R
Richardols
Guest
No, but one can speak of the IRA as being composed mainly of “Catholics” without making a list of those who are violent, and who are non-violent, who are church-goers, and who are non-church-goers.
- Status
A
Adonis33
Guest
I think the point the elarier posters were trying to make is that the Islamic Terrorist were killing in the name if Islam, where the IRA and Serbians were not killing in the name if Chritianity,and in fact there actions were often condemned by Christians. I think this is a huge distinction.
I have posted this before - Christian leaders do not call for the conversion of the word by the killing of innocents.
R
Richardols
Guest
Would it have made any difference if the IRA said that they were killing in the name of Christianity? No, they’d still be acting contrary to what their Catholic faith teaches. The same with those Islamist terrorists.
A
Adonis33
Guest
Of course their is a difference, not in the violence, but in how you refer to them. The IRA is not saying “I am doing this in the name of the Holy Mother CHurch” - they are terrorist that happen to be Catholic. The fact that they are Catholic has absolutely nothin to do with thier actions
Islamic Terrorist, on the other hand, destroy in the name of their religion. Their Islamic faith has everything to do with their actions. That is why you cannot associate the IRA as “Catholic Terrorist”, because they do not asociate the violence with the religion.
R
Richardols
Guest
Adonis33Islamic Terrorist said:
A
Adonis33
Guest
My apoligies - you are correct - I probably should have said “there interpretation of their faith”.
D
dwc
Guest
I agree. The Serbs, the members of the IRA – they are indeed poor examples of Christianity, but Christianity was not their** motive** for violence – secular political interests were. For the terrorists, they openly quote the Qu’ran and their interpretation of same to support their acts of violence. The serbs and IRA members’ Christianity is incidental to their violence. The muslim terrorists’ faith is central to their violence.
I may be wrong, but I can’t think of a single sentence in the New Testament which could be used to justify violence against others.
P
PaulDupre
Guest
Mike,
If the day arrives when someone gives me the choice of panties on my head or getting my head cut off, I promise you I will choose the panties.
Hi ho,
Paul
M
MikeWM
Guest
I see. So it doesn’t matter what we do, as long as it isn’t quite as bad as what the bad guys are doing?
Mike
A
Adonis33
Guest
You can’t compare fraternity hazing to having your head sawed off with a rusty butchers knife.
I refuse to believe that you think the two are comparable.
A
Adonis33
Guest
That is becaouse their isn’t a sentence that can be used to justify terrorism in the New Testament.
M
MikeWM
Guest
No, and you can’t compare the deeds of the supposedly lawful and repected United States Army with a group of outlaws who kidnap and murder people, but that’s what the person I replied to had done.
Mike
M
MikeWM
Guest
Just as an addendum, those of you who think this is limited to ‘fraternity hazing’ (the Iraqis wanted to join a fraternity??) or ‘sticking panties on someone’s head’ then I suggest you try to investigate a bit more closely. This article would be a good start
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_of_Abu_Ghraib_abuse
(edited to warn that this is graphic, and rather unpleasant)
Have a look at the photos in that article, and then tell me it was ‘panties on the head’ or a bit of a joke.
Mike
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_of_Abu_Ghraib_abuse
(edited to warn that this is graphic, and rather unpleasant)
Have a look at the photos in that article, and then tell me it was ‘panties on the head’ or a bit of a joke.
Mike
K
Karin
Guest
Oh man…this is really(the photos at the link you provided) disgusting, inhuman, and sick-I am sure I could come up with some other words too!!! I had seem some of them but others I had not…the only question I can ask after viewing them is Why???
M
MikeWM
Guest
I had only seen some of those photos before too, not the others. I must admit, I’d really rather not have seen them at all.
Mike
K
Karin
Guest
I agree, I also would of prefered not to see them…I did not think, I also hoped, they could get any worse than the few I had seen …well I was WRONG!!!I had only seen some of those photos before too, not the others. I must admit, I’d really rather not have seen them at all.
Mike
M
mjdonnelly
Guest
And those who commited the acts are have either already gone to trial or are going to be there soon.
Name a Christian religious or Christian political leader that has applauded what happened there. Did Bush seem proud of his troops for what they did?
However that is the attitude some leaders in the middle east have shown over beheadings of people trying to improve the quality of life in Iraq.
Name a Christian religious or Christian political leader that has applauded what happened there. Did Bush seem proud of his troops for what they did?
However that is the attitude some leaders in the middle east have shown over beheadings of people trying to improve the quality of life in Iraq.
M
MikeWM
Guest
Nope, never said he did, and I’m sure he wasn’t.
Which ones? Which Middle East leader has said they were ‘proud’ of the beheadings of Ken Bigley or Margaret Hassan?
And again, I’m amazed by the way people seem to want to compare the actions of the US Army and a band of murderous thugs. Shouldn’t you want more positive comparisons for one’s army?
Mike
M
mjdonnelly
Guest
The context of the article was trying to protray us as having a war on Islam, instead of a war against terrorists. I thought that by you posting a link to those pictures that you were citing an example of what Bush is to be held responsible for, when the responsible parties are already being punished.
I would call al-Zarqawi a religious leader, he certainly uses Islam that way.
We didn’t start this, they did. They are responsible for those beheadings, not Bush or Blair. Kidnapping a 65 yr old. Takes alot of bravery there.
K
Karin
Guest
- Status