UN staff killed in Afghan protest over Quran burning in US

[pnewton]

They didn’t say that. They said that people who misused it to the point of causing trouble should be punished.

Punished for what? One can only punish that which is in law as being a crime. Should free expression that is unpopular be considered a crime? Should it only be criminal when something bad happens? If the latter, then do we not let the criminals, in this case the murderers, dictate what is criminal. The problem with responding to this burning legally is that it allows for the spilling of innocent blood in order to blackmail this country.

 

[Robert_Bay]

Please remember to charitably discuss the issues, not each other.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Muslims riot gives many search results.

Perhaps we sould outlaw…everything?

Muslims Riot in Dudley over cancelled mega-mosque project

freedomist.com/2010/05/03/muslims-riot-in-dudley-over-cancelled-mega-mosque-project/

Muslims Riot Over Spelling of ‘Koran’ in U.S. Media

scrappleface.com/?p=1921

Muslims Riot Over Defense of Free Speech, Religious Critique

atheism.about.com/b/2009/02/18/muslims-riot-over-defense-of-free-speech-religious-critique.htm

Muslims Riot Over by Miss World Article

http://www.beliefnet.com/News/2002/11/Muslims-Riot-Over-By-Miss-World-Article.aspx

Muslims riot in Indian Kashmir over protest deaths

reuters.com/article/2008/08/13/us-india-kashmir-idUSSP25368320080813?feedType=nl

Hundreds Riot in Egypt Over Muslim Rape Claim

christianpost.com/news/hundreds-riot-in-egypt-over-muslim-rape-claim-41995/

I could go on, and on, and on but it’s late.

I wonder how many laws the West needs to change to accomodate Islam?

 

[estesbob]

Muslims riot gives many search results.

Perhaps we sould outlaw…everything?

Muslims Riot in Dudley over cancelled mega-mosque project

freedomist.com/2010/05/03/muslims-riot-in-dudley-over-cancelled-mega-mosque-project/

Muslims Riot Over Spelling of ‘Koran’ in U.S. Media

scrappleface.com/?p=1921

Muslims Riot Over Defense of Free Speech, Religious Critique

atheism.about.com/b/2009/02/18/muslims-riot-over-defense-of-free-speech-religious-critique.htm

Muslims Riot Over by Miss World Article

http://www.beliefnet.com/News/2002/11/Muslims-Riot-Over-By-Miss-World-Article.aspx

Muslims riot in Indian Kashmir over protest deaths

reuters.com/article/2008/08/13/us-india-kashmir-idUSSP25368320080813?feedType=nl

Hundreds Riot in Egypt Over Muslim Rape Claim

christianpost.com/news/hundreds-riot-in-egypt-over-muslim-rape-claim-41995/

I could go on, and on, and on but it’s late.

I wonder how many laws the West needs to change to accomodate Islam?

Scappleface is a parody site.

 

[Darryl1958]

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!

To mention these things might hurt other peoples feelings. So many people value feelings over truth, that it doesn’t matter how many polls are done on support for sharia in the Muslim world, or how many elections go over to Hamas and Hizbollah, Islamists in Turkey, or now the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, no matter what Muslims themselves invariably choose for their own countries if given the choice, no matter how much welfare in our countries is support the man and his multiple wives and families,
the truth just doesn’t matter.

What is happening in Pakistan about killing the Christian convert, and assasinating any politician who disagrees, no matter how much popular support is shown for these things on popular TV there, and on the street and in the press, it really, really doesn’t matter.

Politically correct means trading in the truth so that no one’s feeling get hurt, and vast numbers of people are just okay with that.

 

[Darryl1958]

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!

To mention these things might hurt other peoples feelings. So many people value feelings over truth, that it doesn’t matter how many polls are done on support for sharia in the Muslim world, or how many elections go over to Hamas and Hizbollah, Islamists in Turkey, or now the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, no matter what Muslims themselves invariably choose for their own countries if given the choice, no matter how much welfare in our countries is support the man and his multiple wives and families,
the truth just doesn’t matter.

What is happening in Pakistan about killing the Christian convert, and assassinating any politician who disagrees, no matter how much popular support is shown for these things on popular TV there, and on the street and in the press, it really, really doesn’t matter.

Politically correct means trading in the truth so that no one’s feeling get hurt, and vast numbers of people are just okay with that.

