Obama Condemns Violence in the Name of Religion; Bible Thumpers Blow a Gasket
73 replies, posted
[QUOTE=BloodRayne;47086546]So he's targeting the crusades and slavery due to christians. The Crusades were just (ergo some crimes), they were in response to Islamic hordes destroying spain and southern europe. Putting everyone who would not convert to islam or pay their religious tax to the sword.
ISIS is no different now to Islam back then.[/QUOTE]
When white Christians do it, it's just a few crimes that's all in the past.
When Muslims do it, they're brutal savages that never learn.
Am I doing this right? Is that whats all the rage in Germany these days, forgetting the past?
The bible is violent as fuck the entire way through, and God is used to justify the violence almost the entire way through.
The promised land was inhabited before Abraham showed up, and was occupied again when Moses led the Jews into Canaan. The first time, Abraham had to to a bit of light murdering to make his presence known and accepted, but when Joshua finally got over the Jordan river, the next couple dozen years were spent systematically removing all other tribes from the area by murdering everything. Saul actually got in trouble with God for not killing every living person as well as all the animals from some random city that God decided he didn't like any more.
There are numerous accounts of brutal violence in the name of God all throughout the Old Testament, and if you say that that's not indicative of the New Testament at all, I would tell you to realize that the only reason it isn't is because Christians were a very small and weak group existing in fear around the Mediterranean. The instant that they got into power, they went back to murdering people for having different beliefs.
If fucking Bush or Reagan said this then Republicans would be calling them fucking saints but since it's Obama then he's literally Hitler. It's really just more evidence that they don't actually care about policy or anything like that they just hate Obama and will take any opportunity to slag on everything he says and does.
[QUOTE=darunner;47086917]It's a pretty stupid comparison to make. Yeah, some terrible things were done in the name of Christianity. But it was the dark ages. There is absolutely no reason for the same thing to be allowed in the 21st century.[/QUOTE]
What dark ages? The crusades happened in the high middle ages, practically the height of western civilization before the black death.
[QUOTE=BloodRayne;47086546]So he's targeting the crusades and slavery due to christians. The Crusades were just (ergo some crimes), they were in response to Islamic hordes destroying spain and southern europe. Putting everyone who would not convert to islam or pay their religious tax to the sword.
ISIS is no different now to Islam back then.[/QUOTE]
Holy shit lol, no.
What's the point of him saying that though? Are people supposed to feel guilty and be more lenient with modern terrorists?
[QUOTE=darunner;47086917]But it was the dark ages. There is absolutely no reason for the same thing to be allowed in the 21st century.[/QUOTE]
You do know that in our own grandparents lifetimes, these little 'horrible never to happen again' shitfests actually HAPPENE:
World War II
The fucking [B][I]Holocaust[/I][/B]
[B]The Rwandan Genocide[/B] that the superpowers did nothing about.
The Rape of Nankin
The Darfur Genocide
Monarchies/Democracies have been overthrown by US/European countries because they didn't suit our needs. (Argentina, Iraq, Syria, etc). Some of them turned into brutal dictatorships.
The War on Terror that has killed 100's of THOUSANDS of innocent civilians.
Oh a little thing called a near total nuclear war in the 19 goddamn 80's.
People DO NOT CHANGE. ALL of these events were caused by a perfect storm of political, ethnic/religious, and ideological incompatibility. It was the same in the middle ages and it's the same now. Time does NOT motivate what can and cannot happen.
[editline]6th February 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=No_Excuses;47087271]What's the point of him saying that though? Are people supposed to feel guilty and be more lenient with modern terrorists?[/QUOTE]
He's SAYING it because the point is that we shouldn't use it as a tool to create hate between groups, i.e. Islam vs Christians, because we've both done some pretty stupid shit in the past caused by hysteria and powerful rulers.
He is saying WE ARE NO DIFFERENT TO THE CRUSADERS OF THE PAST. That is NOT AN EXCUSE, it's just historical fact that means people are the same no matter what their religion, and people should NEVER use it to justify violence.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;47087278]You do know that in our own grandparents lifetimes, these little 'horrible never to happen again' shitfests actually HAPPENE:
World War II
The fucking [B][I]Holocaust[/I][/B]
[B]The Rwandan Genocide[/B] that the superpowers did nothing about.
The Rape of Nankin
The Darfur Genocide
Monarchies/Democracies have been overthrown by US/European countries because they didn't suit our needs. (Argentina, Iraq, Syria, etc). Some of them turned into brutal dictatorships.
