..."

i seem to have lost your point.

the people involved have done just what you suggest--they have saved their lives by fleeing iraq. Right, sort of. I mean, I support them fully- if they don't like it, they should flee. I was really disputing that they were getting persecuted as christians. Not disputing actually, so much as criticising. It is really something they can control- if they want to.

Just like if they started persecuting atheists here. I'd really only get persecuted if I allowed it by openly professing atheism.

Right, sort of. I mean, I support them fully- if they don't like it, they should flee. I was really disputing that they were getting persecuted as christians. Not disputing actually, so much as criticising. It is really something they can control- if they want to.

Just like if they started persecuting atheists here. I'd really only get persecuted if I allowed it by openly professing atheism.

well no

you are persecuted whether or not you admit to atheism. you have to spend your life in a lie feigning belief. you have to watch your tongue always lest you slip and admit to going right to sleep without allowing time for having said your nightly prayers. you must worry that you will forget to say "god bless you" when someone sneezes. you cant ever show your true mind to anyone for fear that they will turn you in and you will lose everything.

or you can run.

well no

you are persecuted whether or not you admit to atheism. you have to spend your life in a lie feigning belief. you have to watch your tongue always lest you slip and admit to going right to sleep without allowing time for having said your nightly prayers. you must worry that you will forget to say "god bless you" when someone sneezes. you cant ever show your true mind to anyone for fear that they will turn you in and you will lose everything. So what? We have to watch what we say with a lot of things. What counts is what is inside. It's not living a lie if you are internally true to yourself, and consider the motions as simple lip service. Like calling boss you hate 'Sir', you don't have to, but it is better that way. It doesn't mean you are living a lie, it means you are being prudent about how others perceive your life.

or you can run. Or, if public expression of your beliefs is of paramount importance to you (as is dismally often the case with Christians), you can run. It really depends on your relative care levels. Do you care about being publically christian more than you care about living unmolested?

So what? We have to watch what we say with a lot of things. What counts is what is inside. It's not living a lie if you are internally true to yourself, and consider the motions as simple lip service. Like calling boss you hate 'Sir', you don't have to, but it is better that way. It doesn't mean you are living a lie, it means you are being prudent about how others perceive your life.

Or, if public expression of your beliefs is of paramount importance to you (as is dismally often the case with Christians), you can run. It really depends on your relative care levels. Do you care about being publically christian more than you care about living unmolested?

calling or not calling your boss "sir" will not get you driven from your home.

but anyway, you are assigning responsibility for persecution to those who are being persecuted instead of to those who are doing the persecution.

or perhaps those who have inadvertantly opened the door to persecution.

in any case, its a bad thing for people to have to repudiate their faith or leave the country.

but anyway, you are assigning responsibility for persecution to those who are being persecuted instead of to those who are doing the persecution.well, you have to assign the responsibility to where it belongs. if those who are persecuted are generally annoying retards it is their responsibility if they get rejected.

in any case, its a bad thing for people to have to repudiate their faith or leave the country.if that really is a bad thing depends entirely on which faith it is. there are good faiths and there are bad faiths, and if you adhere to a bad faith it is a good thing if you are pressured to drop it.

well, you have to assign the responsibility to where it belongs. if those who are persecuted are generally annoying retards it is their responsibility if they get rejected.

if that really is a bad thing depends entirely on which faith it is. there are good faiths and there are bad faiths, and if you adhere to a bad faith it is a good thing if you are pressured to drop it.

Yah, Yah, we get it. You hate everything Abrahmic.

Yah, Yah, we get it. You hate everything Abrahmic.Because it's all empty and vain (just as are the followers). And Yah indeed.

It isn't their fault. I mean it sucks to be discriminated against, but religion is one of those things you only really have to allow to be a problem if you let people know.

If they started persecuting atheists in Australia, when the G-man knocks on my door I say "God bless you". Thats the point. It sucks that I couldn't be open about my atheism, but wouldn't it just be self-effacingly stupid to allow myself to be persecuted for something nobody can tell I have?

Isn't the whole point that you should be allowed to be open about your religious beliefs without being persecuted?

well, you have to assign the responsibility to where it belongs. if those who are persecuted are generally annoying retards it is their responsibility if they get rejected.

if that really is a bad thing depends entirely on which faith it is. there are good faiths and there are bad faiths, and if you adhere to a bad faith it is a good thing if you are pressured to drop it.

no really it doesnt matter if its christianity, islam, scientology or satanism. all that matters is that they behave themselves. as these people have been doing for generations.

American policies are doing what more than a millenium of Islam has failed to do: eradicate Christianity in the Middle East.

It's sick that now that we've taken out Saddam, Christians are being persecuted on an unprecedented scale in Iraq.

http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_vanishing_christians_of_iraq/

Well GWB is just trying to see Christ's vision brought to life. Remember, Christ says that if you are truly one of his followers you will be persecuted. That's impossible to do in the Western Hemisphere where Christians control the ruling power structure. It's impossible to do in Europe where people are to multicultural to persecute for a religion.

But take a look at all the opportunity that George Bush has created for people to be True Christian Martyrs (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3690259.stm) in Iraq. The poor Christians in the West are doomed to eternal damnation for refusing to subject themselves to persecution, but thanks to George W. Bush, they have no one to blame but themselves. If they wanted to be good Christian Martyrs, they could join a Korean Church, or enlist in the military to be martyred.

