Christian terrorism at it again

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage

There is a reason islam is bashed- because currently every where in the world where islam intgrated into the culture/government - its terriable. Women's rights, homosexual right's, religous freedom, freedom of speech - all oppressed in those countries.

Yes, and everywhere where the muslim findies are going nuts you find poverty also, poverty + religion islam or christianity greatly increases you chance of radicals, granted christers have matured more over the years through vast wealth accumilated through invasions and genocide of indigenous peoples.

Leave muslims to accumilate wealth and modernize without western imperialism and they too will become more secular.

Originally posted by: shrumpage
Actually i challenged you on your claim that christians would be just as blood thristy of they were prescuted, or the minority, or not in power

I dont see where you pulled that from, they are just as bloodthirty when rallied though. Western wealth has taken the edge off the worst of christianity though. But the same things mentioned about womens rights and stuff is not too far back in our own culture, if not lingering elements still here with us today. (feminazis, gaybashing, KKK etc.)

I think you are spot-on there, christians have chilled out only becasue of the fact that they have conquered enough so they are comfortable enough to tone down the extremism, but they have the capability if needed to be just as bloodthirsty again if the situation was as desperate as the muslims is nowdays and the tables were turned.

Bolded for you. Your words, not mine.

If wealth takes the edge off, then why were the hijacker on 9/11 well of and educated? And doesn't osma have a lot family wealth to draw from?

yet they have killed people - wonder what they were like before they had money....

Also if being poor is such a catalyst for violence, when didn't the US experaince a huge upswing in of violence and crime during the great depression?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage

There is a reason islam is bashed- because currently every where in the world where islam intgrated into the culture/government - its terriable. Women's rights, homosexual right's, religous freedom, freedom of speech - all oppressed in those countries.

Yes, and everywhere where the muslim findies are going nuts you find poverty also, poverty + religion islam or christianity greatly increases you chance of radicals, granted christers have matured more over the years through vast wealth accumilated through invasions and genocide of indigenous peoples.

Leave muslims to accumilate wealth and modernize without western imperialism and they too will become more secular.

Originally posted by: shrumpage
Actually i challenged you on your claim that christians would be just as blood thristy of they were prescuted, or the minority, or not in power

I dont see where you pulled that from, they are just as bloodthirty when rallied though. Western wealth has taken the edge off the worst of christianity though. But the same things mentioned about womens rights and stuff is not too far back in our own culture, if not lingering elements still here with us today. (feminazis, gaybashing, KKK etc.)

I think you are spot-on there, christians have chilled out only becasue of the fact that they have conquered enough so they are comfortable enough to tone down the extremism, but they have the capability if needed to be just as bloodthirsty again if the situation was as desperate as the muslims is nowdays and the tables were turned.

Bolded for you. Your words, not mine.

If wealth takes the edge off, then why were the hijacker on 9/11 well of and educated? And doesn't osma have a lot family wealth to draw from?

yet they have killed people - wonder what they were like before they had money....

Also if being poor is such a catalyst for violence, when didn't the US experaince a huge upswing in of violence and crime during the great depression?

Stability in culture, simple. We have been blessed with wealth and stability, we have been isolated here in the US for a very long time between two oceans with non-beligerant neighbors and a well working system that has been able to handle assimilation of all our cultures, (well mostly white christians) also we have a somewhat fair system of representation that afford freedoms, america is a poor example really as radical christians cannot get too much of a foothold since we try to practice seperation of church and state except for a few customs here and there, excpeting the south (which has had problems with christians and their insisting on holding onto their old ways of slavery but the south for example is the poorest part back then and had the more firerand christians (still do) resistant to other cultures and new ways)

By the 20th century excepting the south and the rise of the KKK and civil rights/ commie scare christians have pretty much lost their fundamentalist teeth, but liek the examples I gave before there still is a element of trying to push us back, and probably always will until people give up their old customs.

 

[shrumpage]

That doesn't expalin europe does it?

Last hundred years its been ravaged war, corrupt political systems, but its not a mess like arabic countries - isn't sitting on billions of $ of oil. yet you don't see people blowing themselves up or flying into buildings.

You were right when you said "culture," some cultures are better

btw are you going to retract your threory about 'blood thristy' christians?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: shrumpage
That doesn't expalin europe does it?

Last hundred years its been ravaged war, corrupt political systems, but its not a mess like arabic countries - isn't sitting on billions of $ of oil. yet you don't see people blowing themselves up or flying into buildings.

