Burning people to death. Didn't Christians do that a few years back?

[MannyGoldstein]

For being "witches" and whatnot?

And my own peeps, the Jews, had a few episodes way back that sound roughly in line with what ISIS is doing, e.g. Samuel 15:

"Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’ ”

No, I'm not saying that killing for the Lord is OK. Rather, I don't think that killing for the Lord is exclusive of any particular religion. In fact, I don't think it's part of any real religion; killing is killing, and some religious claptrap is sometimes used as an excuse, just as "God's will" is used to explain away all sorts of suffering and exploitation.

I prefer Abraham Lincoln's religion, it avoids this kind of suffering:

"When I do good, I feel good. When I do bad, I feel bad. That's my religion."
- Abraham Lincoln

Peace.

Update: seems like President Obama agrees with me:http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026184066

[cwydro]

1. Suspected witches were never burned in this country,

despite popular belief.

However, Queen Mary did a lot of nasty burning of Protestants (not witches) during her reign.

But that was more than "a few years back."

[MannyGoldstein]

3. But they *were* slowly pressed to death with great weights, IIRC

And torched elsewhere, of course.

[Adrahil]

46. More than 200 years ago... n/t

[Marrah_G]

107. just one was pressed to death

Not that it makes it right, just wanted to clarify.

[jmowreader]

225. And nineteen were hanged

[Marrah_G]

234. Yes- it was a scary time

And shows how quickly people can turn on each other.

I loved living in Salem. It's so beautiful.

[jmowreader]

235. I've only been once

Tell me: what's it like there in October?

[Marrah_G]

238. It's insane in October and if you actually live there it's hell

The traffic is just crazy. Being pagan I would get whatever I needed from witchy shops downtown in sept so I could avoid it completely in October.

October is filled with college kids, tourists, partiers, a smattering of Pagans (usually the younger ones and ones that live right downtown) and way to many street preachers making sure we know we are going to hell.

[Quackers]

18. Queen Mary

Is that Henry the VIII's daughter with his first wife?

[PassingFair]

39. Yes. Also known as "Bloody Mary"

Not to be confused with "Mary, Queen of Scots"

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

156. No, that was reserved for folks 'living while black'.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/02/04/1362325/-ISIS-Burned-a-Man-Alive-That-It-is-Nothing-Compared-to-the-Spectacular-Lynchings-of-Black-Americans

[Downwinder]

2. In Dresden and Tokyo among others.

In Iraq it is supposed to be deep frying.

[n2doc]

86. +1 n/t

[truebluegreen]

226. +2

But of course, "war crimes" are limited to things we don't do...until we do them.

[MrMickeysMom]

4. Those Spanish knew a thing or two in the 1470's

and, the ever popular-



Anyone for a artistic rendition of Joan at the stake?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Stilke_Hermann_Anton_-_Joan_of_Arc's_Death_at_the_Stake.jpg

[hugo_from_TN]

5. Yes in the 13th century

Which is why most of us would like the Muslim religion (extremists, excuse me), to move to the 21st century post haste.

[JI7]

6. the guy burned to death in a cage was a Muslim

[Throd]

8. What is your point?

[exboyfil]

16. Well essentially the civil authorities were turning a blind eye to

burning individuals to death even into the early 20th century.

Jesse Washington in Waco, TX

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_of_Jesse_Washington

Henry Smith in Paris, TX

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Smith_%28lynching_victim%29

Others

[MattSh]

34. There were very few Muslim extremists until...

the USA started creating them by the thousands beginning about 30 years ago.

[Bluenorthwest]

54. Yes because of course, Soviet occupation of Afghanistan was welcomed by the people there and

the Chechens also welcomed their anti gay missionary wife sex loving Orthodox overlords!

[pipoman]

77. Wrong

Try 70 years ago....right around 1948.. .

[nichomachus]

118. It actually goes back 100 years

When the western powers meddled in the Middle East and put the Saud family in charge of territory that had been ruled by the Hussein family. They were pissed off at Hussein and wanted to teach him a lesson -- plus the Saud family made promises. To cement their claim to the land, the family later renamed it Saudi Arabia.

One problem for the Saudis was that the rather large tribe contained a significant factkion Islamic fundamentalists -- Wahabbists -- who were unhappy about the westerners being around. They wanted to kill people and blow things up. The Saudi rulers -- to keep peace in the kingdom -- allowed and encouraged them and even supported them financially -- as long as they kept their activities outside the kingdom. They were free to disrupt things anywhere else they wanted.

We just tapped into that 30 years ago and basically poured gasoline on the fire.

[truebluegreen]

227. Don't forget the fuel we tossed on the fire in 1953....

I'm sure it was just a coincidence that it was the CIA, doing operations instead of gathering intelligence.

[MasochisticHistorian]

243. Your accuracy is appreciated but off

Wahabb, who the Wahabbists take their name from, died in 1792, and was himself inspired by a much earlier writer. Wahabbists actually are the exact opposite of how you described them. The Saud family are Wahabbists, the strategy they use to spread Islam is through the economy, oil, and cloak-and-dagger means. The clarification needs to be made that the Hussein family as related to Saddam Hussein as Barack Hussein Obama. Hussein actually wasn't Saddam's family name. Also the Saudi family was setting up, ruling, and being deposed from Kingdoms in Arabia for 300 years. There wasn't any recent intervention by the West that put them there, the Head of the Hussein family tried to take the title Caliph after the Ottomans fell. The Saud family won. And calling Arabia, Saudi Arabia is the same thing as calling Obama's term, Obama's America. In Arabic they don't have the possessive 's like in English. Still you were a lot closer to what the truth is than anyone who only goes with your last sentence.

[840high]

130. Bingo - thanks

[sabrina 1]

215. How about White Phospherous? Is that from the 13th Century?

[Throd]

7. I remember that. Wasn't it 2011?

[MADem]

9. Burning people is un-Islamic.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/02/04/mideast-crisis-jordan-clerics-idINKBN0L814Q20150204

Egypt's top Muslim authority, the 1,000 year old Al-Azhar university revered by Sunni Muslims around the world, issued a statement expressing "deep anger over the lowly terrorist act" by what it called a "Satanic, terrorist" group.

The Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, Ahmed al-Tayeb, said the killers themselves deserved to be "killed, crucified or to have their limbs amputated."

In Qatar, the International Association of Muslim Scholars, headed by prominent cleric Youssef al-Qaradawi and linked to the Muslim Brotherhood that has influence across the region, called the burning of Kasaesbeh a criminal act...."... this extremist organisation does not represent Islam in any way and its actions always harm Islam," it said.