:mp5:Well GWB is just trying to see Christ's vision brought to life. Remember, Christ says that if you are truly one of his followers you will be persecuted. That's impossible to do in the Western Hemisphere where Christians control the ruling power structure. It's impossible to do in Europe where people are to multicultural to persecute for a religion.

But take a look at all the opportunity that George Bush has created for people to be True Christian Martyrs (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3690259.stm) in Iraq. The poor Christians in the West are doomed to eternal damnation for refusing to subject themselves to persecution, but thanks to George W. Bush, they have no one to blame but themselves. If they wanted to be good Christian Martyrs, they could join a Korean Church, or enlist in the military to be martyred.


he is such a good christian man. we are so lucky to have him as president.

[/sarcasm]

I think what the OP is correctly lamenting is the demise of secularism, not specifically Christianity, that under Saddam (despite his police state) at least it was secular and kept the Sunni/Shia/Kurd/Christian etc delicate balance together in Iraq. In fact one of the reasons that Saddam started the war with Iran was because Iranians revolutionaries were stirring up rebellions with the Kurds and playing the Shias against the Sunnis, Saddam rightly feared this would expose Iraq factional weakness he has viciously suppressed for so long, and tried to silence Iran, which actually worked because it produced a nationalist (beyond religion) which united Iraqis of all sections. The toppling of the Baathists by the US toppled alot of things, fascism, police state etc, but it also opened the Pandora's box.

So sad...:(

thank god for atheism

Firstbest response. FTW.

It's a stupid thing to be driven anywhere because of your religious beliefs. Things like race and gender suck when being discriminated, because these are innate, and consequent of no choice on one's own part. But religion? It's dumb. It is 100% in your head. Nobody can tell you are a christian, you have to tell them first (or show them). Getting persecuted? Stop overtly displaying your faith. Nobody can read your mind.

Or better yet, do the world a favour, and drop it altogether.

And in Northern Ireland atheists get asked "but are you a catholic atheist or a protestant atheist?"

Depending on where you live people judge what religion you are by the food you eat, the school you attend (or attended), which football team you support, the area you live in or just the fact you do not participate in certain festivals or events.

This is particularly true when the majority of people are of one faith - the minority are lumped together.

:mp5:


he is such a good christian man. we are so lucky to have him as president.

[/sarcasm]
I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job. —to a group of Amish in Lancaster, Pennsylvania - July 9, 2004

Talk about low. Lying to the Amish of all people. :mad:

Oh yeah, and this:

I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and what I believe — I believe what I believe is right. —Rome, Italy, July 22, 2001

But, of course, there's no real established pattern, regardless of what Boykin might or might not say about the guy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_G._Boykin
He's in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this.

Ok, let me rephrase, no need for 'violent persecution'. I'd rather skip town than be martyred.

Look, if some christian slaps on a kufi and a bedsheet, who is going to know who he was in his previous life amongst all the chaos and upheaval? Obviously the priest is fucked, as well as a couple of personalities, but the vast majority are just nameless memories.

Indeed, but that is what sucks about life, sometimes things aren't as they should be. Do you act accordingly, or demand things be as they should be?

You can't do much, from what I hear.

You are my perfect example of what is wrong with the world. You wouldn't die for any of your beliefs, you'd rather run. You have no spine. You are the type who wants to please everyone, I believe in a God, I don't support any certain religion, they all produce some good, some bad. You are the perfect example of the moral relativist. There are no beliefs that you would fight or die for, because all violence is bad to you. I don't feel sorry for these Christians, they have to either fight or run, thats life. I'm sure life under Saddam was sooo much better.

You are my perfect example of what is wrong with the world. You wouldn't die for any of your beliefs, you'd rather run. You have no spine. You are the type who wants to please everyone, I believe in a God, I don't support any certain religion, they all produce some good, some bad. You are the perfect example of the moral relativist. There are no beliefs that you would fight or die for, because all violence is bad to you. I don't feel sorry for these Christians, they have to either fight or run, thats life. I'm sure life under Saddam was sooo much better.

Hello MTAE. And I would gladly die for my beliefs, this is because my beliefs are about the welfare and material conditions and class consciousness of the whole world, my beliefs are not the self-exultation and mob ego-mentality of nationalism and religious fundamentalism.

no really it doesnt matter if its christianity, islam, scientology or satanism. all that matters is that they behave themselves. as these people have been doing for generations.according to you, does "behave" include to not spread misinformation about the world?

*Shakes fist at Bottle*

Why must you always steal my thunder? Why must post so often and so well?
To be frank, it's because I love getting fists shaken at me...

;)

Isn't the whole point that you should be allowed to be open about your religious beliefs without being persecuted?
Okay, I'm going to put on a Devil's Advocate Cap, to ask a question:

In my society, there are lots of beliefs you can't be open about. Why should religious beliefs be automatically given a pass? "Religious beliefs" can span a pretty huge range, and a lot of people have religious beliefs that include misogyny, racism, homophobia, and other forms of hate that would not be accepted (or would be less easily accepted) if they were voiced in a secular manner. So why should tossing a bunch of superstition into the mix give a person MORE leeway with their beliefs than they would have otherwise?

And should people really be "allowed" to be open about any and all beliefs? From a legal perspective, I believe they should, and from a personal physical safety perspective, but I don't think other people should feel obligated to put up with every possible human belief.

If you believe women are subhumans, I don't have any sympathy for you when you get branded a jackass and nobody invites you to parties any more. If you vocally share your hatred of brown people, I think an employer has every right to not hire you because they don't want their company associated with your bigotry. And so forth.