You were right when you said "culture," some cultures are better

btw are you going to retract your threory about 'blood thristy' christians?

No, becasue everything I said backs it up, europe is the center of secularism and has been for 100s of years, europe has also been quite wealthy and dealt with a lot of tough times, but yet always bounces back quickly, not falling into long years of lawlessness. The rise of secularism in europe goes back 100s of years, and is not centered in the 20th century.

 

[shrumpage]

Its funny that you bring up slavery - western culture was the first to take steps to eridicate it - particularly the christian abolishist. and then later the civil rights movement was headed by christians.

The rest of the world still hasn't caught up.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: shrumpage
Its funny that you bring up slavery - western culture was the first to take steps to eridicate it - particularly the christian abolishist. and then later the civil rights movement was headed by christians.

The rest of the world still hasn't caught up.

And yet slavery was also supported by christians, that is a two way street. The more secular north being the one against it. The still more radical south being for it.

It is still like this today, and the civil rights movement had christian leaders yes, but it was more becasue the church was a good place to network.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage
That doesn't expalin europe does it?

Last hundred years its been ravaged war, corrupt political systems, but its not a mess like arabic countries - isn't sitting on billions of $ of oil. yet you don't see people blowing themselves up or flying into buildings.

You were right when you said "culture," some cultures are better

btw are you going to retract your threory about 'blood thristy' christians?

No, becasue everything I said backs it up, europe is the center of secularism and has been for 100s of years, europe has also been quite wealthy and dealt with a lot of tough times, but yet always bounces back quickly, not falling into long years of lawlessness. The rise of secularism in europe goes back 100s of years, and is not centered in the 20th century.

You said stability is the key along with wealth, europe was darn well broke and ravaged by war, twice in the last hundred years- yet it didn't have wide spread violence or cultural deprivity.

that doesn't fit with your theory no does it?

And can you explain the great depression in the US, if poverty directly correlates to crime and violence why wasn't there a huge upswing in such activity.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

You said stability is the key along with wealth, europe was darn well broke and ravaged by war, twice in the last hundred years- yet it didn't have wide spread violence or cultural deprivity.

that doesn't fit with your theory no does it?

And can you explain the great depression in the US, if poverty directly correlates to crime and violence why wasn't there a huge upswing in such activity.

broke and ravaged is a gloss over, europe was rebuilt very quickly after both wars, and was already quite secular and vastly more wealthy then the rest of the world educated too.

(education is a big big part of toning down religions more fundamentalist aspects)

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage
Its funny that you bring up slavery - western culture was the first to take steps to eridicate it - particularly the christian abolishist. and then later the civil rights movement was headed by christians.

The rest of the world still hasn't caught up.

And yet slavery was also supported by christians, that is a two way street. The more secular north being the one against it. The still more radical south being for it.

It is still like this today, and no the civil rights movement had christian leaders yes, but it was more becasue the church was a good place to network.

Founding Fathers wronte about inalienable rights from their Creator, might that have a direct connection to Christianity? Seems like a very direct connection to chrisitinity.

Civil rights in both cases happend because of Christians, and the church. Yet other places in the world have not. The further removed from Christian influence a place is the less likely that place is to adhere to basic civil rights.

Back to the orginal point.

With all the prescution against christians that has happened in the last hundred years, where has been the violence be christians? Can you answer that?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: shrumpage


With all the prescution against christians that has happened in the last hundred years, where has been the violence be christians? Can you answer that?

I do not see christians singled out for persecution on a large scale in the 20th, if anything it was christianity doing the persecuting excpeting the USSR, but then even stalin let christians have church again during ww2)

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage

You said stability is the key along with wealth, europe was darn well broke and ravaged by war, twice in the last hundred years- yet it didn't have wide spread violence or cultural deprivity.

that doesn't fit with your theory no does it?

And can you explain the great depression in the US, if poverty directly correlates to crime and violence why wasn't there a huge upswing in such activity.

broke and ravaged is a gloss over, europe was rebuilt very quickly after both wars, and was already quite secular and vastly more wealthy then the rest of the world educated too.

(education is a big big part of toning down religions more fundamentalist aspects)

Saduia Arabia has had wealth and stabliity for some time - nearly as long as europe - yet they produced people, who were educated and wealthy - yet committed mass murder.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage


With all the prescution against christians that has happened in the last hundred years, where has been the violence be christians? Can you answer that?