The Islamic State posted a religious edict on Twitter, which ruled that it is permissible...However, senior clerics across the Islamic world argued that inflicting death by fire was always banned under Islam.....

[hugo_from_TN]

10. OMG. This is gold.

The Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, Ahmed al-Tayeb, said the killers themselves deserved to be "killed, crucified or to have their limbs amputated."

[JI7]

11. it's an emotional reaction to what they did to the Soldier

reacting that way to what they did is not the same as what ISIS actually did do to the soldier.

[MADem]

90. There is an interesting quotation from the Quran that says something on the lines of

"Any Muslim who intentionally murders another Muslim shall be put to death."

If one would view implementation of the death penalty as intentional murder, that could be a problem--unless you got a non-Muslim executioner.

That said, in this case, I think there are plenty of people who don't have a problem with what al-Tayeb said.

[cascadiance]

102. Which is why the terrorists of 9/11 shouldn't be considered Muslim as they did both...

... burning people to death in the twin towers, and many of those that were killed were Muslims too.

[MADem]

168. They aren't. People forget the enormous outpouring of sympathy and goodwill from the Muslim world

after that event. Pity Bush went and squandered that goodwill with his "Ah'm gunna git revenge fer mah deddy!" attack on the Wrong Frigging Country.

People from most countries of the world, including Muslim countries, died in those towers (and I'm not counting the hijackers).

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=44b_1359356589&comments=1

[former9thward]

12. Islam has no Pope.

There is no authority that gets to say what is "un-Islamic" or not.

[Violet_Crumble]

24. The Pope doesn't get to speak for Christianity either...

Many Christians aren't Catholic...

[WinkyDink]

65. "The Pope doesn't get to speak for Protestantism either..." Fixed. :-).

[Bluenorthwest]

81. He does not speak for Protestants nor for the millions of members of Orthodox Churches which

have their own heirearchies. Anglicans are also not under the Pope and have their own Archbishop. There are roughly the same number of Christians who are Catholic as those who are not, around 1.3 billion of each....

[WinkyDink]

205. Anglicans come under the rubric of "Protestants," and I figured by mentioning the Eastern Chruch I'd

be extra-pedantic.

[former9thward]

78. True and I come from a Protestant background.

But at least the Pope speaks for a sizable, if not majority, of the Christian faith. Islam has no similar figure.

[MADem]

93. Uh, yes, they do. nt

[former9thward]

98. Uhh, no they don't.

[MADem]

172. No one disregards the Grand Imam of al-Ahzar if they are Sunni.

And no one disregards a Grand Ayatullah if they are Shi'a.

These leaders are about as Pope-ish as you are going to get--and they fulfill the same role as the Pope does with regard to their flocks, laying down the law, and explaining what "the rules" are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Grand_Imams_of_al-Azhar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marja%27

[former9thward]

174. Your second link gives a multitude of people not one.

In terms of the Grand Imam of al-Ahzar what are his quotes on the relevant subject?

[MADem]

175. I provided a link upthread with his comments. He's pissed. Big time.

As for the shi'a methodology of religious jurisprudence, you are demanding that they follow western criteria and that's not going to happen because that's not their way. That said, the Pope also consults with the college of cardinals and they do argue with him. We don't hear an awful lot about that but we do hear from the occasional cardinal on his way out the door after Francis has demoted him.

Usually, in Shi'a Islam, one ayatullah will be the spokesperson, but there are many and they operate in a consensus fashion. What comes out of their deliberations has the same effect as a Papal edict. If you want the One Name, that would be Ali Khamenei--he's "the" Grand Ayatullah and he will speak to the decisions made, but they won't be made in a vacuum.

[MasochisticHistorian]

244. People forget what a Pope is.

We like to think of the peaceful Pope Francis, and listen to quotes from Stalin and Napoleon "How many legions can the Pope command." There was a time when the answer was all of them It's one of the big issues when anyone brings up the Crusades as an example of religious extremism. The Pope was a secular powerhouse at that time. If you owned land and ruled people, and weren't in Ummayyad Spain, you got your power from the Pope.

For Islam, and these Islamists in particular, the Caliph commands their legions. He doesn't have to call for a Jihad, jihad is something that you don't call for it's always happening, you only have breaks when a Caliph says that someone has entered the Dar al harb. Which al-Baghadadi hasn't done.

Right now the Muslim world is set up almost the exact same way as the Christian world was during the First Crusade, right after the Norman's kidnapped a Pope. They have no central structure, are split into two big groups, and every imam has the power to interpret with no agreed upon way to codify it all.

[WinkyDink]

64. "What am I, chopped liver?!"---Prince Shah Karim Al Hussaini Aga Khan (IV).

[MADem]

176. He owns a good chunk of the shi'a territory--there are at least fifteen million

Ismailis throughout the world!!

[MADem]

92. Really? They don't have a pope? Ya don't say!!!

Yes, there is an "authority" such as it is--it's the Quran. Same document, no matter what your sect.

And--big news!! The POPE, such as he is, doesn't speak for all "Christians" either--but I'll wager they'd all manage to come up with the same view point that burning someone in a cage is "un-Christian," doncha think?

[former9thward]

100. A book is not a person.

Just in case you don't know the difference.

No I don't think there is the same point of view. Christians in the Middle Ages burned various people. So clearly they thought it was ok to do that under their faith.

[MADem]

173. I know the difference. The book is the same no matter where you go in Islam.

That's the point.

The principle argument with regard to shi'a and sunni have to do with the line of succession, not with the words in the book.

[MasochisticHistorian]

242. Yes they do

They call it their Caliph. Abu Bakr al_Baghdadi named himself Caliph Ibrahim. He gets to say that everything ISIS does is Islamic. Because all the other Muslims of the Middle East have neglected to dissuade him of his delusions of grandeur.

[Ykcutnek]

13. Not necessarily.

The Prophet gave orders concerning Kinanah to Zubayr, saying, ‘Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah’s chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him. -- Al-Tabari, Vol. 8, p. 122

[MADem]

89. Al Tabari is not the Quran. His exegesis is an opinion, and even in your example,

horrible as it is, the person was tortured by fire, not killed by it.

The mode of death in your very example was beheading.

Further to the point, scholars (who do nothing but study the Quran and associated literature) and leaders across the Muslim world have condemned this atrocity.

