UN staff killed in Afghan protest over Quran burning in US

[iamrefreshed]

The pastor burned the Quran, because he found it evil, and without regards for innocent people that maybe endangered by those who believe the book to be sacred.

We are taught, by Christ, not to live ‘an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth’. We are taught to love our neighbor, love our enemies and do unto others, as we would have them do to us.

That’s nice that you play the Christian card (you are the only one arguing this BTW) but please answer this…

Should free speech laws in the US allow for burning the Quran?

 

[Raskolnikov]

LemonAndLime:

Many many Muslims want Sharia or Taliban?

Which ones are these? What are your assertions based on?

Apparently it is supposed to be common knowledge that most Muslims want to enslave the world. I’ve no doubt that there are a few ofthis kind, but I’ve known a number Muslims and none of them have come remotely close to fitting the portrait of Muslims that GraceDK is painting here.

And I’m pretty sure the majority of Muslims in most European countries aren’t even observant. I’m not sure what the argument is that a bunch of non-observant Muslims are going to establish a Kalifath in Europe.

GraceDK:

When Christians are ridiculed we do not go and decapitate innocent people. Nor should we blame the blasphemers for their deaths if we killed them in response to their words. I sincerely hope you agree on that.

There was a time, not all that long ago, when Christians regularly did just as reprehensible things in the name their religion. As late as the 1930s many intellectuals thought Catholicism was the reason for Spain’s backwardness. This memory of our own Christian past, for me, tempers the inclination to declare a religion to be evil because the violence committed by some in its name.

I do suggest that all Christians start to seriously study what Islam is about.
The devil cannot be faught with the devil. Truth must overcome the lie.

Believe it or not, many scholars have studies Islam and not come to you conclusion that it is evil. I’d recomend the works of historian John Esposito’s, especially “Islam and Democracy.” The author is Catholic and is the director of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown.

 

[pnewton]

Many many Muslims want Sharia or Taliban?

Enough for violence to be a regular theme. Enough for everyone who has condemned this pastor to note that the reaction was predictable.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Enough for violence to be a regular theme. Enough for everyone who has condemned this pastor to note that the reaction was predictable.

So protests = wanting Taliban and Sharia law.

In that case, university students in England are very keen on it also.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Maybe you all missed the Egyptian modesty police thread?

Or the fact that there are modesty police in many Islamic countries?

And that Sharia law rules many Muslim countries?

Or that there have been efforts in the US and Canada for Sharia law?

Wow, talk about ostriches!

 

[SamH]

The pastor admitted to knowing of the possibility of violence in reaction to his action and he was warned about such prior to fulfilling his plans. Yes there are violent Muslims, but in this particular instance their violence was fueled by the pastor’s action, creating more unnecessary violence towards innocent people and aiding the extremists in recruitment.

So George Tiller asked for it?

 

[iamrefreshed]

So George Tiller asked for it?

BTDT with Theo Van Gogh.

Apparentely, that was different!??!

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

That’s nice that you play the Christian card (you are the only one arguing this BTW) but please answer this…

Should free speech laws in the US allow for burning the Quran?

‘Played the Christian card’? I’m a Christian, on a Christian forum.

Is yours a loaded question?

To answer your question, His teachings come first and most relevant over any of ‘man’s’ laws. As I’ve tried to explain, on a few occasions, the law permits abortions, but as a Christian I don’t believe in abortions. The law permits ‘free speech’, but as a Christian I don’t believe that right should be exercised if it has the remotest possibility of endangering the lives of anyone.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Maybe you all missed the Egyptian modesty police thread?

The government imposing morality does not mean the sentiment is actually believed in by the majority of the people.

Or the fact that there are modesty police in many Islamic countries?

See above.

And that Sharia law rules many Muslim countries?

But not all Muslims Also, see above again.

Or that there have been efforts in the US and Canada for Sharia law?

There have also been efforts in the USA for women to not have equal rights to men, with a Christian origin (see Concerned Women for America). So what’s your point about Muslims?

Wow, talk about ostriches!

 

[iamrefreshed]

‘Played the Christian card’? I’m a Christian, on a Christian forum.

Is yours a loaded question?