I do not see christians singled out for persecution on a large scale in the 20th, if anything it was christianity doing the persecuting excpeting the USSR, but then even stalin let christians have church again during ww2)

Try after WWII
China
USSR
North Korea
islamic countries

i know people how escaped from those places because of presuction - yet no christian induced violence!

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage

You said stability is the key along with wealth, europe was darn well broke and ravaged by war, twice in the last hundred years- yet it didn't have wide spread violence or cultural deprivity.

that doesn't fit with your theory no does it?

And can you explain the great depression in the US, if poverty directly correlates to crime and violence why wasn't there a huge upswing in such activity.

broke and ravaged is a gloss over, europe was rebuilt very quickly after both wars, and was already quite secular and vastly more wealthy then the rest of the world educated too.

(education is a big big part of toning down religions more fundamentalist aspects)

Saduia Arabia has had wealth and stabliity for some time - nearly as long as europe - yet they produced people, who were educated and wealthy - yet committed mass murder.

Saudi Arabia was very very poor state until (the big oil well -forget the name) oil was found in the 50s, they just outlawed slavery in 1962 and their government is anything but openminded.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage

You said stability is the key along with wealth, europe was darn well broke and ravaged by war, twice in the last hundred years- yet it didn't have wide spread violence or cultural deprivity.

that doesn't fit with your theory no does it?

And can you explain the great depression in the US, if poverty directly correlates to crime and violence why wasn't there a huge upswing in such activity.

broke and ravaged is a gloss over, europe was rebuilt very quickly after both wars, and was already quite secular and vastly more wealthy then the rest of the world educated too.

(education is a big big part of toning down religions more fundamentalist aspects)

Saduia Arabia has had wealth and stabliity for some time - nearly as long as europe - yet they produced people, who were educated and wealthy - yet committed mass murder.

Saudi Arabia was very very poor state until oil was found in the 50s, they just outlawed slavery in 1962 and their government is anything but openminded.

So europe is destoryed and broke by the end the 1940's, its 'glossed over' and rebuilt. During that time Saudi Arabia gets massive wealth and built up - yet doesn't apply to your threory.

Would you say that the culture in europe was better?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: shrumpage

You said stability is the key along with wealth, europe was darn well broke and ravaged by war, twice in the last hundred years- yet it didn't have wide spread violence or cultural deprivity.

that doesn't fit with your theory no does it?

And can you explain the great depression in the US, if poverty directly correlates to crime and violence why wasn't there a huge upswing in such activity.

broke and ravaged is a gloss over, europe was rebuilt very quickly after both wars, and was already quite secular and vastly more wealthy then the rest of the world educated too.

(education is a big big part of toning down religions more fundamentalist aspects)

Saduia Arabia has had wealth and stabliity for some time - nearly as long as europe - yet they produced people, who were educated and wealthy - yet committed mass murder.

Saudi Arabia was very very poor state until oil was found in the 50s, they just outlawed slavery in 1962 and their government is anything but openminded.

So europe is destoryed and broke by the end the 1940's, its 'glossed over' and rebuilt. During that time Saudi Arabia gets massive wealth and built up - yet doesn't apply to your threory.

Would you say that the culture in europe was better?

No it is the industrial revoloution and the rise of education the freed the people from the old ways. Also europe did have freer governments, better education, better health, and much more time then SA has to chill out the majority of their fundies, also less religious persecution, nietzche being an example of what european philosophers could get away with. (all of which was funded by christian imperialism, muslims missed out on the richest colonies to fund modernization)

Old ways take a few generations to die off through modernization of society. Free speech, bringing the people out of poverty and education is the big killer of fundamentalism on a whole though some religions resist the inevitable better then others)
But given time, a free society and a good education even the baptists, evangelicals and muslims will join the modern world.

Christianity and quite a few muslim cultures even have come a long way since 400 years ago, bringing people out of poverty and giving them the choice to free themselves
from religious opression is the key)

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: shrumpage


Founding Fathers wronte about inalienable rights from their Creator, might that have a direct connection to Christianity? Seems like a very direct connection to chrisitinity.

"The United States is in no way founded upon the Christian religion"

-- George Washington & John Adams

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Saudi Arabia was very very poor state until (the big oil well -forget the name) oil was found in the 50s, they just outlawed slavery in 1962 and their government is anything but openminded.