[lobodons]

23. "Satanic, terrorist" group

Best description yet to describe ISIS for who they are and represent.

[MADem]

94. When Muslims pull out the "shatan" references, they aren't playing. They're pissed.

I hope this is a Jump The Shark moment for those ISIS/ISIL/Daesh jerks.

[Cleita]

14. Apparently a Roman Emperor also lit his dinner party with torches

that had live Christians bound to them for fuel. It must have smelled awful not to mention the screaming. I can't imagine any sane party goer would have had much of an appetite. So it seems a millennium later the Christians did something similar. All demographics have their cruel psychopaths. We really need to identify them and never let them gain power of any scope.

[whathehell]

15. If by a "few" years you mean 500 or so..

[RKP5637]

29. Quite true! Technological progress and sociological progress often do not go hand in hand.

Technology advances, so many feel more civilized and less barbaric ... but often it is demonstrated barbarism in humanity is always close at hand. As you said, and I agree, "The human psyche is still that of a pack animal."

And often religion is a tool for barbarism. ... with a belief in some mythical entity tacitly saying "hey, it's OK."

[whathehell]

40. Maybe, but we're talking about actions,

not psyches, that's another conversation altogether.

[exboyfil]

19. About a 100 years ago

The state did absolutely nothing to individuals who cut off body parts and burned men alive. Even fully documented with pictures no prosecutions were ever pursued.

[whathehell]

37. Individuals did that..

and, on paper, at least, these were "crimes", not officially sanctioned

modes of executions for "witchcraft", as the OP has stated.

[enki23]

72. Or, literally a few. Or, more honestly, currently ongoing.

https://thetaleofbittertruth.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/suspected-witches-burned-alive-by-christians-in-kenya/

[whathehell]

145. Not as a matter of policy in the Western developed world.

Sorry.

[enki23]

186. That's a hell of a qualification. It's also not done as a harvest ritual by albino Irish girls.

So I guess it isn't a problem then.

[whathehell]

196. No, and when you compare

the populations of the western developed world to that of albino Irish girls

engaged in harvesting rituals, I think you'll see the problem with that analogy.

[enki23]

198. Yes, because the way to save face under well-deserved mockery is to take it ultra-literally.

Last edited Fri Feb 6, 2015, 10:34 AM - Edit history (2)

Sure. Black Christians in Africa don't count. Only official policies of large denominations of "western" (white) Christians, among groups of whom you approve. Those haven't been torturing very many people to death lately. With the exception the strongly Christian United States.

[whathehell]

200. BWAHAHAHAHAHA..Project much?

Learn how to make a credible argument, dear... It will help a lot.

[enki23]

202. Christians burning people is not a "credible argument" that Christians burn people, "dear?"

Sometimes people are justified in being assholes, when they're forced to deal with idiots. You don't have that excuse. You are that excuse.

[whathehell]

211. Insults typically underscore an inability to argue effectively, so let me explain this to you in

a way you can understand: One small group in one country cannot represent Christians (or Jews or Muslims)

as a whole. It's a question of numbers, which is why your argument doesn't work...As a tiny minority, they

are no more representative of Christianity than ISIS is of Islam...Get it now?

If not, I'd suggest a course in Critical Thinking, as I'm unwilling to engage in further attempts

to educate you. Goodbye.

[enki23]

229. Are you... responding to me with arguments against other people? Or are you trying to gaslight me?

I never said witch burnings were "representative of Christianity". I never said that this burning was "representative of Islam". I responded to your bullshit to the effect that somehow Christianity can't do this shit, or only did it "500 years ago," which is either clueless about the shit Christians have done and continue in many cases to do, or is just a fucking stupid "no true Scotsman" argument. I literally responded with pointers to the really real world that refutes your bullshit. Christians didn't just burn people 500 years ago. Christians still burn people. And they were, and currently are motivated by insane supernatural bullshit that includes fucking Christian supernatural bullshit. That is the fucking truth. Their blackness and Africanness doesn't fucking negate their fucking Christian-ness. That doesn't mean they represent the Christian norm. That was never something that was brought up in our... whatever the fuck this is. So... go burn the fuck out of that straw man somewhere else if you really feel you have to.

And please, resist the urge to pretend that my use of "fucking" regarding your irritating self somehow makes you win a thing.

[whathehell]

237. I'm trying to tell you

to go "burn the fuck" out of your ass -- You couldn't compose an intelligent argument if your life depended on it.

The funny thing is, you don't even realize it.

Buh bye now.

[sabrina 1]

216. How about Depleted Uranium and White Phospherus? What religion is the use of these, far more

efficient methods of burning people, lots of them at one time, based on?

I was going to put up a link to some photos from Iraq, but frankly they are far too graphic, especially the children

Airc, 70% of Americans supported that war.

[whathehell]

219. No religion.at all, unless one considers imperialism a "religion".

and if it is, it's one that appears to predate all others.

[sabrina 1]

220. How do you determine that? Many of the supporters and defenders of the burning of Iraqi

civilians in Fallujah, eg, were self proclaimed Christians. You couldn't tune in to one of those Evangelical programs without hearing how 'righteous' our destruction of the 'Infidels' was. Our 'leader' at the time, called it a Crusade.

To those who were the victims of these atrocities, it WAS a Christian Crusade. It isn't how WE define it, it is how the victims view it. Especially when they have plenty to base those vies on.

Same for us. It isn't how ordinary Muslims over there define it, many are as horrified by those acts and refuse to accept it is being done in the name of their religion also. But are we listening? Did THEY listen when Christians here denied it was being done in the name of religion?

As Obama stated, and I agree, many atrocities have been committed in the name of one religion or another, but is it about religion, or do these particular individuals just want to kill and use religion as an excuse?

[whathehell]

222. "Self-defined Christians" can be as non representative of Christianity as Al Queda is of Islam

and again, the "Christians" you're using as examples are Evangelicals, a minority in the faith. In addition

I have never heard ANY Christian use the term "infidels" to refer to non-Christians, let alone cheer on

their deaths as such.

I accept that ISIS and Al.Queda aren't representative of most Muslims, so to answer your question, yes,

I'm listening and I think many Americans are as well, even though they also have plenty to base the lies on.

[cpwm17]

20. Many Christians still fantasize about non-believers burning in Hell

http://www.lookandlive.org/sermontopics/sermonsonhell.html



I know my parents do.

