Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 19 Oct 2006 11:58 <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:BXBZg.17718$6S3.17130(a)newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... > > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:4536D490.247A7341(a)hotmail.com... >> >> >> T Wake wrote: >> >>> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote >>> > David Bostwick wrote: >>> > >>> >> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >McVeigh was a part of the radical Christian right. The IRA was >>> >> >Catholic >>> >> >fighting Protestants (and Protestants fought back). >>> >> >>> >> And the guy who killed the Amish kids was what? >>> > >>> > Mad presumably. >>> >>> And at least a Christian :-) ("His suicide notes stated that he was >>> still >>> angry at God for the death of a premature infant daughter nine years >>> prior." >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Carl_Roberts) >> >> Hmmm..... The threat from fundamentalist religions. > > I'm not sure if your comment was meant to be sarcastic, but this was most > likely not an example of the threat from a fundamentalist religion. As I > understand it, the Amish aren't particularly Fundamentalist, they are just > deeply religious and very, very dogmatic when it comes to rejecting > technology. In any case, the fellow wasn't even Amish. No, this was > more likely just a guy who went over the edge, partly because of the death > of his daughter, and partly because of some pedophilia issues that were > tormenting him. One of the most touching aspects of the whole incident is > the Amish response. They knew immediately that there was absolutely no > reason to hate him, and almost immediately forgave him--he was quite > clearly a very sick man, who did what he did because of that sickness, not > out of some fundmental character flaw like hatred. Their consistent > longer term response was to invite his widow to the funeral for the little > girls, and to attend his funeral. They had no reason to hate her, either, > and knew that the best way to begin healing and get on with their lives > was to help her heal as well. That shows an amazing degree of maturity of > which not many social groups (including many Christian groups) would be > capable, if you ask me. Although I am devoutly Atheistic, I am often impressed by some religious groups. The Amish are among them. (But so are Sufis to balance them out :-))
From: T Wake on 19 Oct 2006 12:07 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eh7ovu$8qk_001(a)s977.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <YrGdnWfM1rcLD6vYRVnyiA(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:eh5425$8qk_010(a)s847.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <0oWdnYXsM90H3KjYnZ2dnUVZ8sudnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in >>>>message >>>>news:009aj2dksthbu9fopngsr64nhfofi1dnjl(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Tue, 17 Oct 06 12:40:58 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>In article <odi8j25ttpiuu9t6tbg4jne9cdut88qmin(a)4ax.com>, >>>>>> John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>>>>On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:38:14 +0100, Eeyore >>>>>>><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Lloyd Parker wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> JoeBloe <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > All of Islam (read the moslems) believe that all others that are >>>>>>>>> > not >>>>>>>>> >moslem are "infidels" and that killing them is not, nor should >>>>>>>>> >not >>>>>>>>> >be >>>>>>>>> >a crime. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You are lying. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I suspect it's what he learnt at Church. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>American Christian fundamentalists are as dangerous if not more so >>>>>>>>than >>>>>>their >>>>>>>>Muslim counterparts. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Yeah, all those Southern Baptist suicide bombers. >>>>>> >>>>>>Sigh! Wait. If this gets results it will be tried. >>>>>>Have you not noticed what's been happening lately? >>>>>>And it's not just Southern Baptist. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Judiasism and Christianity have generally considered suicide to be a >>>>> sin. Radical Islam considers it to be a holy act. >>>> >>>>An interpretation issue really. It would not be unreasonable for Radical >>>>Christians or Jews to redefine some aspects of their faith to enable >>>>suicide >>>>for a just cause. The bible has killing anyone a sin, >>> >>> Murder is a sin; this is not "not killing anyone". >> >>"Thou shalt not kill" >> >>State sanctioned murder is still murder, otherwise what Saddam Hussein did >>to the marsh arabs was not murder. > > That is how westerners view his killing (as murder). Yes. I agree. All Moslems I have met and discussed this with view it as murder as well. All Hindus do. And Janes. And Atheists. (etc). In the bible, killing someone is wrong. Trying to redefine it to make "murder" wrong and then coming up with reasons as to why killing person X is not murder is (IMHO) wrong. Unless of course the word of God is so open to interpretation that mere mortals can have the temerity to explain what he "really" meant. >>>>Christians have been >>>>fairly free with the definition of this though. >>> >>> Do you kill where kill is deliberate cessation of a living thing? >> >>I am not a Christian so I do not see where this is going. >> >>Killing some one is, IMHO, ending their life against their wishes. > > It is in everyone's hardware to have a will to survive. Yes. Killing is wrong. Murder is wrong. But killing people when it is not murder is still wrong. >> >>Why? Do you kill where kill is deliberate cessation of a living thing? > > Yes. I need to eat to keep living. I also try to keep vermin > and other critters from tresspassing in my house. If a human > being is threatening my existenece and I have evidence that > the intention is real, I will kill or expect someone else > (whose job is to protect me and mine) to kill him/her/them. Yes, and you accept this is a necessary bad thing to keep yourself safe. Part of the problem is Christianity has historically removed the "life" from groups that people were allowed to kill. Early followers of Jesus were 100% pacifists, dying before killing another human. As Christianity evolved various reasons to kill others were introduced ranging from "killing to protect myself" to "killing to protect my family," "killing to protect my property" and even simply killing because the Pope declared the other person Heretic so it is now ok. Killing Animals is a good example. The whole "not having a soul" thing all help to skirt round the "Thou Shalt Not Kill" rule. Humans are good at finding loopholes to exploit.