The War on Terror that has killed 100's of THOUSANDS of innocent civilians.
Oh a little thing called a near total nuclear war in the 19 goddamn 80's.
People DO NOT CHANGE. ALL of these events were caused by a perfect storm of political, ethnic/religious, and ideological incompatibility. It was the same in the middle ages and it's the same now. Time does NOT motivate what can and cannot happen.[/QUOTE]
You forgot the Armenian Genocide, Pontic genocide, Assyrian genocide by muslims.
[QUOTE=BloodRayne;47087308]You forgot the Armenian Genocide, Pontic genocide, Assyrian genocide by muslims.[/QUOTE]
I didn't 'forget' anything. The events I listed contained lots of different ethnicity and religions. Why do YOU have such an agenda?
[QUOTE=Deathtrooper2;47086502]Im Christian, and what he said about us in the Crusades is the Truth really. Basically, back before the first crusades occurred. Pope Urban II noticed the the Byzantine empire was being invaded by Arabian armies and was basically going to collapse. But During that time. The Byzantine empire was Orthodox, but the West part of Europe was Catholic. Pope Urban II thought that by unleashing a Crusade against the Arabian armies, his church would gain more power in the Byzantine Empire and the Middle East. So in other words, if Pope Urban II wasn't power hungry, this shit wouldn't of happened in the first place.
I just mean there wouldn't be as much Anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim today if the crusades wouldn't of happened.[/QUOTE]
No this isn't true. The crusades were a last chance effort by the church to, A. solidify their power in Western Europe, and B. stop all the feudal lords from constantly slaughtering each other over petty bullshit.
The church then decided that the best way to do this was to ship all these "marauding warlords" and their armies to fight a common enemy. This enemy was easily found in the Middle East. This of course was done in such a way that it elevated religious fervor in Europe to massively high levels to the point where the people's crusade happened as well as the European crusades and all that shit.
[editline]6th February 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=BloodRayne;47086546]So he's targeting the crusades and slavery due to christians. The Crusades were just (ergo some crimes), they were in response to Islamic hordes destroying spain and southern europe. Putting everyone who would not convert to islam or pay their religious tax to the sword.
ISIS is no different now to Islam back then.[/QUOTE]
Not really, the Europeans were doing a pretty good job of destroying each other as all the feudal lords constantly schemed and warred for power. Feudal Europe is honestly a pretty dark time if you were a peasant simply because armies had to be fed somehow. Armies would basically sack whatever land they were staying on, friendly lands, enemy lands, didn't matter, the army had to eat. Without the crusades, Europe would have not entered the Middle Ages as it did.
The crusades turned the nobles attention away from each other to this common enemy, those "demons" in the deserts. (in the accounts of Pope Urban II's speech at the Council of Clermont, he actually does call them demons and other horrid things. Another great point would be how even he states that rich and poor alike were to go and that for taking part in this holy war, you would be washed clean of all your sins.
Also "destroying Spain." lol You're hilarious. The Islamic Empire built Spain. All that architecture in churches, the elaborate geometric patterns and the like are Islamic in origin.
this is all charlemagne's fault
are people seriously mad because the president didnt approve of violence
isnt the job of the president to keep his country safe like why are people mad i dont understand
[QUOTE=Cornish;47087784]are people seriously mad because the president didnt approve of violence
isnt the job of the president to keep his country safe like why are people mad i dont understand[/QUOTE]
Because they think: "Blame the crusades for ISIS, they are people too, we shouldn't fight them, Christianity is bad and I am a Muslim."
What was actually said was "Don't fight in the name of your Religion, because that is a shitty excuse and people will fight regardless of religion, and fighting in the name of religion gives your own religion bad reputation(usually)."
Personally, ISIS is a bunch of terrorists that needs to be arrested/killed because they are a fucking threat to everyone, not because they are basically fighting a war for Islam. There are good Muslims and bad Christians, they are people. But again, using religion to justify something is well, a shitty excuse. So you are saying your deity is okay with enslaving, torturing, raping, or killing people because they are "heathens" or you are trying to "better" them? Yeah, if I had a BS meter, it would probably explode in my face if I heard that from someone.