Being heartless is good and bad for me. Good in that I don't get upset over big emotional things happening (normally). Bad in that I really lose track of where the conversation goes. :confused:I'm like the cold sniper...:sniper:

However, I do become partially upset whenever a religion or culture is persecuted (however much I may DISLIKE it, I still do hate to see only PART of society collapse).

calling or not calling your boss "sir" will not get you driven from your home.

but anyway, you are assigning responsibility for persecution to those who are being persecuted instead of to those who are doing the persecution Not quite, but almost- so keep the finger on the trigger. I am keeping the responsibility with the persecutors, but noting that the persecuted could easily avoid persecution were they not so self-righteous. "Anyone who thinks of the number three will be persecuted! Now who is thinking of the number three?" *A couple of idiots wave their hands*

or perhaps those who have inadvertantly opened the door to persecution.

in any case, its a bad thing for people to have to repudiate their faith or leave the country.Yeah, it sucks, but that is life. You do what you have to to get by as you wish. The question is whether you make it harder for yourself.

Isn't the whole point that you should be allowed to be open about your religious beliefs without being persecuted? I suppose, but the real point is that not everything is as it should be. In such a scenario, do you go on a self-martyring crusade in defiance that things aren't as they should be, or do you deal with reality as it is?

You are my perfect example of what is wrong with the world. You wouldn't die for any of your beliefs, you'd rather run. So it is the people who mind their own business who fuck the world, not the people who fight to cram their ideals down the throats of others? Thats news. You have no spine. If by 'no spine' you mean I am not a self-righteous fucktard, then yes. You are the type who wants to please everyone, Quite the opposite, I don't care to please anyone. I believe in a God, I don't support any certain religion, they all produce some good, some bad. Indeed, so what? You are the perfect example of the moral relativist. True, how is this a bad thing? There are no beliefs that you would fight or die for, because all violence is bad to you. Wrong. Well, right and wrong. Whilst there are no abstract ideals for which I would risk my very existence for, I don't see all violence as bad. Violence can be very useful. I don't feel sorry for these Christians, they have to either fight or run, thats life. I'm sure life under Saddam was sooo much better. Niether, they can either lump it, fight, or run. I'd say fighting it would be stupid, unless they were likely to win, which they are not. So, run or deal with it.

Hello MTAE. And I would gladly die for my beliefs, this is because my beliefs are about the welfare and material conditions and class consciousness of the whole world, my beliefs are not the self-exultation and mob ego-mentality of nationalism and religious fundamentalism.Is that MTAE?

Weep for the christians being persecuted and killed. Weep for the destruction of an ancient culture. But don't forget...

to weep for the jews - one of the oldest jewish enclaves is being abandoned as well. Dating back 2500 years, and once numbering over 150,000, almost all have now left voluntarily or been forced out. The UNHCR reports that since the fall of the regime in 2003, ‘the living conditions of the Jews in Iraq has worsened dramatically’ due to the pervasive suspicion that the Jews must be co-operating with the multi-national forces. In September 2006, the International Religious Freedom Report stated that the Jewish population ‘has dwindled to less than 15 persons in the Baghdad area’.

Or to worry for the Palestinians. Before the fall of Saddam, they numbered 35,000. Today that figure is closer to 15,000. And where should they flee? Iraqi Palestinians have been turned away from the Iraq/Jordan border and only a limited number have been allowed into Syria. Having accepted 287 refugees, the Syrian government informed the UNHCR in early May 2006 that it will not accept any more. Since May 2006, 350 Palestinians, including children and pregnant women, have fled Baghdad and are stranded in no man’s land between Iraq and Syria.

Don't forget The Mandaean (or Sabian) religion, one of the oldest surviving Gnostic religions in the world, dating back
to the Mesopotamian civilisation. The situation for Mandaeans in Iraq has ‘deteriorated remarkably’ since the invasion by the US and coalition forces and the collapse of the regime, according to a UNHCR report from 2005.
(Human Rights Watch estimate the population of 30,000 had declined to less than 13,000 - in 2005)

Weep for the Yazidis. Since 2003, Islamist groups have declared Yazidis ‘impure’ and, among other things, leaflets have been distributed in Mosul by Islamic extremists calling for the death of all members of the Yazidi community.

Remember the plight of the Bahá’ís. Quote one Bahá’í doctor from Iraq:
We were happy when the regime ended, and we started our activities once again, as all who were previously oppressed did ... But once again we are living in fear of fanatics who may be against us. They did not exist three years ago and they do now. Muslims are killing each other and trying to divide Baghdad. We are afraid of civil war, we are waiting to see what will happen and we are praying for
the best.’ (ASSIMILATION, EXODUS, ERADICATION: IRAQ’S MINORITY COMMUNITIES SINCE 2003 page 14)

But this was about the Christians... The Committee of Planning and Follow-Up in Iraq issued a statement after five churches were bombed in 2004, which included: As we announce our responsibility for the bombings we tell you, the people of the crosses: return to your senses and be aware that God’s soldiers are ready for
you. You wanted a crusade and these are its results.

I'll end on a quote from Assimilation, Exodus, Eradication:
Iraq’s minority communities since 2003; by Preti Taneja.