From: T Wake on 19 Oct 2006 12:08 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eh7o8n$8qk_005(a)s977.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <453643F9.131D0BC3(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>> >Judiasism and Christianity have generally considered suicide to be a >>> >sin. >>> >>> So did Islam. >> >>So DOES Islam. > > In case you haven't noticed, this has changed. It is not > suicide if you kill others when you kill yourself. Do you > not find something odd about this thinking, considering > what the Koran says? An example of how people will re-interpret their holy books to suit their needs. No religion is immune to this. Even Hindus appear to have changed their religion into a Monotheistic once since they had greater contact with the west.
From: T Wake on 19 Oct 2006 12:10 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eh7odg$8qk_006(a)s977.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <HItZg.15972$e66.4379(a)newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>, > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:eh53u8$8qk_009(a)s847.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <009aj2dksthbu9fopngsr64nhfofi1dnjl(a)4ax.com>, >>> John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>On Tue, 17 Oct 06 12:40:58 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>> >>>>>In article <odi8j25ttpiuu9t6tbg4jne9cdut88qmin(a)4ax.com>, >>>>> John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>>>On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:38:14 +0100, Eeyore >>>>>><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Lloyd Parker wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> JoeBloe <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > All of Islam (read the moslems) believe that all others that are >>>>>>>> > not >>>>>>>> >moslem are "infidels" and that killing them is not, nor should not >>>>>>>> >be >>>>>>>> >a crime. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You are lying. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I suspect it's what he learnt at Church. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>American Christian fundamentalists are as dangerous if not more so >>>>>>>than >>>>>their >>>>>>>Muslim counterparts. >>>>>>> >>>>>>Yeah, all those Southern Baptist suicide bombers. >>>>> >>>>>Sigh! Wait. If this gets results it will be tried. >>>>>Have you not noticed what's been happening lately? >>>>>And it's not just Southern Baptist. >>>>> >>>>Judiasism and Christianity have generally considered suicide to be a >>>>sin. >>> >>> So did Islam. >>> >>>> Radical Islam considers it to be a holy act. It also helps get >>>>rid of the young males, making the world safe for lecherous old-fart >>>>polygamists. >>> >>> Now think again. Christians admire and praise people who are >>> martyrs. It doesn't take an IQ of greater than 60 to figure >>> out how to turn that one into making suicide bombers heroes. >>> Islam has figured out how. You need to listen to some >>> of Falwell's speeches. Turn to that religious channel that >>> is on your cable, arm yourself with a 10 gallon barf bag, >>> and listen to what those believers are getting told. >> >> >>Now you're finally starting to catch on. There are far bigger dangers, >>both >>ideological and potential physical threats, within our own borders than >>without. > > You are wrong. It is a secondary danger. If Islam wins, the > internal danger won't exist because none of those people > will be alive. Neither will you be alive so the internal > danger is a null job. False conclusion drawn on an inaccurate assumption. There is no competition for Islam to "win" in that sense. If the West changed to Islamic based societies life would continue largely as normal.
From: T Wake on 19 Oct 2006 12:11
<jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eh7mj3$8qk_001(a)s977.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... <big snip> > The news said that the questions that were asked was if > anybody knew anybody who died. Adding these up will not > give a correct count. I don't know enough about counting > but I would guess that the reliablility of the count > would be 1/x, where x=number of people asked. They are > going to report anybody who is rumored to have died. <snip> How many do you think have died? What is an acceptable number? |