 

[LtTony]

The thing is, they have been doing this before Pastor Jones was even a glimmer in his father’s eye. They don’t need an excuse. They will riot, murder and burn whether Jones burned the book or not. It doesn’t matter what Jones did or didn’t do, they would have rioted, using something, someone else as an excuse. He is not even partially responsible.

My point with the Ethiopian riots was that no one did anything but they rioted, burned churches and drove 10,000 people from their homes.

You’ve essentially mentioned this twice before. It is a valid observation that went by without comment. I totally agree where you’re coming from – christians have been and are being butchered by muslim tribal societies. With little or no provocation.
A number of people here, however, are examining this particular incident and its unique circumstances. Your general observation certainly applies to it, imo.

 

[LtTony]

Originally Posted by Scott_Lafrance forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
The Koran, as observed by the example of Muhammed, does command it. If you want to find out what the truth of a religious text is, observe the founder of the faith. Muhammed was, among other things, a violent man who spread his new faith by the sword. Christ did no such thing, in fact, peacefully offering himself up to be executed without resisting.

Did God not do the same thing with the Jews in the OT? Yes I realize the NT changed things but it’s interesting how quickly people forget about our faiths violent history when observing another’s…

No, actually God didn’t do the same thing with the Jews. It is often seen that way by some, however, and I can understand why. In the course of one of those discussions, I looked into it. A lot different situation, a one-time situation and in a time long ago.

 

[Raskolnikov]

LtTony:

No, actually God didn’t do the same thing with the Jews. It is often seen that way by some, however, and I can understand why. In the course of one of those discussions, I looked into it. A lot different situation, a one-time situation and in a time long ago.

Well, how exactly did the Jews get rid of the Canaanites? Peaceful persuasion?

Scott_Lafrance:

The Koran, as observed by the example of Muhammed, does command it. If you want to find out what the truth of a religious text is, observe the founder of the faith. Muhammed was, among other things, a violent man who spread his new faith by the sword. Christ did no such thing, in fact, peacefully offering himself up to be executed without resisting.

And yet, throughout history so many Christians have done just what Islamic terrorists are trying to do now: spread their faith through violence, in spite of the teachings of their savior. At the same time, Islamic terrorism is just a few decades old. How can one tie this very modern phenomenon to a fourteen century old text? Did they discover some new hadiths telling believers to hijack planes? What took so long? Or perhaps ther are other explanations for why there is so much violence in the Middle East.

 

[jilly4ski]

I tried to qualify my statement by saying the dangers were not as widely known as Muslim extremists were known for. I also explained I had to read up to see who he was and in reading found he was shot more than one instance. The other difference, I failed to post but is important, was he did what he felt was lawful to do and did not do it intentionally to incite a people.

Umm, just a heads up, but what this pastor did was lawful too, it is called freedom of speech protected by the US Constitution and endorsed by the Vatican. What happened to all the stuff about following God’s law first. Surely a Lutheran Christian should know that abortion is murder and murder is against God’s law.

Anyways this pastor is a Bible Christian and interprets God’s law they way he thinks the Bible says, not the way the Church does. Thus could have thought he was following God’s law in burning the book.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Umm, just a heads up, but what this pastor did was lawful too, it is called freedom of speech protected by the US Constitution and endorsed by the Vatican. What happened to all the stuff about following God’s law first. Surely a Lutheran Christian should know that abortion is murder and murder is against God’s law.

Anyways this pastor is a Bible Christian and interprets God’s law they way he thinks the Bible says, not the way the Church does. Thus could have thought he was following God’s law in burning the book.

The BIG difference between the two was ‘intention’. (I guess I need to be more careful of exactly how I word things since people are being so critical of exactly what I say.) The pastor intended to inflame Muslims. I have no qualms with the freedom of speech, as long as it’s not used in a fashion to endanger someone’s life. I know freedom of speech is endorsed by the Vatican, but I also know the Vatican condemned the pastor’s plan to burn the Koran. Were they wrong in that instance?

I also know the pastor is a Bible Christian, even though his website shows belief in the ‘Apostolic’ leadership. From the same site you can see he succeeded the founder of his Church in 1996. The Church itself was founded in 1986.

‘Could have’? Now we turn to speculation? The pastor, whether he believed he was following God’s law or not, admitted to knowing there was a possibility of inciting violence. That’s a stretch of interpretation to read inciting violence into any of Christ’s teachings, even though I have seen it on these very forums.