[QUOTE=draugur;47087361]No this isn't true. The crusades were a last chance effort by the church to, A. solidify their power in Western Europe, and B. stop all the feudal lords from constantly slaughtering each other over petty bullshit.[/quote]
Well the crusades didn't really solidify the churches power. The church was growing powerful as a result of a growing administration and legal reform that slowly centralized the institution. The church became more powerful in the wake of the crusades (and ultimately expanded christendom), something that wouldn't be stopped until the late medieval period.
[quote]Feudal Europe is honestly a pretty dark time if you were a peasant simply because armies had to be fed somehow. Armies would basically sack whatever land they were staying on, friendly lands, enemy lands, didn't matter, the army had to eat. Without the crusades, Europe would have not entered the Middle Ages as it did.[/quote]
Much of the work in peace wasn't really because of the crusades. As christendom expanded and kings slowly reigned in their nobles, Europe became more peaceful. The end of the viking age by christianizing Scandinavia helped lead to a decline in raids, violent feuds, etc. The crusades, while temporarily directing a few tens of thousands of young men to fight somewhere else, are not ultimately responsible for the peace.
[quote]Also "destroying Spain." lol You're hilarious. The Islamic Empire built Spain. All that architecture in churches, the elaborate geometric patterns and the like are Islamic in origin.[/QUOTE]
The architecture is actually Roman-Greek in origin. (Some of the art itself isn't though).
The Islamic Empire didn't really invent new architecture. The arch, dome, etc all predate Islam.
There's no reason that a modern group of people in the 21st century should behave the same way we did hundreds/thousands of years ago. Comparing them to the Crusades to excuse their behavior is bullshit-- extremist groups such as ISIS are just about as evil as you can find in modern day and age.
There is no excuse for their behavior. I disagree with showing ISIS any mercy whatsoever.
[QUOTE=Deng;47087941]Well the crusades didn't really solidify the churches power. [/QUOTE]
It sort of did though, it solidified and grew in power partially because of all the religious fervor which gave them power, and partially as many nobles and other men left all their things to the church when they died as they were left without suitable heirs (though the land went to the kings of course if the king hadn't perished as wel), some men when they returned to Europe even became monks and left their things to the church. The church's wealth grew substantially as well as their power over the people.
The crusades killed so many people that it honestly destroyed entire bloodlines, the church just profited by picking up the pieces.
[editline]6th February 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Deng;47087941]
The architecture is actually Roman-Greek in origin. (Some of the art itself isn't though).
The Islamic Empire didn't really invent new architecture. The arch, dome, etc all predate Islam.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, architecture was the wrong choice of a word. I meant artwork, but I figured the artwork and such fell into the realm of architecture for some reason.
[QUOTE=J!NX;47086751]Religion shouldn't be about violence anyways
if you use your religion as an excuse for violence, you're just looking for ways to excuse being a shitty person.[/QUOTE]
So the islam founder muhammad is exactly that then.
[QUOTE=BloodRayne;47088073]So the islam founder muhammad is exactly that then.[/QUOTE]
OK, now you're just going out of your way to create shit.
[QUOTE=No_Excuses;47087271]What's the point of him saying that though? Are people supposed to feel guilty and be more lenient with modern terrorists?[/QUOTE]
NO! How are people actually reading into this in that way? He's saying that violence in the name of religion ([b]including Islam and not limited to Islam[/b]) is wrong. He's not sympathizing. And at the same time pointing out that Christianity has had a record of terrorism itself. People need to realize faults in their own history as much as the faults of others. He's trying to point out how Muslims and Christians are similar, I believe, in an effort to dissolve hatred.
[QUOTE=Marden;47086548]I'm scared how much influence religion still has on people's opinions in the US.[/QUOTE]
Taking advantage of the state-enforced absence of religion by the USSR to use as a counter-point, the Christian right-wing grabbed the US and since around the 50s has been trying to wrench away the country to become a theocracy. Arguably this began even earlier with shit like prohibition, but "In God We Trust" goes back to 1956.
They're crazy, they're dangerous, and sadly they have a strong voting bloc.
[QUOTE=draugur;47088044]It sort of did though, it solidified and grew in power partially because of all the religious fervor which gave them power, and partially as many nobles and other men left all their things to the church when they died as they were left without suitable heirs (though the land went to the kings of course if the king hadn't perished as wel), some men when they returned to Europe even became monks and left their things to the church. The church's wealth grew substantially as well as their power over the people.[/QUOTE]
The thing is that the church was already all powerful by the year 1100 when the crusades were kicking off. It was the fact that the pope could call a crusade and be taken seriously was what made the church in itself an extremely powerful institution (compared to say a century or so earlier when they were dependent on the Holy Roman Emperor).