Ten per cent of Iraq’s population is made up of minority communities. They include Armenian and Chaldo-
Assyrian Christians, Bahá’ís, Faili Kurds, Jews, Mandaeans, Palestinians, Shabaks, Turkomans and Yazidis. Some of these groups have lived in Iraq for two millennia or more. There is now a real fear that they will not survive the current conflict and their unique culture and heritage in Iraq may be extinguished forever. A huge exodus of these communities is now taking place. The Iraqi Ministry for Migration and Displacement in Iraq has estimated that nearly half of the minority communities have left the country. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, minorities make up approximately 30 per cent of the 1.8m Iraqi refugees now seeking sanctuary in Jordan, Syria and across the world.

Minorities are specifically targeted for eradication because of their faith and ethnicity. Christians are at risk because their faith associates them with the West and with the MNF-I (Multi National Force in Iraq). The traditional trade of this community as alcohol-sellers also makes them a target. Islamist groups have dubbed the Yazidi religion ‘impure’ and called for their destruction. For Mandaeans, the carrying of weapons is a direct violation of their religious laws, thus making it difficult for them to defend themselves.

All of Iraq’s minority communities have suffered violations since 2003 which include:

• destruction and defacement of religious buildings
• mass murder of congregations gathered in and around them
• abduction, ransoming and murder of religious and civic leaders and individuals including children
• forced conversion to Islam using tactics such as death threats, rape and forced marriage.

Minority communities also face assimilation because the areas they live in, such as Mosul, Basra and Kirkuk, put them at the centre of power struggles between Kurds, Sunni Arabs and Shia Arabs, fighting over historical claims and – crucially – Iraq’s great oil wealth.

Ironically, many from these groups felt life might improve for them at the collapse of the Ba’ath regime. But as well as the current lack of security, discriminatory laws still active from the time of Saddam Hussein’s rule continue to make life almost impossible. The Bahá’í community remains without the right to citizenship and their freedom of movement and to practise their religion is still curtailed. Iraq’s Palestinian community, once given special treatment to suit the political will of the Ba’ath Party, now find themselves under siege in Baghdad, the constant target of violence and threats. With neighbouring countries unwilling to give them refuge, they remain trapped in increasing numbers on the borders of Iraq.

So far Iraq’s fledgling democratic processes have presented problems for minorities. During the 2005 elections, members of minority groups reported violence, intimidation and lack of access to polling booths. The new Constitution – approved in a 2005 referendum – was drafted with little participation from minority groups. Though it is progressive in many respects, it is alarmingly vague on the role Islam will play in the future Iraqi state – placing a question-mark over issues of religious freedom. It could also have offered stronger protections for minority and women’s rights.

now im really depressed.

now im really depressed.

You're welcome. *Nods*

Okay, I'm going to put on a Devil's Advocate Cap, to ask a question:

In my society, there are lots of beliefs you can't be open about. Why should religious beliefs be automatically given a pass? "Religious beliefs" can span a pretty huge range, and a lot of people have religious beliefs that include misogyny, racism, homophobia, and other forms of hate that would not be accepted (or would be less easily accepted) if they were voiced in a secular manner. So why should tossing a bunch of superstition into the mix give a person MORE leeway with their beliefs than they would have otherwise?

And should people really be "allowed" to be open about any and all beliefs? From a legal perspective, I believe they should, and from a personal physical safety perspective, but I don't think other people should feel obligated to put up with every possible human belief.

If you believe women are subhumans, I don't have any sympathy for you when you get branded a jackass and nobody invites you to parties any more. If you vocally share your hatred of brown people, I think an employer has every right to not hire you because they don't want their company associated with your bigotry. And so forth.

That's all true, but this is christianity, not racism or some other prejudice.

Christianity is a very vague term. For example, i got told i was christian when i responded to the question "if everyone treated everything with love, would the world be a better place?", with yes, and then to the question "and did jesus preach this?", with yes.

If this makes me an actual christian is irrelevant, i would be persecuted, especially since i couldn't hide it very well, not being able to answer the questions they might ask me. Plus I would rather die than not live by my personal beliefs, which only makes it harder to hide.

Since such a large group of people fit the category "christian", i think it mutes the point you mention.

EDIT: Dammit Gravlen! I didn't really want to know that:( Why not add the amount of animal species being wiped out just to add pain icing to the pain cake.

To be frank, it's because I love getting fists shaken at me...

;)

In internet lingo, that sounds SO EXTREMELY hot.
:)

..., but this is christianity, not racism or some other prejudice....ROFLOL :eek: :rolleyes: :D
greetings from Salem...

You are my perfect example of what is wrong with the world. You wouldn't die for any of your beliefs, you'd rather run. You have no spine. You are the type who wants to please everyone, I believe in a God, I don't support any certain religion, they all produce some good, some bad. You are the perfect example of the moral relativist. There are no beliefs that you would fight or die for, because all violence is bad to you. I don't feel sorry for these Christians, they have to either fight or run, thats life. I'm sure life under Saddam was sooo much better.

I think what's wrong with the world is that in fact far too many people are willing and eager to die for their beliefs.

I think what's wrong with the world is that in fact far too many people are willing and eager to die for their beliefs.I think the bigger problem by far is that they're willing and eager to make others die for them.

Not that I have any kind of respect for people who'll, for example, light themselves on fire to make a point, but it's a hell of a lot better than lighting others on fire.

Not that I have any kind of respect for people who'll, for example, light themselves on fire to make a point

I would; that shit takes some cojones.

