Christian Terrorism

[Thunderball]

Originally posted by Claeren@Sep 26 2005, 04:13 PM
Are you guys serious? You actually believe that? Yikes...

Hmmm... Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, United, Calvinist, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist, Orthodox Christian, Mormons (yes, technically), and then of course there's at least a dozen non-aligned Christian churches... and thats just the ones I can think of offhand.

All have different enough views to be considered different, yet all fall under the Christian umbrella. Hence its very difficult for say the Pope should condemn these guys, cause they are a separate religion... All he can do is what he and his predecessor have done and condemn acts of violence and suggest the pursuit of peace.

I should add that I'm not a very religious person, but I've studied them intensely for a few years now... Next time you wanna challenge someone, make sure you know what you're talking about.

To be fair, the term "christian fundamentalist" has been used more than a few times to describe the actions of people or groups... muslim extremism is simply much more prevalent.

[transplant99]

The Catholic Church and the Branch Davidians are not associated with each other.

Time to give up the ghost man.

David Koresh, was MOST CERTAINLY, a self proclaimed Christian.

No one ever said he was a Catholic...i doth belive it is you that is mixing that up.

[MarchHare]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 26 2005, 05:33 PM

Time to give up the ghost man.

David Koresh, was MOST CERTAINLY, a self proclaimed Christian.

No one ever said he was a Catholic...i doth belive it is you that is mixing that up.

Again, it wasn't Koresh himself that motivated McVeigh's action, it was the federal government's response at Waco and Ruby Ridge. In McVeigh's mind, by using tanks against their own citizens, the US government had crossed the line into tyranny and therefore as a patriot he had to defend Americans. That was his motivation. He wasn't a follower of Koresh, and his religion played no role in the bombings.

[Buff]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 26 2005, 05:33 PM

Time to give up the ghost man.

David Koresh, was MOST CERTAINLY, a self proclaimed Christian.

No one ever said he was a Catholic...i doth belive it is you that is mixing that up.

You have to remember that just because somebody says he belongs to a grouping, doesn't mean that he actually does. We could sit here and argue one way or another if somebody is or isn't a Christain, but ultimately that isn't for you or I to judge...

[Thunderball]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 26 2005, 05:33 PM

Time to give up the ghost man.

David Koresh, was MOST CERTAINLY, a self proclaimed Christian.

No one ever said he was a Catholic...i doth belive it is you that is mixing that up.

I think the concern over differentiating them is because all Christians are being grouped into the same pot. Islamic people face the same thing, but with them its a division of 2 (and sometimes 3), and not a division of dozens who have gone out of their way to distance themselves from the others. Its sheer ignorance on both sides... especially ignorance on the Western front for thinking all Islams are the same with varying levels of extremism, and ignorance on the atheist side for assuming all Christians are exactly the same with varying levels of extremism.

[Cheese]

Heres the list of religions...

List

[CaramonLS]

Cheese makes a decent point, if you read into it a bit guys.

Muslim bombs a building, suicide bombs someone. They have and will be labelled a Muslim extremist, Islamic extremist, Muslim Fundementalist.

They killed for what they beleive in, and used religion to support it.

Eric Rudolph bombs an abortion clinic, and he isn't labelled a Christian terrorist, except for he did it and followed the same criteria as the other terrorist I described. Thought what he was doing what was right, used religion as his excuse for it.

On that level, the labels we place on these 2 seperate incidents are biased, because one hits a lot closer to home and that is the predominant religion in our society.

At the root of it, both were acts of Terrorism caused by the person in questions religious beleifs and convictions. They get labelled differently, and that guys is Cheese's point through my eyes.

[habernac]

I'm with ya, Fotze

[transplant99]

Originally posted by fotze@Sep 26 2005, 07:46 PM
Why can't we cut all the rhetoric and agree to term the extremists religious ######bags

Agreed.

And if McVeigh wasn't "extremly motivated"........i have no idea who was.