[RKP5637]

30. Religion, IMO, is one of the most dangerous clubs on earth. n/t

[whathehell]

148. Yeah, along with Stalin's Atheist club that killed 20 Million.

[RKP5637]

179. Exactly! Same thing IMO. n/t

[whathehell]

43. Maybe, but "fantasizing" is a far better

alternative to actually doing it, as ISIS and some theocratic Muslim governments do.

[enki23]

75. Much better. It's also much better to fantasize about a brutal rape than to undertake one.

Last edited Thu Feb 5, 2015, 10:42 PM - Edit history (1)

But let's not pretend that there is no connection between the two. Because sure, by far most people who fantasize about such things never actually do them. Probably. But the reverse is certainly not true.

Also, "fantasize" in this case actually means "believes will happen, and approves." Which is a stronger thing than just exercising one's imagination.

[whathehell]

84. People fantasize about all.sorts of things, dear

It's connection to likely future action is unclear. As far as there being "many" Christians who

fantasize about sinners burning in Hell, it's a very questionable assertion that can't be quantified,

so it's pretty much meaningless.

[cpwm17]

91. I grew up around Christians

and it is obvious that many enjoy the thought of hell. As I wrote above, my parents do.

In their selfish way of thinking, hell is the ultimate 'I told you so' for the horrible crime of believing differently about the origin of the Universe.

[whathehell]

141. Unless you're defining "Christians" very narrowly, cpwm17, your experience is

hardly unique, given that it's the majority religion of the nation.

Your parents sound like they may be right wing fundamentalists, and they

are a minority of American Christians, and don't represent the majority.

[cpwm17]

164. No, I haven't condemned all Christians

though many do think that way.

http://www.thearda.com/quickstats/qs_72_p.asp
[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

Perhaps not everybody that believes there is a hell thinks that it's just, but the majority of US believers in religion believe there is a hell. Most of these people are Christian.

Christianity (Islam, Judaism, etc.) isn't just one thing so it doesn't make sense to condemn all Christians for the beliefs and actions of some. But, Christianity (and other religions) do deserve criticism. Their religious writings do promote evil and some selfish believers do use that as an excuse to promote and commit evil beliefs and acts.

[whathehell]

165. That's nice, but still off point

since simply believing in hell in no way means you enjoy "fantasizing" about

people going there...I was raised Christian and never met anyone like that.

[cpwm17]

171. Once one thinks it is just to infinitely torture one for eternity for having a different opinion

on the origin of the Universe, it is a very short step to fantasizing about torture. Some on the right go that far.

[whathehell]

204. One doesn't have to believe something is "just" to believe it's true.

so I'm afraid your argument doesn't work for me. My experience with Christianity

had nothing to do with a sadistic anticipation of sending others to hell. I'm

sorry if your experience was different.

[cpwm17]

213. I made sure to not make a blanket condemnation of all Christians

If one believes Hell is real, but believes it is not just, then he/she believes in a God that they believe is not just. That's a scary reality.

Most Christians defend the concept of Hell, and many enjoy the thought of Hell. Either way, it's messed up and selfish.

[whathehell]

214. Yes, but you seem to be retracting it..

and in your use of "many" and "most" you are conflating your Fundamentalist environment

with that of far more numerous Mainstream Christians, and that's simply false.

You are also in error in claiming that those who believe in a hell that doesn't seem just

to them are guilty of believing in an unjust God when the truth is the majority of Christians,

who are, by the way, NOT Fundamentalists, see it in a more nuanced, less

"black an white" way...Fundamentalists are notoriously literal minded, other Christians less so, and

in many cases FAR less so....Mine was not and neither was that of my spouse, even though we were

raised in different Christian traditions. I'd suggest you begin educating yourself on other Christian

traditions before presuming to speak for them all.


P.S. Just to let you know, I'm growing tired of this discussion, so I won't be commenting further on it.

[enki23]

185. Yup. "Many" is a weasel word that's a placeholder for something that is not currently quantified.

It would, however, most certainly be "quantifiable" if someone were had the time and resources to do the leg work.

However, I do know that in the Christian church I grew up in, there was a very great deal of exactly that. There was genuine glee that those very bad bastards who disagreed with them about their insane Christian bullshit were going to get the eternal suffering they deserved. I imagine not all Christians feel that way. But many, yes many make it clear that they do. Many in leadership positions, and public positions. Fucking *many.*

[cpwm17]

88. That's true

but they are a large part of the base that supports our unprovoked wars that massacre and burn thousands of innocents. Wars that destroy societies which allow the sociopaths like ISIS to take over. It also happened in Cambodia with the Khmer Rouge after our massive bombing campaign.

I'm not saying that all Christians are like this or they are collectively responsible, they're not, but many people that are attracted to a belief system that often supports torture also like war.

[Dragonfli]

21. Christians are doing it now, with hellfire missiles and white phosphorous upon occassion

I am willing to bet some of them follow other "faiths" as well. Our killers are hired without prejudice regarding what fairy tails they use to justify how what they do is holy and good.

Sometimes they even hit the odd one or two that are actually combatants used to justify the burnings along with the civilians.

[whathehell]

44. Um, I think you mean "governments",

whose citizens are comprised of various religions.

[Dragonfli]

87. Governments use people to do their killing, Those drones are not self aware just yet.

Each individual killer makes a choice to kill or not when asked to. Their varying faiths do not appear to deter them in such decisions.

[whathehell]

142. Right,

so you just confirmed my argument.

[Dragonfli]

147. How so? "Each individual killer makes a choice to kill or not when asked to"

It is people doing the killing (Mostly Christian if they hail from this continent), Governments are not people any more than corporations are.

Do you also believe that when an individual does something that harms others and then hides behind a corporation to avoid personal liability that makes sense because "the corporation did it" and not the man that made the decision? I don't really follow your thoughts here.

[whathehell]

152. You said governments use people. The fact is, governments are comprised of people,

just like religions are...Get it now?

[Dragonfli]

155. So are Corporations, but it should not excuse the people within it that are the actual perpetrators

I never bought that it should. Get me now, even if you disagree with me?

[whathehell]

162. So whose excusing anyone?

[pnwmom]

22. It is wrong now and it was wrong then. What's your point? n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

41. Did you actually read my OP?

If you did, then I suck at writing because my point is right there.

[Dreamer Tatum]

25. How many people is ISIS then entitled to incinerate?

1? 10? 1000? 100000? More?

[Waiting For Everyman]

103. +1

Good question, sailing right over heads.