I would; that shit takes some cojones.But does it impress you so much you try to accomodate whatever the fried fucker wanted? If it doesn't, it's just self-defeating, init?

I think the bigger problem by far is that they're willing and eager to make others die for them.

Not that I have any kind of respect for people who'll, for example, light themselves on fire to make a point, but it's a hell of a lot better than lighting others on fire.

I think any kind of belief that people would die or kill for is inherently flawed.

But does it impress you so much you try to accomodate whatever the fried fucker wanted? If it doesn't, it's just self-defeating, init?

I don't think so.

But does it impress you so much you try to accomodate whatever the fried fucker wanted? If it doesn't, it's just self-defeating, init?

Well, of course not, but what is he/she going to do living that will?

I think any kind of belief that people would die or kill for is inherently flawed.In most cases, I think it's people who're the problem, not necessarily the belief(s).

Anarchism is a great example. The cornerstone of any kind of anarchist ideology, is free association. Yet our history has had depressingly many people who'd happily kill others for not wanting to live in an anarchic society. It's a bit misplaced to blame the idea for the actions of a bunch of tossers who obviously didn't grasp it. That's what I think anyway.

And no, I'm not referring to all the people who've had to defend themselves just because they themselves wanted to live in an anarchic society. There's a difference.

Well, of course not, but what is he/she going to do living that will?Keep trying to convince people, one at a time if need be, and organise the convinced. Individually there's a whole lot of things we can't do. In groups, there's almost nothing we can't do. Setting oneself on fire just deprives the group of a voice.

As I just said, I'm an anarchist. I could go set myself ablaze down the corner, in desperation of how futile my cause seems right now. But by far the better choice, I think, is to keep talking to people, keep showing them it can work, and ensuring that even if I never see it happen, those who come after will have a chance to.

Keep trying to convince people, one at a time if need be, and organise the convinced. Individually there's a whole lot of things we can't do. In groups, there's almost nothing we can't do. Setting oneself on fire just deprives the group of a voice.

As I just said, I'm an anarchist. I could go set myself ablaze down the corner, in desperation of how futile my cause seems right now. But by far the better choice, I think, is to keep talking to people, keep showing them it can work, and ensuring that even if I never see it happen, those who come after will have a chance to.

I really can't think of anything an individual could say or do that would budge me politically. But I'm just saying, no matter what the reason, it takes some nerve to burn yourself alive, and I admire that.

I really can't think of anything an individual could say or do that would budge me politically.Perhaps that's why you have whatever stance you do? :p
Mind, that you can't think of anything, doesn't mean it can't happen - unless you're just a bloodyminded waste of oxygen, of course, but I'll assume you aren't ;)But I'm just saying, no matter what the reason, it takes some nerve to burn yourself alive, and I admire that.We'll just have to disagree. I think it's a copout.

That's all true, but this is christianity, not racism or some other prejudice.

I honestly cannot come up with polite way to respond to that right now.


Christianity is a very vague term. For example, i got told i was christian when i responded to the question "if everyone treated everything with love, would the world be a better place?", with yes, and then to the question "and did jesus preach this?", with yes.

I once was told that I'm "black" because a very distant ancestor of mine was from Morocco. People are often wrong about surprisingly obvious things.


If this makes me an actual christian is irrelevant, i would be persecuted, especially since i couldn't hide it very well, not being able to answer the questions they might ask me. Plus I would rather die than not live by my personal beliefs, which only makes it harder to hide.

There's been a lot of talk around here recently about this whole "dying for one's beliefs" thing. I think I'd probably say whatever the fuck it took to stay alive, so I could continue holding my beliefs and living according to them as best I can.

But, then, even at my tender young age I've already encountered a handful of people who would be only too happy to kill me for my beliefs. So, from my point of view, it would be relatively easy to die for my beliefs. Plenty of offers to help me along with that! On the other hand, living for my beliefs and doing what it takes to continue living for them even at the cost of my pride...now there's a real bastard of a time.


Since such a large group of people fit the category "christian", i think it mutes the point you mention.

Easy answer: they don't.

There's always a few random yahoos who oversimplify reality to the point of complete ridiculousness.

"Do you believe that the Bible says that Jesus said X?"
"Yes, the Bible does say that."
"Then you're a CHRISTIAN!!! RAWRRR!!!"

Meh. They're just as wrong as if they insisted that anybody who has ever done anything using their left hand MUST BE LEFT-HANDED!

There's been a lot of talk around here recently about this whole "dying for one's beliefs" thing. I think I'd probably say whatever the fuck it took to stay alive, so I could continue holding my beliefs and living according to them as best I can.
But wouldn't that be contradictory? Say, a government came to power that held public stonings for homosexuals, and you were required to take part, and if you didn't you would be executed. Would such a situation make you die for your beliefs?

But wouldn't that be contradictory? Say, a government came to power that held public stonings for homosexuals, and you were required to take part, and if you didn't you would be executed. Would such a situation make you die for your beliefs?

Or would you just hide?

But wouldn't that be contradictory? Say, a government came to power that held public stonings for homosexuals, and you were required to take part, and if you didn't you would be executed. Would such a situation make you die for your beliefs?
Cop-out answer: I kind of think that sort of government couldn't descend upon me in one fell swoop, and there would be some kind of prelude or warning during which time I could escape/hide/something.

Also, if a government of that sort actually did come to power they'd be sure to kill me off in the first wave. I'm an educated non-hetero female who refuses to breed. I'm a Primary Target for that sort of regime.