Now let’s look at the Muslim view. Do you think they are not following God’s law, as they understand and believe? If, because one believes they are following God’s law, people are overlooking any guilt associated with this wrong, then all parties are exonerated. I’m sure that’s not what you’re trying to say, I am just trying to show you the flaw of that logic, in my honest opinion.

I only try to view everything through a ‘Christian’s’ eye, or how Christ might view things. He comes before anything of this world, including any government or laws enacted by any government, according to my belief and faith in Him. I find responsibility for everyone from the pastor, to the political leaders, the religious leaders and those who actually killed those people, based on how I would view myself if I had done any of this. I can tell you, I would see it as sinning grievously for myself.

 

[Linda_Marie]

I see your point… but it doesn’t change mine.

Again… I reworded my question just for you…

Say something you DO feel compelled to do for the sole purpose of illiciting a response would likely result in violence… would you do it?

sole purpose of illiciting a response? I would not feel compelled to do anything for the sole purpose of illiciting a response, violent or non violent. There would have to be much more reason to go ahead with something that might provoke others to violence. I’m not a mind reader and can’t judge what was in Pastor Jone’s heart when he felt compelled to do what he did.

The thing is, it doesn’t take much to provoke a Muslim to violence. I lived in Saudi Arabia, among Wahhabi Muslims, for nigh on 25 years. I also spent 3 years in Beirut and 4 years in Iran. I ‘provoked’ Muslims just be being female and walking down the street.

I suppose I should have taken up the abaya, or just stayed home all the time, modifying my behaviour, accepting their restrictions on my freedom because of the threat of assault. I got very good at spotting which men were going to try to grope me on the street but I wasn’t always successful at avoiding them. Obviously, it was my fault because I didn’t cover myself with an abaya, although I dressed so that only my hands and head were uncovered. My fault for leaving my head exposed in public like that. I was just asking to be groped.

Here I was doing something that might result in violence on the part of Muslims. Anyone who thinks being groped by complete strangers in the middle of the street isn’t violence…

I can’t count how many times I was forced off the sidewalk and made to walk in the gutter like a good dhimmi. That wouldn’t have happened had I stayed home. Again, my fault.

<…>
Already artists and thinkers all over Europe are scared shitless to critizise anything about Islam because they fear violence or death.
<…>

This is the coercion. Do as we want, or we will kill you or other innocents and put the blame on you.

<…>

The time for society to actually stand up to the bully has come and gone. Society as a whole could not due to cowardice and political correctness.
Ergo, Pastor Jones.

I hope to God that it is not too late.

<…> See what you all made me do!

This is their argument. They take one random act by an individual, and blame the entire country and all Christians for their rioting and murders.

It’s still unrelated… the wife leaving did so to get herself out of harms way… Jones was in no danger himself but rather put himself there by his actions as well as anyone else who these radicals felt like attacking. Why do you insist on using an unrelated analogy when the truth is much more compelling?

I thought the analogy might be easier to understand.

The truth is that Muslims don’t need an excuse to attack non-Muslims. They will fabricate one if necessary.

Bottom line.

1. It is common knowledge that radical Muslims are known for committing random acts of violence**. **-]when their faith is insulted.
   /-]

amended to show the truth of the matter.

AND you still didn’t answer my previous question…

If you had nothing else to deter you except the knowledge that it would result in violence… would YOU have done it?

answered above and not a yes or no question. Nothing I do or don’t do has any effect on whether Muslims will resort to violence. I can guarantee they will riot, burn churches and kill Christians again. They don’t need any provocation. If they aren’t provoked by the actions of Christians, they will fabricate a reason to riot, murder and burn.

The muslims are telling to us to modify our behaviour or they will riot, murder, burn and destroy.They threaten violence and mayhem to coerce us and force their beliefs on us.

The same as the abusive husband forces his wife to do what he wants or he will beat her. Yes, she could leave but the abusive husband still reacts violently when his demands are not met, only now, since his wife is not to hand to beat, he beats on the next woman he sees and still blames his wife for his actions.

At the moment, we can leave Muslim lands and no longer be subjected to their demands. However, we are now seeing them reach across the oceans. They are blaming us for their own actions, saying “Look what you made me do. It is all your fault for doing x, y, z, or not doing a, b, c.”

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Well, how exactly did the Jews get rid of the Canaanites? Peaceful persuasion?