To answer your question, His teachings come first and most relevant over any of ‘man’s’ laws. As I’ve tried to explain, on a few occasions, the law permits abortions, but as a Christian I don’t believe in abortions. The law permits ‘free speech’, but as a Christian I don’t believe that right should be exercised if it has the remotest possibility of endangering the lives of anyone.

Thanks for being clear that you are for the removal of free speech.

Now what if I said that if you post that again I will kill someone?

Will you post it?

Oh, and why does His laws come first? Who is He? And who determines that?

Christians don’t get to set law int he US. Government and the elect do. They don’t only represent Christians.

Sorry for playing the Devil’s Advocate but your assumption screamed for it.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Thanks for being clear that you are for the removal of free speech.

They didn’t say that. They said that people who misused it to the point of causing trouble should be punished. It’s like saying someone who thinks there should be rules about gun ownership is anti-guns. No they’re not, they just think there should be controls in place. No freedom without laws. No peace without preparing for war. That sorta thing.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

So George Tiller asked for it?

It’s not the same thing, and yet is similar. George Tiller worked within the boundaries of the law and extremists killed him for it. Yet is was Tiller’s endangerment of people that caused the extremists to react. I don’t endorse what Tiller was doing and I don’t endorse those who shot him. Also, making it different, is the fact that it was not known that Christians would react with violence, causing death, certainly not as well known as how the Muslims respond.

Islam is the rule of law in most Muslim countries. We have knowledge they are prone to violence, even against innocents as a form of retribution. This does not make their actions right, but we have knowledge of these type actions. The pastor was warned by several members of our government and his plans were condemned by the Vatican and more, yet he went ahead with his plans.

I’ve already tried to state how I view a discussion as dishonest when there is a spin, or twist, put to what I post to make it appear I’m saying something I’m not. I had to look George Tiller up, because I did not remember his name. I remembered the situation after looking him up and I have never said in any post that anyone ‘deserved’ or ‘asked’ for ‘it’. The victims in Afghanistan certainly never ‘asked for it’, but I do not see the Muslims solely responsible for what happened. They were knowingly incited, making the action a shared responsibility, in my opinion. My opinion is based on how I would feel if I had done what the pastor had done and I would most assuredly feel as if I had sinned grievously. But my point is, I am going to quit responding to less than honest posters who spin or twist it to appear I have said something I did not. I believe I am making myself clear enough to understand and have gone through some lengths to explain them further for some posters. I

 

[iamrefreshed]

They didn’t say that. They said that people who misused it to the point of causing trouble should be punished. It’s like saying someone who thinks there should be rules about gun ownership is anti-guns. No they’re not, they just think there should be controls in place. No freedom without laws. No peace without preparing for war. That sorta thing.

I read what was said. Can you point out the punished part you mention?

"The law permits ‘free speech’, but as a Christian I don’t believe that right should be exercised if it has the remotest possibility of endangering the lives of anyone. "

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Thanks for being clear that you are for the removal of free speech.

Now what if I said that if you post that again I will kill someone?

Will you post it?

Oh, and why does His laws come first? Who is He? And who determines that?

Christians don’t get to set law int he US. Government and the elect do. They don’t only represent Christians.

Sorry for playing the Devil’s Advocate but your assumption screamed for it.

I did not say that and your silliness is not humorous on this particular subject, in my honest opinion.

His laws come first, because of who He is, and all He’s done for us. He is Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God. I am a Christian first and all else follows that. He determined that.

Christians don’t get to set law in the US. That doesn’t mean Christians will not be held responsible for certain actions, when we stand before the only judge that counts, because of some non-Christian man made laws.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and responded to you and hoped we were beyond the dishonest discussion tactics of spinning or twisting my posts to say something I did not say, but I see I was mistaken. I will not respond to your posts anymore, but wish you no ill will.

God Bless

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

They didn’t say that. They said that people who misused it to the point of causing trouble should be punished. It’s like saying someone who thinks there should be rules about gun ownership is anti-guns. No they’re not, they just think there should be controls in place. No freedom without laws. No peace without preparing for war. That sorta thing.

Thank you.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

It’s not the same thing, and yet is similar. George Tiller worked within the boundaries of the law and extremists killed him for it. Yet is was Tiller’s endangerment of people that caused the extremists to react. I don’t endorse what Tiller was doing and I don’t endorse those who shot him. Also, making it different, is the fact that it was not known that Christians would react with violence, causing death, certainly not as well known as how the Muslims respond.