Less cop-out answer: I honestly don't know. If somebody put a stone in my hand and a gun to my head and said, "Stone that fag or die," I really truly don't know what the fuck I would do. I'd probably just fizzle out mentally and get shot because I was taking too long. Not really "dying for my principles," so much as "dying because situation DOES NOT COMPUTE."

But wouldn't that be contradictory? Say, a government came to power that held public stonings for homosexuals, and you were required to take part, and if you didn't you would be executed. Would such a situation make you die for your beliefs?

Pretend you can't throw for shit? :p Or fail that, say that your arm hurts. In other words, cop-out in a fashion that doesn't give away your beliefs by acting like a lamewad.

Cop-out answer: I kind of think that sort of government couldn't descend upon me in one fell swoop, and there would be some kind of prelude or warning during which time I could escape/hide/something.

Also, if a government of that sort actually did come to power they'd be sure to kill me off in the first wave. I'm an educated non-hetero female who refuses to breed. I'm a Primary Target for that sort of regime.

Less cop-out answer: I honestly don't know. If somebody put a stone in my hand and a gun to my head and said, "Stone that fag or die," I really truly don't know what the fuck I would do. I'd probably just fizzle out mentally and get shot because I was taking too long. Not really "dying for my principles," so much as "dying because situation DOES NOT COMPUTE."
Hmph. Is a yes or no answer too much to ask for?

Hmph. Is a yes or no answer too much to ask for?
I guess it's a yes, then, because my beliefs would most likely cause me to hesitate long enough that I'd get shot before I could figure out what to do. :P

Hmph. Is a yes or no answer too much to ask for?Yes it is, because your scenario is too simplistic. You're asking her to make all sorts of assumptions you provide no info on. Will she be in a position to protect others if she complies? Will she be next? etc.

Yes it is, because your scenario is too simplistic. You're asking her to make all sorts of assumptions you provide no info on. Will she be in a position to protect others if she complies? Will she be next? etc.

It's simple for a reason. I could have written an entire fucking short story about it if I was so inclined. In fact, I'll make it even simpler for you: Would you die instead of violating your beliefs? Its a simple matter of refusing to compromise your beliefs even when faced with death.

It's simple for a reason. I could have written an entire fucking short story about it if I was so inclined. In fact, I'll make it even simpler for you: Would you die instead of violating your beliefs? Its a simple matter of refusing to compromise your beliefs even when faced with death.I married a religious woman, so evidently not.

If you meant to ask if I'd rather spend the rest of my life being forced to systematically violate my own ethics, the answer's probably the opposite - but again it depends on the situation. But hey, why switch to grayscale when black & white don't work? ;)

A more interesting question to me is not if someone is willing to die for their beliefs, but if they are willing to kill for them.

I married a religious woman, so evidently not.
My condolences. ;)

If you meant to ask if I'd rather spend the rest of my life being forced to systematically violate my own ethics
I thought that was pretty clear in my original post, but I guess it was too simple!

A more interesting question to me is not if someone is willing to die for their beliefs, but if they are willing to kill for them.

"Kill" is a rather loose term.

Would you be willing to kill someone in order to stop them from killing an innocent person? Or do you believe it's ok for people to kill innocent people?

Okay, I'm going to put on a Devil's Advocate Cap, to ask a question:

In my society, there are lots of beliefs you can't be open about. Why should religious beliefs be automatically given a pass? "Religious beliefs" can span a pretty huge range, and a lot of people have religious beliefs that include misogyny, racism, homophobia, and other forms of hate that would not be accepted (or would be less easily accepted) if they were voiced in a secular manner. So why should tossing a bunch of superstition into the mix give a person MORE leeway with their beliefs than they would have otherwise?

And should people really be "allowed" to be open about any and all beliefs? From a legal perspective, I believe they should, and from a personal physical safety perspective, but I don't think other people should feel obligated to put up with every possible human belief.

If you believe women are subhumans, I don't have any sympathy for you when you get branded a jackass and nobody invites you to parties any more. If you vocally share your hatred of brown people, I think an employer has every right to not hire you because they don't want their company associated with your bigotry. And so forth.

Not quite, but almost- so keep the finger on the trigger. I am keeping the responsibility with the persecutors, but noting that the persecuted could easily avoid persecution were they not so self-righteous. "Anyone who thinks of the number three will be persecuted! Now who is thinking of the number three?" *A couple of idiots wave their hands*

Yeah, it sucks, but that is life. You do what you have to to get by as you wish. The question is whether you make it harder for yourself.

I think the bigger problem by far is that they're willing and eager to make others die for them.

Not that I have any kind of respect for people who'll, for example, light themselves on fire to make a point, but it's a hell of a lot better than lighting others on fire.

QFT. Especially GreaterPacificNations's posts- they have all been 100% win.

Would you die instead of violating your beliefs? Its a simple matter of refusing to compromise your beliefs even when faced with death.
Well, that question I already answered a long ways back. Indeed, I think it was kind of the point of the post you originally responded to when you posed this question!

My whole point was that I doubt I'd be particularly eager to die for ANYTHING, including my beliefs, because I'm not in any hurry to die.

Your question really seems to be more about whether I would KILL, in a manner directly contrary to my beliefs, in order to preserve my own life. That's a bit of a different question.

At that point, it's really more about "what would you be willing to do to preserve your own life?" It's about self-preservation more than personal morality.

At that point, it's really more about "what would you be willing to do to preserve your own life?" It's about self-preservation more than personal morality.