Tim McVeigh sees himself as martyr protesting an evil government and calls the 168 people he murdered when he blew up the Murrah Federal Building "collateral damage." To most Americans he is a coward devoid of emotion or reason. What the press fails to report is he is a product of Christian Identity and their holy war against ZOG.

Tim was certainly exposed to their ideas, which are common among the militias he associated with. His statements and attitude are Christian Identity right down the line. I don't think he acted alone either, he is covering someone's ass. His/their real goal was to trigger a race war but McVeigh was so stupid he got caught. I'm sure Willie Martin never met Tim McVeigh or the other coward who murdered the kids at a Texas Baptist church. What he does do is spread the hate, lies, and paranoia that for these innocent people got them "killed in the end."

So clearly an extremist, i am stunned others argue otherwise.

[MarchHare]

Who's arguing that McVeigh wasn't an extremist? I certainly agree with that point. All I'm saying is that he wasn't a religious extremist, as his crimes were not motivated by his faith.

[Thunderball]

Originally posted by CaramonLS@Sep 26 2005, 05:45 PM
Cheese makes a decent point, if you read into it a bit guys.

Muslim bombs a building, suicide bombs someone. They have and will be labelled a Muslim extremist, Islamic extremist, Muslim Fundementalist.

They killed for what they beleive in, and used religion to support it.

Eric Rudolph bombs an abortion clinic, and he isn't labelled a Christian terrorist, except for he did it and followed the same criteria as the other terrorist I described. Thought what he was doing what was right, used religion as his excuse for it.

On that level, the labels we place on these 2 seperate incidents are biased, because one hits a lot closer to home and that is the predominant religion in our society.

At the root of it, both were acts of Terrorism caused by the person in questions religious beleifs and convictions. They get labelled differently, and that guys is Cheese's point through my eyes.

I've gone a bit off-topic here, but yeah, I agree with this to a point.

In Muslim countries, no doubt they're called Christian Fundamentalists, Christian Extremists and whatnot.... and yet they probably call their own freedom fighters, or religious heroes or martyrs, depending on their slant. Bias inherently exists, and if someone bombed a church in the name of atheism, would atheists want to be associated with that, and say they're the majority? of course not. Its an ugly truth...

However, I have read in more than a few publications and heard in the media, crimes like these being perpetrated by "fundamentalist christians" and "christian zealots"... hell, I've even seen it called so on CNN before.

Are they gonna harp on and on about it? No. Why? cause for one thing, no one has claimed a holy war on America on behalf of Christians (of course, how could they when they are a minority of crackpots amongst their own majority?), nor have they had large groups attacking a country, proudly claiming to do it again, and attempting to use the religion to organize more cannon fodder... That makes it an elevated threat in the eyes of the public, rightly or wrongly, and will be pushed accordingly.

[Agamemnon]

Agree whole-heartedly w/ Cheese.

How about this example. McVeigh, while being a Christian (we assume), bombed the Oklahoma Government building for political reasons. He believes the world should be a certain way, and went about achieving it. Did his spirituality provide him with the 'faith' he needed to do the job? We'll never know.

We call him 'terrorist'.

Where I think Cheese has a fantastic point is, if you take the same type of guy, but paint him brown and put him in Iraq, his dissent immediately takes on a religious character (because that's what our media tells us). He may be just as religious (or not) as McVeigh, but he bombs the crap out of Baghdad because of his political beliefs.

It seems that the former is accepted without question. The latter seems to constantly confuse political beliefs and reasons w/ religious beliefs and reasons.

We tend to automatically assume that every fighter in the Middle East is Muslim before Middle-Eastern.

You can certainly avoid seeing the point though, if you like. It seems crystal clear to me.

[transplant99]

Originally posted by MarchHare@Sep 26 2005, 07:54 PM
Who's arguing that McVeigh wasn't an extremist? I certainly agree with that point. All I'm saying is that he wasn't a religious extremist, as his crimes were not motivated by his faith.

I know what you are trying to argue...and it's rediculous.

He was a White Extremist for one thing...where does that belief system take root exactly? The Quran? His own shallow mind?