And yet, throughout history so many Christians have done just what Islamic terrorists are trying to do now: spread their faith through violence, in spite of the teachings of their savior. At the same time, Islamic terrorism is just a few decades old. How can one tie this very modern phenomenon to a fourteen century old text? Did they discover some new hadiths telling believers to hijack planes? What took so long? Or perhaps ther are other explanations for why there is so much violence in the Middle East.

THe difference being, Christians did these things IN SPITE OF the commands of the founder of their faith. Muslims have and continue to do these thing BECAUSE OF the commands of the founder of their faith. Can you not understand the difference? And the New Testiment is a 20 century old text, does that make it less valid because of age? The point I made and you did not refute, and CANNOT refute (although I think it will be amusing to watch you try) is that Christ set the example of his teaching, and so did Muhammed. Christ put Himself to the sword (figuratively and almost literally) as an example to His followers, Muhammed put others to the sword as an example to his followers. Now, you can match texts with actions. Muslims don’t need any “new hadiths” telling them to terrorize people in the name of their faith. They’ve been doing it since the time of their leader, Muhammed. They’re just following his example. They’ve changed their methods. Instead of butchering them in the streets with swords and knives…well, they still do it that way…they began capturing them on the sea and land and turning them into convert soldiers for their faith (see janissaries and mameluks). Then, as technology advanced, so did HOW they terrorize people in the name of Allah at the command of Muhammed, but not the WHY. That has always remained consistent.

 

[GraceDK]

I’m sure it is… but do you honestly think that purposely inciting anger is something that Christ would’ve taught? Of course not. So while from a human point of view it makes logical sense (I don’t agree with it but I understand what you’re saying) I think it would be quite damaging to the soul to try to make someone angry. In other words I don’t think God would want us to make someone angry for His sake.

I dont think an anticipated response of anger should hinder a person from doing what he believes to be right.

In the New Testament we read that the first Christians burned books of sorcery. Do you think they were wrong in doing so?
Some people might have been very angry at that but the nature of those books were so that the Christians condemned them to hell.

I think there is a difference between burning books that openly incite to hatred and violence -. like Mein Kamph or the Quran (which whether you like it or not does command slaying of non-muslims) and what the Church did in the middle ages where it burned other peoples ideas which didn’t incite to violence.

You say its against God’s wishes that i make anyone angry. I make people angry all the time though, eg. when I say that communism caused the death of millions of people in the Soviet and China, or when I tell people that abortion is wrong. Oh they are enraged with an almost demonic rage, and I am sure they would like to censor me.
Do you think that I also shouldnt tell them the truth because I already know they will be enraged? Indeed one man was so enraged that he tried to hit with his car a girl who peacefully demonstrated at a abortion clinic… She knew that people would be angry too, so was that her fault?

People have always been angry with Christians.

You say pastor burning quran = death and violence (implicitly deserved)
I say the violence that came precisely shows something about the dangerous nature of Islam. The whole outcome has to do with Islam… not about the pastor per se… The whole world precisely warned him because they know how sick Islamists are in that they place books and religion far above human dignity.
The Quran burning was one action of defiance… In Europe museums dont even dare to put critical art of Islam in the museums lest someone become violent.
One Jewish professor read aloud from the Quran at a university lecture and was consequently beaten up.
The Jews are leaving Europe because of the inherent anti-semitism in Islam which comes with the massive immigration.

 

[mdrummer5]

I dont think an anticipated response of anger should hinder a person from doing what he believes to be right.

In the New Testament we read that the first Christians burned books of sorcery. Do you think they were wrong in doing so?
Some people might have been very angry at that but the nature of those books were so that the Christians condemned them to hell.

I think there is a difference between burning books that openly incite to hatred and violence -. like Mein Kamph or the Quran (which whether you like it or not does command slaying of non-muslims) and what the Church did in the middle ages where it burned other peoples ideas which didn’t incite to violence.

You say its against God’s wishes that i make anyone angry. I make people angry all the time though, eg. when I say that communism caused the death of millions of people in the Soviet and China, or when I tell people that abortion is wrong. Oh they are enraged with an almost demonic rage, and I am sure they would like to censor me.
Do you think that I also shouldnt tell them the truth because I already know they will be enraged? Indeed one man was so enraged that he tried to hit with his car a girl who peacefully demonstrated at a abortion clinic… She knew that people would be angry too, so was that her fault?

People have always been angry with Christians.