Yet there are people who believe that killing in self-preservation is evil.

It still boils down to your belief system.

Do you believe that killing to preserve your own life is a good (or at least ok) thing?

Taken further:

Do you believe that killing in order to prevent someone from raping you is a good thing?

It could be that you believe that your own body and your own personal dignity are worth more than someone else's life - or you may believe that your own body and personal dignity are not worth defending to that extent.

Well, that question I already answered a long ways back. Indeed, I think it was kind of the point of the post you originally responded to when you posed this question!

My whole point was that I doubt I'd be particularly eager to die for ANYTHING, including my beliefs, because I'm not in any hurry to die.

Your question really seems to be more about whether I would KILL, in a manner directly contrary to my beliefs, in order to preserve my own life. That's a bit of a different question.

At that point, it's really more about "what would you be willing to do to preserve your own life?" It's about self-preservation more than personal morality.

The killing is irrelevant. I tried to think of an uncompromisable situation that would leave no room for negotiation, or skirting of the issuse. There was no other reason for picking that, other than trying to prove a point.

The killing is irrelevant. I tried to think of an uncompromisable situation that would leave no room for negotiation, or skirting of the issuse. There was no other reason for picking that, other than trying to prove a point.

Ok. You're living in a police state.

A particular minority is being hunted and rounded up.

One of them appears at your door at night, asking for food and shelter.

You know that if you do this, and are caught (in fact, if you simply don't turn them in), you'll be shot within 24 hours.

Do you take them in? Do you turn them in?

Do you take them in? Do you turn them in?Of course. I'll just have to hope I can dodge the NSA or whatever.

Of course. I'll just have to hope I can dodge the NSA or whatever.

And this is an example of "would you risk death for your beliefs"

Yet there are people who believe that killing in self-preservation is evil.

It still boils down to your belief system.

In that sense, I suppose you're right. But I tend to view self-preservation as a "belief" that is more tightly tied to instinct and impulse than most others. That puts it in a special category, in my opinion.

I believe it's a bad idea for me to burn off my hand, because I believe hands are lovely and useful and fun parts to own. But when I pull my hand back from a hot burner, it's not because I'm consciously acting on my abstract belief...it's because FUCKING OUCH.


Do you believe that killing to preserve your own life is a good (or at least ok) thing?

I tend to break even on that one. It's not "good" to be forced to kill to preserve your life, but it's also understandable that an individual would choose to do so. I tend to view it as "null" in moral terms, precisely because I view self-preservation as a different motive than most others.


Taken further:

Do you believe that killing in order to prevent someone from raping you is a good thing?

Again, do I think it's "good"? No, because that situation is just crummy from start to finish.

Would I do it? Probably, if I could. But I'd also probably punch Bill O'Reilly in the face if I could, even though it would most likely end up being more trouble than it's worth.


It could be that you believe that your own body and your own personal dignity are worth more than someone else's life - or you may believe that your own body and personal dignity are not worth defending to that extent.
Oh, well here's another problem:

I believe morality is 100% subjective. This impacts how I judge other people's moral choices.

See, I have my personal moral standards. I know what I, personally, believe is the right thing to do in most situations. But I don't expect all other people to live by my standards. I give lots of wiggle room on lots of different topics.

For myself, personally, I would probably kill to defend my own life/body, or that of one of my loved ones. I would feel that my actions were justified. I would feel that another person who did this would be justified.

But does that necessarily mean I think somebody is wrong if they would choose to die before killing another person? Nope.

The killing is irrelevant.

Erm...no. The killing cannot possibly be irrelevant to that situation, or to the choice I would make in that situation.


I tried to think of an uncompromisable situation that would leave no room for negotiation, or skirting of the issuse. There was no other reason for picking that, other than trying to prove a point.
Okay, but the simple fact is that you can't blithely remove the "killing another person" aspect from that example. That's the situation you created, and that's what I respond to.

Ok. You're living in a police state.

A particular minority is being hunted and rounded up.

One of them appears at your door at night, asking for food and shelter.

You know that if you do this, and are caught (in fact, if you simply don't turn them in), you'll be shot within 24 hours.

Do you take them in? Do you turn them in?

Yes. I would rather die than live with the shame not taking them in.

Erm...no. The killing cannot possibly be irrelevant to that situation, or to the choice I would make in that situation.


Okay, but the simple fact is that you can't blithely remove the "killing another person" aspect from that example. That's the situation you created, and that's what I respond to.

Fair enough.

Moving a bit back towards the center of the topic, and as a follow-up to my previous post:

Another perspective from a different rapport. This part focuses on christians as Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs).


For Christians wishing to leave the inflamed governorate of Baghdad, the unstable areas of Mosul and radical Basra, then Erbil or Ninewah, is their most viable option unless they want to leave the country. Some churches have attempted to chart movements of parishioners but have been unsuccessful because numbers are continually changing. Those attending church services have decreased rapidly, while a further indication of movement has been the large number of requests for church records for the purposes of obtaining travel documents and transfers to churches abroad in the hope of assistance there.

Calm and stable, Erbil has become the safe haven for Christian IDPs who can resume a normal life and start businesses or obtain employment relatively easily. The chosen neighborhood is Ainkawa, a predominantly Christian enclave that has, over the last two years, received more than 2,700 families, mainly from Baghdad and Mosul. These families had few troubles selling their properties and businesses in their original locations as, belonging to neither Islamic sect, they do not face threats or property devaluation issues. The government of Kurdistan has encouraged this move to Erbil and has supported them with monthly salaries. Recently, 900 plots of land were also distributed to these Christian IDP families in Ainkawa.