Or are you suggesting he was only a Christian extermist (IE: Based his beliefs on Christianity) some of the time, and NOT when he blew the bejeezuz out of innocent people in Oklahoma City?

I see it as harder to seperate than it is to connect....disagree?

[Thunderball]

Originally posted by Agamemnon@Sep 26 2005, 05:57 PM
Agree whole-heartedly w/ Cheese.

How about this example. McVeigh, while being a Christian (we assume), bombed the Oklahoma Government building for political reasons. He believes the world should be a certain way, and went about achieving it. Did his spirituality provide him with the 'faith' he needed to do the job? We'll never know.

We call him 'terrorist'.

Where I think Cheese has a fantastic point is, if you take the same type of guy, but paint him brown and put him in Iraq, his dissent immediately takes on a religious character (because that's what our media tells us). He may be just as religious (or not) as McVeigh, but he bombs the crap out of Baghdad because of his political beliefs.

It seems that the former is accepted without question. The latter seems to constantly confuse political beliefs and reasons w/ religious beliefs and reasons.

We tend to automatically assume that every fighter in the Middle East is Muslim before Middle-Eastern.

You can certainly avoid seeing the point though, if you like. It seems crystal clear to me.

That is a very good point... however, when you look at many middle eastern countries... politics and religion are very much hand in hand... look at sharia law for the biggest proof of that.

Many of these Arabic fighters use religion as a weapon to galvanize support and keep hold of their people, much like Christians did during the Crusades. That gives it a bit of a distinction from Christians today since our society is firmly secular (at least in theory) and the use of religion as a weapon is much less feasible.

[Patek23]

Originally posted by Cheese@Sep 26 2005, 04:08 PM
well obviously you are the only one...so again...if you dont want to talk about it...dont click on the thread titles.

When your done w**king off to your George Carlin comedy albums come back with an open mind about everything, otherwise your just p*ssing and moaning.



EDIT- I should learn to spell.

[Clarkey]

Isn't it so simple to blame the problems of the world on religion.

The blame should be pointed to man's lust for power, greed and control. Religion is just one of the conduits that man has utilized (and manipulated when convenient) to pursue these vices.

[Jayems]

I dont wanna touch this.

[transplant99]

When your done w**king off to your George Carlin comedy albums come back with an open mind about everything, otherwise your just p*ssing and moaning.

I can only assume that this is some half-witted and vague referance to age.

If so, you are more pathetic and sad than I could ever assume on my own.

Unbelievable.

You of all people...frickin hilarious.

[Patek23]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 26 2005, 05:53 PM

I can only assume that this is some half-witted and vague referance to age.

If so, you are more pathetic and sad than I could ever assume on my own.

Unbelievable.

You of all people...frickin hilarious.

nope, more so to his atheist views.



I have said many times, I am not christian I just don't have any resentment to it. When I got old enough that I could decide to stay Catholic or do my own thing, I chose my own thing. I feel no obligation to do the right or wrong thing, although I 9.9/10 choose to do the right thing, in fact I have almost identical views as cheese except he chooses big bang and I chose that there is a super natural power that created us, which is a large thing on it's own but considering we share similar values that each person to his own and I agree completely with the inequalities of the christians proclaimed (does not apply to all) "christian supremacy". I could be wrong but so far from what cheese has wrote on his philosiphies I agree alot, It's just a huge pet peeve when someone claims to not be christian because they are so vicous to those who are not similar and non-stop nagging on them even going so far as to say there are christian-militants (I don't believe any religion has any militants becasue anyone who goes by what the morals of the bible/qua'ran etc. KNOWS that all of them plainly state that they should never kill anyone, in whatever form you take it)

[transplant99]

nope, more so to his atheist views.

He's an atheist?

Im sure he will be shocked to find that out!! As far as I know...all he has ever said is that he disagrees with the fear that orginized religion tends to have on its followers, though he can speak for himself on this.

I am not christian I just don't have any resentment to it

Nor am I, and niether do I.

I feel no obligation to do the right or wrong thing,

Well i guess we differ...cause i always feel an obligation to do the right thing...though somethimes i make the wrong choice as to what that is.