Lionel Edriess wrote on Nov 22
nd, 2014 at 3:23pm:
You're making assumptions again, Brian. You seem to have forgotten that on many occasions I have stated that I classify myself as an agnostic with a Christian attitude toward others. In other words, that I live by the maxim 'do unto others ... ', and that I judge the actions of others by that same rule.
Yet, as I have pointed out (indirectly) you are silent on all those other examples of religious conflicts, Lionel. You claim you are something and that you believe in something, which you believe means you are fair in your views on religious conflict BUT we rarely, if ever, see any mention of it by you or any of the other Islamophobes. The only people who mention them are people such as myself. Why, Lionel? Instead, we see you and others devoting all their energies to attacking Muslims and their religion. Doesn't matter if they are thousands of kilometres away from an event, its all their fault. They are attacked personally, verbally and often physically. Their places of worship are attacked. People hold demonstrations and even riot against their presence in society.
Quote:It's convenient for you that the majority of those atrocities you mentioned are conducted between peoples of differing religious beliefs. However, your comparisons are somewhat diluted regarding religion as the major factor when one considers the ethnic/political differences between those same antagonists - something you neglected to mention. One would also do well to consider the makeup of the UN these days while remembering that that same organisation has long been considered a toothless tiger. There is plenty of anti-Western, anti-Christian bias in the UN.
You are displaying rather Cold War thinking there, Lionel. That may be how it was 20 years ago, today it is much more muted as the geo-political impetus of the Cold War has disappeared. Today, most nations want to be Western, they want to be part of the West's economic system and earn the big bucks.
I agree that religion is one factor in many of the conflicts that I've mentioned. However, it is never far from the surface, it is also used as a convenient excuse to justify other animosities. Does that mean it should be ignored? At the same time, in many of the Muslim conflicts around the world, religion is merely an excuse, there are others, it is just the rhetoric of many of the participants which pushes it to the fore. So, why should it be considered the major factor in one conflict and not in another, Lionel? Is it because one participant makes it more prominent or is it just like all the others, merely an excuse to justify it?
Quote:I agree with you when you say the world is a crappy place but there seems to be very few answers and even less concerted interest in attempting to solve the myriad problems that beset it. Are you aware of the number of people who starve every day in this civilised, technologically advanced, potentially resource-rich world of ours? How can we hope to solve the world's problems when we can't even solve the problems in our own country?
I agree, Lionel. There are though, I'll point out, more people suffering from obesity in the world than hunger. Rather an ironic fact that one, isn't it? Capitalism is in part to blame for bother hunger and obesity. However, we won't see much effort to reform it, while too many vested interests making too much money are involved in either problem.
Quote:The only reason I rail against Islam (not Muslims, mind you), is because the basic tenet of Islam is take no prisoners - our way or suffer the consequences. That is the basic thing that unites all Muslims - despite their own internal divisions. It could also be considered a factor in all those conflicts you previously mentioned.
I'll merely point out, Christianity is no different, Lionel for most of it's history. Lovie-Dovie, happy-clappy Christianity may mask it but at it's heart, like all proselytising religions, determined that it is the way to salvation and no other belief is allowed.
Quote:Most Western nations have witnessed members of their own societies deserting to join the monstrous brigades of the IS, even though they are only a 'tiny minority', yet you continue to deny that 'religion' is a problem.
*_SHRUG_* revolutionary movements have always been attractive to the disaffected in society, Lionel. In the 20th century we saw members of our own society drawn to the Communists and the Fascists in various conflicts around the world. Their numbers were small, their effect actually quite minor. IS is in reality no different. Religion or a particularly interpretation of it is the draw card but is that any different from what happened in say, the Spanish Civil War?
Quote:What is it then that unites them? That 'exclusive' thing?
What always unites people - a belief in a common destiny. Be it religion or political ideology, the effect is the same, Lionel.
Quote:If, as I believe, it is the adoption and adherence to the most basic fundamental beliefs of the socio/religious aspects of Islam, why should we not all condemn such a system and its fanatical followers?
Would the world not be a better place without them - that 'tiny minority'?
I'm more than happy to condemn it's fanatical followers, Lionel, just as I'll condemn all fanatics. The innocent though?
Forum
Pages: 
It’s easy to grow Muslim-hatred these days. (Read 13642 times)