Christians in Baghdad are currently at risk not only from the high unemployment levels and related issues, but also from the threat of kidnappings and death. In the eastern Baghdad neighborhood of Rusafa, the government still maintains a semblance of control yet unemployment and poverty levels are extremely high and many residents are fearful of traveling to work. The majority of pupils and students in Rusafa are still able to attend schools and colleges despite threats, yet many have had to interrupt their education to find work. Female student attendance in secondary schools and colleges has decreased markedly as parents seek to protect their children from the violence. Explosions and university tutor assassinations also create significant fear. The health situation has deteriorated as security constraints have hindered NGOs from providing free medicines and treatment to patients. Those who fall ill pay large sums of money to be treated and if treatment involves x-rays, lab tests and costly equipment, patients wait months to receive the necessary care. The only exceptions to this long wait are those with powerful influence or those willing to pay heavy bribes to move appointments forward. Typical rates of surgery begin at 500,000 Iraqi Dinar for the most basic of treatment.

Christians in Karkh are located within a majority Sunni area which falls outside of government control. Only a few remain because intense bombings and violence have led to widespread departures. The main factor for displacement has been the bombing of churches and direct threats of assassination. Many simply abandoned churches in 2005, and kidnapping of priests or other clergy continues. Unemployment and a lack of available education here are also major issues of concern.


Christians of Baghdad: Aid & Interventions

Churches do help Christians with food and some financial support, but this assistance pales compared to the level of need. No medical help is offered by the churches. Christians not only flee or migrate due to unemployment, security risks, killings and occupation of homes, but also because of the bombing of churches themselves and direct threats to Christians. In particular, kidnapping of priests, their torture, inhumane treatment and ransom demands have had a particularly strong and adverse effect on the psychosocial health of the population.

Some Christians had to move to the north (Kurdistan) and to the Ninewah Valley villages where their ancestral homes are located. Churches and homes were formerly destroyed by the Kurds yet the current Kurdish government now encourages this movement and has reconstructed villages and churches in collaboration with the humanitarian organizations. These IDPs in the north, although safe, suffer from unemployment. The government of Kurdistan has allocated a monthly income of 100,000 Iraqi dinar per family, as well as food rations and food aid from humanitarian organizations. This is very low given the high cost of living and fuel prices. A barrel of gasoline or kerosene costs approximately US $100 or more, with cooking gas (LPG) fetching 25-30,000 ID per bottle. Occasionally, cooking gas runs as high as 90-100,000 ID. Those in Ninewah are better off than those in Erbil, Sulemania or Duhok as they live on ancestral properties which do not require high rental payments. IDPs in the North benefit from good, affordable health treatment as well as the MMUs which offer access to services. Education continues, yet Arabic-Kurdish problems surface as children are able to attend Arabic schools opened by the government of Kurdistan for IDPs with trained teaching staff and transportation for students not only in major governorate zones but also within rural villages. Yet the IDPs have been set back as certain subject fields within Baghdad’s university system are unavailable. As a result, many students alter their specializations and do not achieve desired qualifications.


Iraqi Christian Refugees

Migration to Jordan started in the 1990s due to trade sanctions on Iraq that lasted 13 years; but large numbers also migrated to neighboring countries such as Jordan, Syria and Turkey. Inflation in northern Iraq has meant that many altered their original destination and instead headed to Syria where the cost of living is lower. However, they still face unemployment and exploitation. Christian workers suffer from low wages, job insecurity and poor working conditions. Many depend on financial help from relatives in the Western world. The churches in Syria and Jordan offer assistance in the form of food items or jobs in churches or monasteries but they often are overburdened and receive little international agency support. Emigrants face poor health due to high medical treatment costs and lack of access to care, yet most are able to continue with their education. Major constraints include residential fines and authoritative oversight by government agencies.

Source:
International Medical Corps: Baghdad:
Sectarian Displacement, January 2007
Pages 15-16

EDIT: Dammit Gravlen! I didn't really want to know that:( Why not add the amount of animal species being wiped out just to add pain icing to the pain cake.
Hehe :p

Here's some more pain for you ;)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6935343.stm

And this is an example of "would you risk death for your beliefs"risk death for my beliefs? YES, yes I would.

The question is: Would you -RemoteO- risk an NSA/CIA anal penetration (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=12945363#post12945363) for your beliefs?

Would you.. RemoteO? ;)

risk death for my beliefs? YES, yes I would.

The question is: Would you -RemoteO- risk an NSA/CIA anal penetration (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=12945363#post12945363) for your beliefs?

Would you.. RemoteO? ;)

As I recall, it was pointed out to you that you don't get the rubber glove for your beliefs.

You get it during jail entry procedures after a felony arrest.

You can also get a rubber glove for a prostate exam. Your point is?

Ok. You're living in a police state.

A particular minority is being hunted and rounded up.

One of them appears at your door at night, asking for food and shelter.

You know that if you do this, and are caught (in fact, if you simply don't turn them in), you'll be shot within 24 hours.

Do you take them in? Do you turn them in? Hell no. I don't answer the door. Saves having to turn them in, so in that regard I'm doing us both a favour.

Yes. I would rather die than live with the shame not taking them in.
And then you die. Feel vindicated?