I've recently gotten in the habit of writing something to the effect of "Religion of Peace kills again" whenever Islamist terrorists invoke their religion to kill somebody. Some might misinterpret this as demeaning sarcasm against a great religion, when in fact the vast majority of Moslems do not support terrorism.
I assure you that I have no ill-will against Islam in particular, and in fact, I am an equal-opportunity critic of senseless murder in the name of religion. So you just watch the next time a group of fanatical Buddhists, for example (and not to single anybody out), kill a bunch of innocent civilians in the hope of achieving Nirvana. You can bet your bottom Dalai that I will write something snide about the crime, e.g. "Religion of Enlightenment strikes again". Especially if the public reaction of Buddhist organizations includes statements along the lines of "How dare those vile non-Buddhist hatemongers to give Buddhism a bad name because of this".
Please be sure to let me know as soon as you hear of an act of deity-driven terrorism -- Shinto, Jain, Buddhist, Islamic, Christian, whatever -- and I will immediately get on the case.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 28, 2002 02:54 PMLet me see... Christian? Would a couple of centuries of Inquisition do?
Posted by: mariechen on October 29, 2002 03:38 PMWould a couple of centuries of Inquisition do?
As someone whose ancestors were apparently kicked out of Spain 500 years ago, I have no kind words to say about the Spanish Inquisition. Fortunately, most of Christendom has advanced beyond the Inquisition. But I'm more interested in what's happening today, not what happened hundreds of years ago.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on October 29, 2002 03:52 PMHi, it's Hans again. This site is gaining a slightly more reflected momentum again, congratulations (still, there's a way to go to reach deeper levels of analysis, but there IS progress)! Nominees for terrorism triggered by religion are
1.) Ariel Sharon & Jassir Arafat (both killing innocent and sometimes nocent people by military force, both should be replaced; the conflict being caused by both sides' view of a religiously affected holy land they're sitting on)
2.) some Norwegian Black Metal bands (for burning down Christian churches)
This, as a start, should suffice.
Posted by: hans on October 30, 2002 01:53 AMDoes atheism count? If the "deity" is the state there's most of your 20th century mass atrocities right there.
Posted by: Clubbeaux on October 30, 2002 06:26 AMWhile I am not sure about Arafat's commitment to Islam, it appears that Sharon's actions are based more in politics, i.e. the survival of Israel, than in his religion.
But that is not what I wanted to talk about. While the Spanish Inquisition was 500 years ago, that is the point. There were senseless murders in the name of religion throughout Christian Europe from the REformation onward, and one of the central reasons for the US 1st Amendment concerning separation of Church and State was those wars, that many just wanted to get away from.
The point is that Christianity evolved beyond that stage in history. Those who committed or organized the Inquisitions, the witch burnings, the drowning of Anabaptists, they are all dead and we living have learned from their mistakes and are not going back there again. The Crusades and all the rest are ancient history.
Sadly, "The religion of peace" has elements that have not evolved, have devolved back to a more brutish, evil incarnation of a religion. That is the problem. While western civilization, and most of India and the Far East, has evolved past such events, some have not. When was the last time Jains and Hindus clashed? Or Taoists and the followers of Confucius?
People and civilizations, even religions evolve over time. Those now living cannot be held accountable for events that took place before they were born, but should remember them to prevent their reoccurence. As Churchill once said, "Those who let the past govern the present, lose the future."
Posted by: B. Gibson on November 1, 2002 01:32 AMIslam is at best a feudalist and exclusivist religion.All who do
not believe
in Islam are supposed to be dunce and a step below the faithful
ones.It is
an obscurantist concept. Religion getting into how a man should
sexually
behave with his woman during her mensturation cycle is taking
religion too
far.Decalring women to be their TILL and sow them as one wills,
is a clear
demeaning of women folk.
Moreover leave aside religion , look at the women's condition in
all of the
Islamic countries (barring a handful) , its worse then pathetic.
They still
live in mediviel ages.
Somalia, Bali, New York City, Palestine, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kashmir, India, Chechnya, Moscow...on and on goes the list of barbarous acts committed by Muslims in the name of their backwards cultural beliefs. I want the "believers" to respond to this email, explain how Islam is a religion of peace when the religious clerics and imams preach violence and hatred in their mosques. The silence of moderate Muslims is deafening.
Posted by: Abe Freeman on June 18, 2004 08:23 PM