[MannyGoldstein]

109. Which part of my 4th paragraph is unclear? nt

[Dreamer Tatum]

117. The first three make your position clear. The 4th just gives you room to weasel.

It's really time to stop bullshitting, all of us.

[davidn3600]

26. Few years back?...more like centuries ago

[WorseBeforeBetter]

236. "Sardonic."

sar·don·ic

/särˈdänik/

adjective

adjective: sardonic

Grimly mocking or cynical.
"Starkey attempted a sardonic smile"

synonyms: mocking, satirical, sarcastic, ironical, ironic; More

[pansypoo53219]

27. i have a picture book about the inquisition. the rack in the movies is NOTHING.

but just wait. i am sure ISIL will get ever more creative.

[Teutonic Samuel]

28. The Salem "Witches" Were Hanged, not Burned

I was going to say "hung," then thought better of it.

[JVS]

31. Tu quoque is a shitty and fallacious argument and using it to defend burning people alive is...

so mindblowingly stupid that I cannot fathom why you'd do it.

[Waiting For Everyman]

101. +1

Couldn't agree more.

[MannyGoldstein]

114. In light of my 4th paragraph...

What is the argument you think I'm trying to make?

[ChosenUnWisely]

32. It is only bad when Muslims do it but A-OK if Christians Do it

Neither group is interested in coexistence.

F-em all

[leftynyc]

33. If you consider hundreds of years

a few years back - which I don't. Just another thread trying to downplay what isis is all about because Islam must be protected at all costs.

[FSogol]

35. Nah, some people don't give 2 flips about protecting Islam, they just want to stir

the shit.

SSDD.

shrug:

[leftynyc]

38. True enough

It does nothing but clog up the board but apparently, they don't give a shit.

[Autumn]

52. Easy to unclog your board. Use ignore or trash thread but it's better to complain about posters

you don't like, and you get more attention that way.

[leftynyc]

66. And let them think

everybody supports their bullshit? Never.

[Autumn]

68. There you go, so you admit your complaint is just clogging up the board.

Skinner has given you tools so that you don't have to complain about the board being clogged. That's Skinner is a hell of a good guy.

[leftynyc]

69. If that emoticon

was supposed to convey a point, you failed miserably.

[Autumn]

71. No I just like the emoticons. If Skinner didn't want us to clog up the bord with them we wouldn't

have them.

[MannyGoldstein]

42. First off, the KKK lynched thousands of Americans much more recently

A self-proclaimed Christian group with a (burning) cross as their symbol.

Second - which Christian scriptures have changed over the past 500 years?

[leftynyc]

47. Spare me the utter bullshit

of your argument. I'm not going to ignore what's happening TODAY because of something that happened somewhere else in the past. If you want to engage in lazy simpleminded thinking, that's entirely your business. That you use such thinking to continually clog up this board with bullshit is nothing but annoying. Now don't forget to get one of your fans to whine to the alerters.

[Egnever]

197. Hah! The results!

On Fri Feb 6, 2015, 01:25 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Spare me the utter bullshit
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6182861

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Accusing another DUer of continually clogging up the board with bullshit is nasty and OTT. If manny Goldstein bothers then that much they should put him on ignore instead of doing personal attacks

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Feb 6, 2015, 01:32 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not much in that post I find objection to. Alerter, why are you clogging up my life with a fucking lame alert?
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Leave it alone, there is a trend by one or more members to push their own agenda by equating 500 year old history with today.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Awesome post and would love to leave it but sadly leaving it would be ignoring the TOS.
Sorry Lefty you nailed it but even though I agree with the post I am sure you know why I have to vote to hide.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with the alerter, the way people talk to each on this forum lately makes it look like the comment section on Utube. Used to be more tolerant of these people, but enough with the nastiness.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.


Jury system is so broken...LOL

[leftynyc]

199. If you were one of the

4 jurors who elected to leave it, you have my sincere thanks.

[whathehell]

53. Yes, they were criminals..

and whatever the "changes" in Christian scripture, it is no more violent or

"backward" than that of Judaism or Islam, so you might want to give it a rest.

[MannyGoldstein]

62. That's exactly my point. nt

[whathehell]

85. Tthe only problem is that in

a number of theocratic Muslim governments like.Saudi.Arabia, it's not a.crime, it's state sanctioned.policy.

There are no official "policies" in the West which even allow, let alone require this, so it seems

your analogy doesn't really work.

i

[dsc]

74. actually the King James Bible is considerably different from say the Living Bible

I have no idea if the Koran has multiple translations or not but the Bible surely has.

[whathehell]

45. Exactly -- Another stale excercise in false equivalence

that should have died of exhaustion years ago.

[Nye Bevan]

36. Elizabeth Warren: Destroying ISIS should be our Number 1 priority

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) on Wednesday said that the Obama administration should make defeating the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) its top priority.

"ISIS is growing in strength. It has money, it has organization, it has the capacity to inflict real damage. So when we think about a response we have to think about how to destroy that," Warren told Yahoo's Katie Couric.

Warren agreed that "time is of the essence."

"We need to be working now, full-speed ahead, with other countries, to destroy ISIS. That should be our No. 1 priority," she said in a wide-ranging interview promoting her latest book, A Fighting Chance.

http://thehill.com/policy/international/216559-warren-destroying-isis-should-be-our-no-1-priority

Wise woman.

[DonViejo]

178. Crickets...

not surprising.

[deutsey]

48. Google "lynchings burning" and check out the images

I'm willing to bet a few of those smiling in the crowd believed themselves to be Christians as well.

[WinkyDink]

58. What is your point----That evil lies in the hearts of men of every persuasion? Yeah, and so? It

should be roundly condemned by all whenever, not used as an excuse to point out more evil.

[deutsey]

82. That you don't have to go back to hundreds of years for examples of

such atrocities committed by people calling themselves Christians (as an addendum to the OP).

That was it.

[NCTraveler]

49. Moral relevancy makes me feel all warm and mushy inside. nt.

[randome]

50. And the Romans fed Christians to the lions. And Aztecs practiced human sacrifice.

What's your point?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Snow Leopard]

51. Justifying ISIS?

Wow

[MannyGoldstein]

108. Which part of my 4th paragraph is unclear? nt

[Maedhros]

131. You indirectly criticized America, therefore you are defending ISIS.

For God's sake get up to speed, Manny!

[RedCappedBandit]

55. But killing is part of religion

It says so in their fantasy novels.

