Shooting at Muhammad cartoon contest in Texas

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thermopylae
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Pope Benedict spoke his mind once.
People died directly as a result of that.
 
Darryl1958 said:
To the extent that you don’t submit, and you do speak out where against what it is you disagree with, and to the extent that you are a big enough target, you can expect death and death threats.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you are trying to say here.
I do everything I can to ensure I do not submit in any way shape or form and I speak out to my fullest capabilities against what I do not agree with while being guided by my faith in Jesus Christ in the manner in wich the Church has taught me and guides me in as much as I am able to understand and comprehend it and I still do not have the expectaion of death. Well, again, I hope and pray I don’t.
 
simple_soul said:
:confused:
I really do not beleive anyone, exspecially those on this thread, has been trying to “shift” blame.
They have only been trying to hold each side accountable for what they beleive is each side’s share of the blame.
Click to expand...
So- the victim must share the blame?

The person who is attacked is responsible for the choices of the people attacking them?

So-- does this carry into other crimes? Your philosophy is that the victim is to blame if their actions/dress/speech provoke some kind of reaction?
 
Darryl1958 said:
Pope Benedict spoke his mind once.
People died directly as a result of that.
Click to expand...
I believe the Islamists shot a 60 year old Nun, who spent her whole life helping the poor. They shot her several times, because the Pope said Islam had violent tendencies.
 
Again, I will repeat from yesterday,

Those websites like Jihadwatch get hacked because of what they say.

So, it seems they offend Muslims.

So, then, do we say those websites should not be in operation in an act of appeasement just like some say the contest should not have been held??
 
Path_Finder said:
Again, I will repeat from yesterday,

Those websites like Jihadwatch get hacked because of what they say.

So, it seems they offend Muslims.

So, then, do we say those websites should not be in operation in an act of appeasement just like some say the contest should not have been held??
Click to expand...
That’s a good point. I see what youre getting at now -its all “offensive”. My response to that would be that there should be more websites like that. More events, more protests, more everything… And there should be no attempt to stop it.
 
ok look guys, I don’t have much time so I’ll try to make this as blunt and clear as I can.

I really don’t know if what Pamela Geller did was right or wrong I just know that understanding and knowing my faith in as much as I do I could never do what she did by holding the “Cartoon Contest.”

My personal take on her, others like her, and blogs like Jihadwatch is that they may be more of a tool for Extreem Muslims/Terrorists than thy realize. It was said at the begining that this attach on Pamela Geller at her Cartoon Contest looked like a suicide attempt on the part of the Terrorists and that they seemed like they were armatures.

My take on this is it would not surprise me if ISIS wants them to be around, it is one way they can ensure what they are doing will be heard and seen. It could very well be that Pamela Geller and jihadwatch are playing right into thier hands to help spread their terror. Maybe this whole thing with the Cartoon drawing was a suicide mission on the terrorists part. They did not want to succeed in it and that is why they sent such amatures who probably went willingly to thier death knowing what they were up against and knowing thêy would be slaughtered before they could get to Pamela Geller. They used it to further thier agenda. I do not really believe that this was or is jihadwatch’s or Pamela Geller’s doing this on purpose. I really do believe they have other intentions. I would go so far as to say that they may be being played, used, at thier own game by the terrorist. This would explain why the Government may be so against what they do. I don’t know. Even if they are being used should they keep doing it because it is the right thing to do? But then here we are debating if it really is the right way or is there a more honerable, dignified, and prudent way? I don’t know if my way is correct it is something I am still trying to pan out. With all that being said, I do beleive I understand why Pamela Geller and this like her and Jihadwatch and blog like it do what they do and I don’t blame them and I don’t try to hold it against them. I can’t speak for Pamela Geller but I know. I can speak for Robert Spencer in as much as I know him that he does not do it because he is racist or a bigot or any other of those filthy names he gets called. I beleive he is motivated by other reasons that I beleive a lot of people already tried to explain. I will say I do have a deep respect for him even if I don’t agree with 100’% of the time and choose a different way of doing things and can’t always wrap my brain around half of his reason why he does what he does. I just trust in him that he is following what he believes God wants or needs him to do in this life and leave it at that as I stay focused on what Inbelieve God needs me to do with my life and I am willing to beleive that Pamela. Geller and others like them are doing this too.
With that being said I need to go now untill I get another moment to possibly squeeze in some other thoughts if I have any more.

P.S. Sorry for any typos I really need to go and can’t take the time to proof read but I felt I really needed to get this out as best as could.
 
simple_soul said:
You did not answer my question.
Click to expand...
Oh. I am sorry.

I was not saying that he was expecting that.

So do you hold him accountable as Pamela Geller for what he said, which indeed directly led to the death of a nun?
 
Path_Finder said:
Again, I will repeat from yesterday,

Those websites like Jihadwatch get hacked because of what they say.

So, it seems they offend Muslims.

So, then, do we say those websites should not be in operation in an act of appeasement just like some say the contest should not have been held??
Click to expand...
Bait much?
But no. I do not beleive it is of the same nature as holding a “Cartoon Contest.”
 
Darryl1958 said:
Oh. I am sorry.

I was not saying that he was expecting that.

So do you hold him accountable as Pamela Geller for what he said, which indeed directly led to the death of a nun?
Click to expand...
I beleive there is a difference between what she did and what Pope Benedict did.
 
simple_soul said:
I beleive there is a difference between what she did and what Pope Benedict did.
Click to expand...
So you do not hold him accountable then.

Sure there is a difference between his insult of Islam and Pamela Geller’s.
The effects of the pope’s insult though cost more in terms of innocent lives.
 
simple_soul said:
I really don’t know if what Pamela Geller did was right or wrong I just know that understanding and knowing my faith in as much as I do I could never do what she did by holding the “Cartoon Contest.”
Click to expand...
Knowing that what somebody did was wrong seems to be a pretty important first step in apportioning blame. What you’re saying is the equivalent of “she should have expected to be raped because I would never wear a skirt that short” It’s a non sequitur. Whether or not you would have held such a contest is irrelevant. Geller, et. al. clearly had a right to hold such a contest, and just as clearly, the terrorists had absolutely no right to try to shoot up the contest.
 
simple_soul said:
I beleive there is a difference between what she did and what Pope Benedict did.
Click to expand...
No it isn’t. IMHO

The pope, or Ms. Geller, or the bloggers in Bangladesh hacked to death, or the soldier in London just walking down the street have no control over the actions of the people that attacked them. Your position is that the attackers were somewhat justified (share the blame!) by the actions of those who provoked them. Wearing a uniform provokes them, a blog critical of Islam provokes them, being a Christian provokes them— we all have it coming - disbelief in Islam and Mohammed is a capital offense.

My position is that violence in response to just speech is never acceptable. I would never say that an Islamic preacher expressing his opinion that all us Christians should be beheaded should be violently attacked for saying it. But he should be loudly and widely challenged for those beliefs, debated in the public sphere and the idea of violence justified by religious beliefs denounced vociferously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top