By the time the crusades were rolling around, everybody already was quickly coming to accept the primacy of the church.
[QUOTE=BloodRayne;47088073]So the islam founder muhammad is exactly that then.[/QUOTE]
The Islamophobia is strong with this one.
[QUOTE=Deng;47088192]The thing is that the church was already all powerful by the year 1100 when the crusades were kicking off. It was the fact that the pope could call a crusade and be taken seriously was what made the church in itself an extremely powerful institution (compared to say a century or so earlier when they were dependent on the Holy Roman Emperor).
By the time the crusades were rolling around, everybody already was quickly coming to accept the primacy of the church.[/QUOTE]
True, but they still both gained and legitimized their power in Europe as a result. The gaining isn't really as important though as they already had quite a bit, as you said. It's sort of like Walmart having an increase of a few million dollars in profit, they're already super rich, but they still made gains.
The Crusades and Inquisition were political matters ffs, they just used religion as an excuse to justify it
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;47087278]
He is saying WE ARE NO DIFFERENT TO THE CRUSADERS OF THE PAST. That is NOT AN EXCUSE, it's just historical fact [B]that means people are the same no matter what their religion,[/B] and people should NEVER use it to justify violence.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=ThePanther;47088107]NO! How are people actually reading into this in that way? He's saying that violence in the name of religion ([b]including Islam and not limited to Islam[/b]) is wrong. He's not sympathizing. And at the same time pointing out that Christianity has had a record of terrorism itself. People need to realize faults in their own history as much as the faults of others. [B]He's trying to point out how Muslims and Christians are similar,[/B] I believe, in an effort to dissolve hatred.[/QUOTE]
So what you're all saying is non religious types are superior since they don't and never have needed to be united over terrorism or use religion to justify their actions.
And you're also saying Christian's dark history makes us just as bad as them, that is, if they're to be the same. We're all the same = we're all assholes. Religious folk only though.
[QUOTE=BFG9000;47088489]The Crusades and Inquisition were political matters ffs, they just used religion as an excuse to justify it[/QUOTE]
why is it that when christians do bad shit it's always political but when muslims do bad shit it's because their religion is evil/stuck in the stoneage ?
[QUOTE=J!NX;47086751]Religion shouldn't be about violence anyways
if you use your religion as an excuse for violence, you're just looking for ways to excuse being a shitty person.[/QUOTE]
Let's not pretend that religion doesn't cause any violence. Some people truly believe their violent acts are the will of God.
[QUOTE=kila58;47086558]Being Christian isn't an American value[/QUOTE]
It shouldn't be, but way too many people think it is.
Some parent of a kid who no one likes tried getting me expelled from school because I wasn't christian and thus didn't abide by "American" values. Thankfully it didn't work.
The kid also just got caught bringing drugs to school.
The number of people who forget that religion and state should be seperate is crazy.
[QUOTE=No_Excuses;47088919]So what you're all saying is non religious types are superior since they don't and never have needed to be united over terrorism or use religion to justify their actions.
And you're also saying Christian's dark history makes us just as bad as them, that is, if they're to be the same. We're all the same = we're all assholes. Religious folk only though.[/QUOTE]
Well, it's not that simple. Religion and terrorism can exist independent of each-other, but that isn't what we're dealing with at the moment. It's not applauding atheists for living inherently peaceful lives (which is a fallacy), and it's not saying "we're all assholes" either.
It's a specific statement, about a specific topic, at a specific time (the time that we currently live in.) Not a blanket statement for all people everywhere: religious, atheist, terrorist, or otherwise.
Violence in the name of religion is no worse than violence in the name of nothing, but it's easier to spread in weak minded people, to trick them into thinking that they're doing something good in the eyes of God. That's why we need to emphasize, or remind people, that using religion to push a violent/oppressive agenda is not ok. (The Crusades, Inquisition, ISIS, and slavery are good examples of this.)
[QUOTE=Deng;47087189]What dark ages? The crusades happened in the high middle ages, practically the height of western civilization before the black death.[/QUOTE]
Wasn't the first one in 1096, with that peter the hermit guy? granted it wasn't an army, mostly peasants that ended up getting ambushed and only 3,000 escaping. But after armies were sent to Constantinople. ironically french crusaders killed hundreds of thousands of jews in Germany, even though catholic bishops wanted them protected.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.