[WinkyDink]

60. Apparently you are not in a close relationship with the New Testament.

[RedCappedBandit]

67. Please. All of these books have ridiculous violent crap in them. nt

[hobbit709]

83. Neither do a lot of the people that claim to.

[chervilant]

56. One wonders, Manny,

if those who protest this OP most vociferously are those most incapable of acknowledging the hypocrisy you illuminate.

[WinkyDink]

57. Centuries. A millennium. The passage of time for a civilization matters.

[Bluenorthwest]

59. Nope, witch burnings happened many years ago. Words have meanings. 'Few' has an actual definition

few
fyo͞o/
adjective & pronoun
determiner: few; adjective: few; comparative adjective: fewer; superlative adjective: fewest

1.
a small number of.
"may I ask a few questions?"
synonyms: a small number, a handful, one or two, a couple, two or three;


Yep, there were witch burnings hundreds of years ago, but that's not 'a few years back'. Words have actual meanings which are important, words are the raw material used to make laws which are then used to oppress others. The conservative addiction to misuse of language is one of the things I reject about Republicans. The affected 'aw shucks' bullshit language out of people who have advanced degrees and tons of money is a shameful and dishonest tactic.

[WinkyDink]

61. And even "many" is insufficient, when he refers to 1642.

[haele]

112. Look up necklacing in Africa.

Gruesome stuff, and it's still going on. And not just for "witchcraft".

Haele

[whathehell]

143. Yeah, and it had everything to do with politics,

not religion. Just sayin'.

[haele]

158. And politics and religion don't go hand in hand in these situations?

The religion is used as an excuse in most of these situations. The deceased is typically accused of being a witch (male or female) or gay, or a pedophile in some sort of personal/political dispute, and since those crimes are against "God's Laws", they get burned by the whipped-up mob.

Burning alive seems to be the extra-judicial punishment choice of the under-educated or over-excited mobs who actually want the experience of watching their victim go to Hell, instead of imagining it after the body starts to go cold.

And almost 40 years ago, it was very surprising to hear one of my best friend's "sweet old grandpa" from somewhere in the South use religion as an excuse describing a particular horrendous lynching he tried to justify when a picture of him and his brothers participating had been published.
From memory (which may be a bit rusty):
"That was a terrible time and we were angry. Things have changed now, thankfully - but we all thought what that man had done was against God and Nature. Our preacher himself said we had to let all those [others] who thought they were better than God made them understand that they were going to Hell if they didn't act the way they should."

It was politics- racial politics - that lead to that lynching episode, where, according to the article, they had doused the man with gasoline and lit him before they pulled him up by a noose over a tall branch so that he burned as he asphyxiated.

Sarah had problems talking to her grandfather after than; she never forgave him for the picture of him smiling and pointing in that picture.

Haele

[whathehell]

161. Not in South Africa, which was most noted for it, no.

People kill people for all sorts of reasons -- power, money, and ideology are just a few.

Stalin, an atheist, murdered 20 million.

[jeff47]

128. More like a year and a half ago.

https://thetaleofbittertruth.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/suspected-witches-burned-alive-by-christians-in-kenya/

[padfun]

203. a few, that is eight

" in which a few, that is, eight persons"

1 Peter 3:20

[KG]

63. religion sucks

[dembotoz]

70. we all good cause we murder in a more humane manner

the end result of execution by what ever you method of choice remains death.

maybe is we put a smiley face hood on the folks on the gurney it would be even more clean....

[MineralMan]

73. Depends on your definition of "a few."

Mine must be different from yours. I've been around for "a few" years, and don't remember Christians, specifically, burning people.

[Comrade Grumpy]

126. "Suspected Witches Burned Alive By Christians in Kenya." A year and a half ago.

https://thetaleofbittertruth.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/suspected-witches-burned-alive-by-christians-in-kenya/

I'm not sure of the provenance of this blog, but it does list a lot of links to standard news sources at the bottom.

[marle35]

181. Shocking details in the link

"Relatives are the top suspects in almost all of the killings."

Incredible.

[whathehell]

224. Yeah, and if you read the link you'll see they did it to steal land, not

on the basis of an article of faith.

[MannyGoldstein]

207. Sorry

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12773518

[LanternWaste]

76. A witch burning is my congregations' plan for this weekend

A witch burning is my congregations' plan for this weekend-- right after an early brunch at Bennigan's and a block sale to raise money to remove mold from the library.

It's not that we're really that into it anymore, but rather we do so enjoy validating the biases of the half-wit and the sub-literate.

[get the red out]

79. ISIS good - Christians bad

I get it. Fine. Whatever.

But I don't believe it is a false equivalency to say that the extreme left and the Tea Party are both equal to one another as the same kind of screaming, self-righteous, nightmares too.

Have a wonderful day.

[MannyGoldstein]

110. Which part of my 4th paragraph is unclear? nt

[get the red out]

151. Just a screed

On everyone being bad so we can't even imagine trying to stop history from repeating itself since Christians, the US, the West is bad bad bad. So ISIS has to be let to do what ISIS wants to do.

No problem

I don't agree with either the right's Tea Baggers or OURS.

[MannyGoldstein]

154. Uh... no.

Not what the OP says.

[get the red out]

157. Lets be inactive

Lets always look to the past and never try to do anything to stop madness in the now because of guilt.

[truebluegreen]

228. "...the extreme left...."

Cracks me up when people use that term: commies are as rare as witch-burning in this country.

[get the red out]

230. Sorry you're lost

in your own imagination. It's based on where the country as a whole is. Laugh yourself into Republican leadership top to bottom if you like.

[truebluegreen]

231. I'm afraid you are the one who is lost.

You prolly think Obama a socialist as well.

[get the red out]

232. Not socialist enough

You are mistaking economic theories with foreign policy. I have no clue how someone does that.

[truebluegreen]

233. "I have no clue...." you say.

Gotta agree. Are you talking to an imaginary friend?

[get the red out]

240. Sorry

I thought you were a real person. You are exceptional at being incapable of disagreement and proof-texting for an imaginary person though. Your continued anger at me is strange.

[libdem4life]

80. May I briefly bring to mind the photo that is credited for ending the Viet Nam War? The naked

pre-teen girl on fire, fleeing her burnt out village. I forget her name, but she is still alive today...no she wasn't burned to death but Americans...when confronted directly...abhor the messiness of war.

That's why the stateside warriors don't bother to ask us or require that we honestly face the "so very tacky" results...even coffins of our own.