And you are? :laugh:

Hatred is a horrible disease, Steeplerot. Usually born from fear. Posting threads like this is symptom.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Saudi Arabia was very very poor state until (the big oil well -forget the name) oil was found in the 50s, they just outlawed slavery in 1962 and their government is anything but openminded.

And you are? :laugh:

Hatred is a horrible disease, Steeplerot. Usually born from fear. Posting threads like this is symptom.

You guys love the islamofascist stuff, but hate to hear the dirt on the christians, typical hypocrite, oh yeah I am a hater too for pointing it out. :laugh:

Guess what, both religions histories and their nutjobs suck equally, christers are worse as I have to share a country with their intolerance.

 

[1prophet]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Seems with all the muslim bombers we forget about our own little extremist friends killing for jesus here.

So quick to judge a bad apple in the Christian community, but you would die defending the scores of Muslims waiting in like to kill the next American they can.

yes, he is a bit of a hypocrite that way isn't he?
I would say he is not forgotten since he has been arrested and charged with his crimes.

I like how totally you guys missed the point.

Steeplerot was making the point that every time there is a terrorist attack by a Muslim, the whole "Muslim terrorist" stereotype is beaten like a dead horse. But God forbid anybody calls someone a "Christian terrorist". And judging by your responses, I think Steeplerot did a very good job of making that point.

No steeple is a hatemongering jackass
I said he was caught and charged as he should be his actions were wrong.
To equate that with the muslim jihadists is just assanine.

I don't get how you can make a distinction. A Christian tries to blow something up because of his religious beliefs (or so he claims), and it's unthinkable to call him a "Christian terrorist". A Muslim does the same thing, and it's almost a sin of some kind NOT to call him a "Muslim terrorist". Please tell me, what IS the big difference? That one group seems to be larger at the moment (even if the percentage of the total is VERY small)? Seriously, why is one acceptable and the other not.

the difference is christianity does not teach that that is a noble thing, do not support or defend it , and are not silent in it they will say what that person did "was wrong and not to be excused"

Christian Terrorism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_...ristian_terrorism_in_the_United_States

Did you even read the link you posted?

Christian terrorism in the United States
In the United States, the most frequent examples of Christian terrorism include the intimidation of abortion clinic employees and patrons, and the murder of abortion providers by (occasionally self-professed Christian) anti-abortion extremists.

Eric Rudolph engaged in terrorist activities closely associated with Christian terrorism, such as the targeting of abortion clinics and the bombing of a gay nightclub; also, Rudolph had been suspected to be associated with the Christian Identity organization. However, Rudolph has himself denied such associations, writing that he "prefers Nietzsche to the Bible" and espousing an Atheistic philosophy.

Groups or individuals that commit acts termed Christian terrorism are frequently not exclusively motivated by their beliefs about Christianity. Often, their activities correspond to pre-existing ethnic or social conflicts?for example, the Troubles in Northern Ireland, which has root causes traceable as far back as the Norman invasion of Ireland. While some of the Christian terrorist groups active today may be motivated by the prospect of converting subjects to join their faith, others have territorial/political motives for fighting. Still others have more in common with Nazi ideology than with religious ideology, and work primarily with racist ideals, such as white supremacy (see, for example, the Christian Identity movement).

Christian terrorism is terrorism that the perpetrator claims is performed in furtherance of Christian goals or teachings; This distinguishes Christian terrorism per se from criminal acts performed by people who merely happen to be Christians. Examples include James Charles Kopp's shooting of abortion provider Dr. Barnett Slepian, and the tactics of strategic rape and abduction and conscription of children by the Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda.

Mainstream believers consider these acts to be egregious violations of the religion's ethics. They regularly condemn all acts of terrorism, including those perpetrated by self-professed Christian terrorists. The violent Christian Identity movement, for instance, is regarded as a highly un-Christian organization by most non-members

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: 1prophet
The violent Christian Identity movement, for instance, is regarded as a highly un-Christian organization by most non-members

CM, KKK, NF are all "fringe" christian movements who are violent, but then so is AQ to muslims, christians do not rally behind things internationally anymore for just the sake of religion like muslims do, even though religion is used conviently to draw support for wars. (WoT)

One mans fringe is anothers cause, regardless, the sympathys for these causes are shared by a large amount of christians even though a lot may condemn the violence, you get a lot of folks who look the other way who would not go there.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Corbett

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Seems with all the muslim bombers we forget about our own little extremist friends killing for jesus here.