Islam is the rule of law in most Muslim countries. We have knowledge SOME OF THEM are prone to violence, even against innocents as a form of retribution. This does not make their actions right, but we have knowledge of these type actions. The pastor was warned by several members of our government and his plans were condemned by the Vatican and more, yet he went ahead with his plans.

I’ve already tried to state how I view a discussion as dishonest when there is a spin, or twist, put to what I post to make it appear I’m saying something I’m not. I had to look George Tiller up, because I did not remember his name. I remembered the situation after looking him up and I have never said in any post that anyone ‘deserved’ or ‘asked’ for ‘it’. The victims in Afghanistan certainly never ‘asked for it’, but I do not see the Muslims solely responsible for what happened. They were knowingly incited, making the action a shared responsibility, in my opinion. My opinion is based on how I would feel if I had done what the pastor had done and I would most assuredly feel as if I had sinned grievously. But my point is, I am going to quit responding to less than honest posters who spin or twist it to appear I have said something I did not. I believe I am making myself clear enough to understand and have gone through some lengths to explain them further for some posters. I

Correction shown with emphasis above. Sorry.

 

[lakotak]

I can always blame someone if things go wrong in my life. I can always rationalize my bad behaviors. So what?

While the behavior of the pastor in Florida is idiotic. The fanatics used it only as a rationalization for their evil behaviors, this is not the cause but an a posteriori justification. The same kind of rationalization goes on in other countries when people do not like Christians and so they make up and kind of excuses to apply the blasphemy laws and kill them.

However, if the act had never been done, they could not have used it to justify killing those people. It is like a forest fire, one small match can destroy thousand of acres of land. If the match had not been tossed, the acres and home would not have burned.

 

[jilly4ski]

It’s not the same thing, and yet is similar. George Tiller worked within the boundaries of the law and extremists killed him for it. Yet is was Tiller’s endangerment of people that caused the extremists to react. I don’t endorse what Tiller was doing and I don’t endorse those who shot him. Also, making it different, is the fact that it was not known that Christians would react with violence, causing death, certainly not as well known as how the Muslims respond.

Islam is the rule of law in most Muslim countries. We have knowledge they are prone to violence, even against innocents as a form of retribution. This does not make their actions right, but we have knowledge of these type actions. The pastor was warned by several members of our government and his plans were condemned by the Vatican and more, yet he went ahead with his plans.

This is incorrect, George Tiller had very stringent security measures because he knew he was in danger, (I believe he had is clinic blown up a time or two). The guy who shot him, had studied his movements to find away around the security. Thus it was well known that extremists would and had in the past reacted violently to his actions.

Someone posted about the other protests, but has anyone died in those protests? So apparently Muslims aren’t as violent as you are trying to imply. So some Muslims protest peacefully, (stomping on an effigy is still peaceful). Just this one riot in Afghanistan was violent? So I guess it wasn’t so much of a given that his actions would have resulted in violence.

The reason why I cannot put him on the same plane as the people in the riot, is because it took another positive action of another to create the violence. These people didn’t just all see this video all at once and go out on to the street on their own accord to kill UN workers. Rather leaders in the community told them to become violent. Without their actions no violence would have taken place. The pastors actions alone did not create the violence, it took positive actions of other (besides those the did the actual killing) to spark the violence.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I did not say that and your silliness is not humorous on this particular subject, in my honest opinion.

His laws come first, because of who He is, and all He’s done for us. He is Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God. I am a Christian first and all else follows that. He determined that.

Christians don’t get to set law in the US. That doesn’t mean Christians will not be held responsible for certain actions, when we stand before the only judge that counts, because of some non-Christian man made laws.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and responded to you and hoped we were beyond the dishonest discussion tactics of spinning or twisting my posts to say something I did not say, but I see I was mistaken. I will not respond to your posts anymore, but wish you no ill will.

God Bless

I’m silly? You’re disinguenious. OK, are we done calling names. After all, you are spouting Christian charity.

The subject is free speech. That is ruled by national law. Am I wrong or did you say your would curtail free speech?

 

[iamrefreshed]

Thank you.

Maybe you can show me where you said “punished”?