Some might say, the Viet Nam war was not a religious war. It's just a coincidence that most Americans are Christians and most Vietnamese are Buddhist. Napalm is burning people to death...just without the consciousness or guilt. Then again, the PTSD those who returned suffer, argue the point.

[Act_of_Reparation]

97. No one has claimed religion is the sole purveyor of human cruelty.

But if you think it is entirely coincidental ISIS is chopping off heads with butter knives and throwing gay men from rooftops, then I think you ought to revisit the definition of "coincidence"... because as the great and wise Inigo Mantoya once told the Sicilian rogue Vizzini, "I do not think it means what you think it means."

[libdem4life]

122. With all due respect, dropping incinerating materials intended to anhiliate citizens of a town

or country en masse...with no hint of caring that women and children are killed...such as the photo I referred to is with clear intent. Purposeful death, destruction, and obliteration because we don't like their politics, culture or leader...nothing personal, of course. Long ago we lost the high ground, if we ever had it, to criticize barbarian acts such as these.

The act of one murder at a time, albeit the method is more troubling to our American minds, might be even a slight bit more humane. Remember, they are in a war, too.

(A coincidence is when a car veers off a path and strikes a pedestrian, although I have no idea why that was brought up.)

[Act_of_Reparation]

125. Fallacious argument.

Long ago we lost the high ground, if we ever had it, to criticize barbarian acts such as these.

Who is "we"?

I, personally, have never incinerated anyone, and I would hope you haven't either. I think we can both comfortably criticize anyone who sets aflame another human being without suffering accusations of hypocrisy.

But, even if I had set someone on fire, would I be wrong to criticize someone for doing the same? The answer is no. Hypocritical, yes, but not wrong.

All of this, however, is purely academic. The fact of the matter is I'm a pretty capable guy. I can walk and chew gum at the same time, and I can very well criticize ISIS without losing perspective of what my own government has done, and continues to do.

[libdem4life]

133. Who is WE? And no, it's really not academic at all. ISIS is at war, whether we acknowledge it or

not. They don't happen to have fighter jets and bombs and tanks and unlimited war materiel and UN cover ... Western war tools, et al, which is what makes it "barbarian" to us.

Point is, that the actual experience of seeing one incinerated young girl...Americans did not want their government to do that in our name. And we told our government WE didn't want that. And please don't show it to us again...and they haven't. And it continues...drones now.

Personally, I don't think we belong anywhere near there, but that's a fait acompli...we are heavily invested and not just for Israel. For our own interests. So, they butcher a few, we butcher (or allow to be butchered) a lot. How is it OK for us and not OK for them...perspective or not?

Fallacious argument? It's old fashioned pot/kettle routine.

[Act_of_Reparation]

167. That's what I asked you. And yes, it is fallacious.

Two wrongs make a right.

This is textbook logic. I don't know why some people have such a hard time understanding it.

[libdem4life]

183. No, again, we lack the moral ground to be outraged and wag our fingers. If we did not do the same

then we could be outraged. But we've incinerated millions of people. It's not tit for tat. It's about the right to lecture others and/or do the same to them while claiming outrage.

[Act_of_Reparation]

209. Checkmate, Logic!

I'm not wasting my time with someone so wrapped up in their indignation they can't stop what they're doing for thirty seconds and google "tu quoque"; I'm certainly not wasting my time with someone so pompous as to hold us--whoever the fuck that is... seeing as you still haven't answered the goddamned question--personally responsible for incinerating "millions" of people; and I'm not wasting my time with someone so ethically off-kilter they would defend the "moral high ground" of terrorist asshats.

[libdem4life]

210. I believe your question was Who is We? "We" is a collective yet contextual personal pronoun.

In this case, it is used to refer to citizens/inhabitants of the US such as We, the People. Our (a form of We) elected government, in the name of We, the People, has incinerated millions of individuals in other governments/lands...They or Them. We won. This is not moral high ground.

They have done the same. This is not moral high ground, either. Both are wrong. And no matter how many "wrongs", not one "right" is created. Outcomes are different with both sides claiming their "right-ness" So it becomes rhetorical and useless.

Murdering people is wrong...wrong...wrong, no matter which government justifies it...and they all do...unless it is self-defense.

Thou shalt not kill. Hope that's clearer.

[Art_from_Ark]

182. Her name was/is Phan Thi Kim Phuc

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phan_Thi_Kim_Phuc

[libdem4life]

184. Quite a remarkable woman. Thanks for the url.

[Autumn]

218. "We" and by we I mean our elected leaders who claim to be Christians yet always ok sending

other people off to die are perfectly fine with the use of Napalm in Iraq. So it was certainly more recent than Viet Nam.

[Waiting For Everyman]

95. Your "point" gives ISIS a pass.

Everybody does it, or has done it, so it's ok. Even if that was true, which it isn't, using the ISIS atrocities to make a self-indulgent point about hypocrisy, is lame beyond description. Is that what matters the most right now?

WTF is wrong with you? ISIS' PR cadre thanks you -- now it knows just what to say to manipulate more Westerners into their cause. And btw, I just heard POTUS make the same dumb point in a speech on tv.

(shaking head) How dumb ARE people right now? Is this puny little axe to grind so earth-shakingly important that you simply CANNOT refrain from grinding it to enable those killers at THIS particular moment? Really?

I usually like your posts, and as noted you aren't the only one who has said this, here and elsewhere. Until now, I had hoped it was just a person here or there having a thoughtless moment, and didn't comment, but no more. Stop it!

Or... next time you see one of ISIS' atrocities you can pat yourself on the back for doing your bit to give it the moral cover and psychological acceptance it will use to do more of the same.

Some people (speaking generally, where the shoe fits) who like to note endless responsibility for things should take stock of their own responsibility.

[MannyGoldstein]

111. Which part of my 4th paragraph is unclear? nt

[Waiting For Everyman]

121. If you think that fixes it, it doesn't.

Reread your post title. Does your 4th paragraph make that, and the first 3 paragraphs, magically disappear?

Subtlety is irrelevant to those who will take your premise and use it to excuse ISIS. Whether you want to admit it or not, the main point you have made is that Christians do it, the US does it (in another thread here), so there is no moral curb on ISIS.

And now you're doubling down on it.

[MannyGoldstein]

124. Nope. nt

[Maedhros]

132. I believe Manny is lamenting the lack of moral outrage in the popular media

to violence instigated by anyone other than Islamic extremists. He very clearly is not absolving ISIS of their sins.