So quick to judge a bad apple in the Christian community, but you would die defending the scores of Muslims waiting in like to kill the next American they can.

yes, he is a bit of a hypocrite that way isn't he?
I would say he is not forgotten since he has been arrested and charged with his crimes.

I like how totally you guys missed the point.

Steeplerot was making the point that every time there is a terrorist attack by a Muslim, the whole "Muslim terrorist" stereotype is beaten like a dead horse. But God forbid anybody calls someone a "Christian terrorist". And judging by your responses, I think Steeplerot did a very good job of making that point.

If you look at the New Testiment you would find that this behavior is at odds with the teachings of Jesus, therefore no matter what he calls himself, he cannot be a Christian. There are no virgin equivalent.

Is the same true in the Muslim religion?

 

[RMich]

If Steeplerot is saying that it is wrong to judge the Moslem religion based on the sometimes violent behavior of factions who claim to be its adherents, because by those standards Christianity could likewise be condemned, I agree.

But insofar as he is saying that Christianity actually encourages or condones sectarian violence, I disagee. Hayabusa Rider is absolutely correct when he says: "If you look at the New Testiment you would find that this behavior is at odds with the teachings of Jesus."

However you may deride the Bible, there is no way to twist Christ's teachings into an incitement to violence. Certainly there are plenty of violent fruitcakes in history (one might even argue we have one living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue right now) who have sought to label themselves as Christians, but Christ himself warned there would be many false prophets and that we should judge them by their fruits.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: RMich
If Steeplerot is saying that it is wrong to judge the Moslem religion based on the sometimes violent behavior of factions who claim to be its adherents, because by those standards Christianity could likewise be condemned, I agree.

But insofar as he is saying that Christianity actually encourages or condones sectarian violence, I disagee. Hayabusa Rider is absolutely correct when he says: "If you look at the New Testiment you would find that this behavior is at odds with the teachings of Jesus."

However you may deride the Bible, there is no way to twist Christ's teachings into an incitement to violence. Certainly there are plenty of violent fruitcakes in history (one might even argue we have one living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue right now) who have sought to label themselves as Christians, but Christ himself warned there would be many false prophets and that we should judge them by their fruits.

I didn't realize some parts of the Bible were more accurate than others. I don't know if Jesus encourage violence and/or terrorism or not (I'm leaning towards not), but the Old Testiment God certainly did. God in the Old Testiment is every bit as bad as the worst stereotypes about Muslims, and if I remember my Bible correctly, He frequently encourages his follows to do similarly bad things.

Not that I disagree with Hayabusa Rider's assertion that Christian terrorists aren't Christians, no matter what they call themselves, I just don't agree that the reason is cherry picked lines from their Holy Book. I think the reason Christian terrorists aren't really Christians is the same reason Muslim terrorists aren't really Muslims, because on balance the two religions do not condone that sort of behavior. Any fanatical idiot can justify their actions by picking specific lines out of either religion's holy book, but they are wrong in terms of the overall picture.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Saudi Arabia was very very poor state until (the big oil well -forget the name) oil was found in the 50s, they just outlawed slavery in 1962 and their government is anything but openminded.

And you are? :laugh:

Hatred is a horrible disease, Steeplerot. Usually born from fear. Posting threads like this is symptom.

You guys love the islamofascist stuff, but hate to hear the dirt on the christians, typical hypocrite, oh yeah I am a hater too for pointing it out. :laugh:

Guess what, both religions histories and their nutjobs suck equally, christers are worse as I have to share a country with their intolerance.

I would love to see where and when I have posted anything knocking Muslims and/or Islam. But then again, your hatred has prevented you from seeing me for who I am individually. You look at me and see that I am a black man, err, I mean, Christian. Nothing more. I must be a Bush-loving, gay-hating, redneck Christian, or I confuse your now simple mind, which has fallen ill to hatred and generalization.

Another symptom of fear and hatred is becoming exactly that which you fear and hate. I give you exhibit A, your OP.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: 1prophet
The violent Christian Identity movement, for instance, is regarded as a highly un-Christian organization by most non-members

CM, KKK, NF are all "fringe" christian movements who are violent, but then so is AQ to muslims, christians do not rally behind things internationally anymore for just the sake of religion like muslims do, even though religion is used conviently to draw support for wars. (WoT)

One mans fringe is anothers cause, regardless, the sympathys for these causes are shared by a large amount of christians even though a lot may condemn the violence, you get a lot of folks who look the other way who would not go there.

KKK christian? HOw is BURING a cross christian?