You say pastor burning quran = death and violence (implicitly deserved)
I say the violence that came precisely shows something about the dangerous nature of Islam. The whole outcome has to do with Islam… not about the pastor per se… The whole world precisely warned him because they know how sick Islamists are in that they place books and religion far above human dignity.
The Quran burning was one action of defiance… In Europe museums dont even dare to put critical art of Islam in the museums lest someone become violent.
One Jewish professor read aloud from the Quran at a university lecture and was consequently beaten up.
The Jews are leaving Europe because of the inherent anti-semitism in Islam which comes with the massive immigration.

Making someone angry for simply speaking your mind and intentionally provoking them as you suggested with your snake analogy is entirely different.

As far as Jones and his intent I’m done discussing it. His actions caused violence, period. Of course It makes NO sense for the “offended” to have reacted the way they did (I never claimed otherwise) but it was expected and his actions are what they reacted to, that much is undeniable. The debate of whether or not he is in any way responsible for those deaths is pointless as both sides will never see eye to eye.

However, I’m still hoping we can get the thoughts of some or at least one of our Muslim members.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I hope the posters here who want America to change our laws to appease lunatics 8,000 miles away enjoy their dhimmitude!

I’ll be dead first.

 

[mdrummer5]

I hope the posters here who want America to change our laws to appease lunatics 8,000 miles away enjoy their dhimmitude!

I’ll be dead first.

Several posts have been added since I was on here yesterday so I didn’t catch anyone saying that. I don’t believe we should change our laws. frankly I’m glad that we live in a country that will allow us to say whatever we want… however, I think this should really serve as an example showing that just because we can do something, doesn’t mean we should.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

In the meantime, the wholesale slaughter of Christians by Muslims continues unabated on the Ivory Coast… But please, carry on about the pastor burning a book.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Several posts have been added since I was on here yesterday so I didn’t catch anyone saying that. I don’t believe we should change our laws. frankly I’m glad that we live in a country that will allow us to say whatever we want… however, I think this should really serve as an example showing that just because we can do something, doesn’t mean we should.

It appears a discussion tactic, that is to say something the opposing side stated when in fact they did not state such. No one has requested a change in our laws. As Jharek puts it, ‘Yes, the right to free speech also carries responsibilities with it as well.’ That’s what most of us have been saying. The pastor’s actions were reckless and caused a violent backlash that cost people their lives. We have not left out the responsibility of the political and religious figures, or the very people who committed the act of murder.

Some have basically tried to say, ‘he thought he was serving God, and he’s a Protestant so he might have misunderstood scriptures.’ That’s a flawed argument in my opinion, because Muslims think they serve God, according to their faith and understanding.

Others deny the pastor’s intent, when he has been very vocal about why he did it. He acknowledged knowing about the possibility of violence occurring over his actions. Government officials spoke to him directly, and condemned his plans, just as the Vatican condemned his plans. Now, knowing how his action was responded too, the pastor is discussing plans to put Mohammed on on trial. His intent is easy to see through, for those willing to see. Yet Catholics have rose up in his defense of the action afterward?

Other have argued that they attack Christians. This appears to be calling for, ‘an eye for an eye’, to me. The Middle East has a history riddled with religious killings, and other atrocities, from ALL sides. Do the same people find it revolting that when the modern state of Israel was formed? Christians and Muslims were removed from their homes by the Jews.

We have to find a way beyond the injustices. The tone from some on this thread seem to reject any idea of peace. To overlook some and target a single group appears to be for less than charitable reasons, since no logical explanation has been provided. I’ve asked several times what people suggest can be done? No one has seriously answered that question and some have continued ‘beating the war drum’. At least that what it appears to be.

I have been accused of ‘playing the Christian card’. I am a Christian on a Christian forum and through my faith, my first obligation is to please Him, not any government of this world. What’s legal according to ‘man’s’ laws does not exonerate us before the final judge. We have a greater responsibility. It’s easy to discuss laws that we all know to be wrong, so we can’t fall back on certain laws as reasoning over spiritual obligations while arguing against those we know to be wrong.

I did not intend to offend anyone in this discussion, and apologize if I have. I will leave our posts to speak for themselves and probably won’t be participating in this thread anymore. The subject has more than been hashed and rehashed.

God Bless,

 

[mdrummer5]

In the meantime, the wholesale slaughter of Christians by Muslims continues unabated on the Ivory Coast… But please, carry on about the pastor burning a book.

There’s already a thread about that… but you already know given your response…

If these Muslims kill one more Christian, I am going to burn a copy of the Koran!

I see we’ve learned nothing.