[Waiting For Everyman]

134. If so, this is exactly the wrong time for that.

Violence by Islamic extremists is the subject at hand right now.

At best, all that argument is doing is muddying very clear waters by bringing up a false equivalence which can best wait to be argued another day. It DOES give ISIS a pass. And the point being made is simply not worth that, and it's a point that is drilled into the ground every day of the week, woven into every subject.

It's a huge fail, and there is no mitigating that.

[Maedhros]

137. There is no debate to be had over ISIS atrocities.

They are bad - PERIOD. Nobody refutes this. We can wail and gnash our teeth over how horrible ISIS is, but doing so will have absolutely no effect on how they behave in the future - the opinions of Westerners have no influence over ISIS decision-making. An extended discussion of ISIS atrocities serves only to drum up anti-Islamic sentiment and promulgate intolerance of Muslims in general.

In contrast, there is a debate to be had over atrocities inflicted by those agents whom we are told to view as "our side." Is our endless "War on Terror" effective? Are the atrocities we commit justified? Do our methods of inflicting violence on Muslims undermine our goals for fighting terrorism? Is there a better way to address the problem?

Further, a debate among Western citizens about these issues definitely has the potential to create real, positive change in how we prosecute this "War on Terror." If enough of us reject the regularly-scheduled Two Minute Hate against Islam, and instead focus on whether we are doing the right things, then maybe we can bring this "war" to an end.

[Waiting For Everyman]

160. Everything isn't "all about us" (as in, self-centered as hell)

Yet looking at this board, one would think so.

[Maedhros]

169. The United States is the #1 purveyor of violence in the world.

Our military forces are operating in HUNDREDS of countries. We incinerate civilians every week with our drone strikes.

It really is about us.

Bye now.

[arely staircase]

177. can you really prove that. i dont think you can

How many people were killed by the US military in 2014 compared to other organizations whose business is violence. Maybe it is. I am not sure you say so, back it up.

[whathehell]

144. THANK You.

This bs is really getting old.

[MADem]

170. Really? That's what he meant by "a few years back?"

He's not talking about "violence" in general, he's talking about setting people on fire.

Gee, why wasn't FauxSnooze covering the immolation of St. Jeanne d'Arc from all angles when it happened, I wonder? Cue the video!

This OP came off as "What's the big deal? Christians do it too... (snark/stir)" If that wasn't his intent, that's how I read it.

[MannyGoldstein]

189. Manny wrote "a few years ago"? Holy #%^*!!!!!

That pretty much seals it. Who but the mentally-challenged and the evil can now deny what Manny really is?

Unbelievable.

[MADem]

193. No, Manny wrote "a few years BACK."

The title of this ill-advised OP is

Burning people to death. Didn't Christians do that a few years back?

Unbelievable, indeed.

[MannyGoldstein]

194. Even worse.

Thankfully, that asshole is getting what he deserves now: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12773518

[MADem]

195. How old are you? nt

[Pooka Fey]

239. I'm so glad I found this post and THANK YOU for writing this.

I was searching how to communicate the points that you just made brilliantly, so I'll just quote you:

Or... next time you see one of ISIS' atrocities you can pat yourself on the back for doing your bit to give it the moral cover and psychological acceptance it will use to do more of the same.

Some people (speaking generally, where the shoe fits) who like to note endless responsibility for things should take stock of their own responsibility.

And to add my 2 cents, the moral confusion and existential guilt inherent in modern Western liberals (of which I am one) makes them ISIS's best ally and collaborator. Muslim extremist attacks in Afghanistan against other Muslims, against artwork and historical libraries started well before the Iraq war. Is it Western Narcissism to accept moral responsibility for crimes that have nothing to do with oneself?

[LannyDeVaney]

96. Has ISIS pulled somebody behind a truck yet?

Or is that just a US thing?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

105. Don't give them any ideas./NT

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

99. Yes, but they had the One True God on their side. Just like ISIS does.

[rock]

104. Of course, Abe's religion doesn't work for psychopaths

[niyad]

106. thank you. this was something I pointed out in another OP on the burnings. the roman

catholic church had a LONG history of burning heretics/witches (mostly women) and assorted misfits and people who threatened the power of the church.

something I think about every time I hear pope photo op being praised, even though he has done nothing to elevate the status of women in the church.

[dilby]

113. When you say a few years don't you mean hundreds of years ago?

And the Jewish reference was thousands of years ago, you can't seriously be justifying what these men did based on because bad shit happened in the past so it's ok to still do it.

[MannyGoldstein]

116. I'm not justifying ANY of it.

Zero.

[Smarmie Doofus]

115. That's why they called him "HONEST Abe". n/t

>>>"When I do good, I feel good. When I do bad, I feel bad. That's my religion."

- Abraham Lincoln >>>>

[sibelian]

119. You love cancer.

Or something.

[Kaleva]

123. Italians used to do that a few years back.

They'd use human torches to provide light for their dinner parties.

[onenote]

127. Thanks for the post illustrating that civilization has made progress

Once barbarism and torture were the accepted norm. Not just for Christians and Jews, but pretty much in all societies. The pre-Christian Romans tortured Jews and Christians. Tribal cultures throughout the world, before and after the advent of Christianity, engaged in various barbaric practices, including burning people alive. Even in more recent times, necklacing was used as a particularly barbaric form of punishment by some tribes in South Africa.

But the thing is, that while these once were the norms, they are no longer the norm in most places and are rightly condemned where they are used as a form of punishment.

So thanks for making that clear, which I'm sure must have been the purpose of your OP, unless of course it was just a random history lesson.

[outside]

129. +1

This is the third or forth post this week with people trying to excuse the burning of the pilot because it was done in the past. The moral compass is off. I just added Mr. Goldstein to my ignore list.

[Fumesucker]

241. Unless of course the politicians say it's OK..

White phosphorus was used by the US in Fallujah, it's a horrendously flammable substance, burns on contact with air or water, including the water in human flesh.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/16/AR2005111600374.html

Pentagon Used White Phosphorous in Iraq

By ROBERT BURNS
The Associated Press
Wednesday, November 16, 2005; 5:49 AM

[MisterP]

135. heck, even Mexico was crucifying peasants in the 20s

Calles and Canabal could have even written that OP

[ileus]

136. You make a great point, two wrongs do make a right.

even if one wrong was centuries ago.

[MannyGoldstein]

139. Yes, that what I wrote

In an alternative version of the English language.

[brooklynite]

138. I understand the Romans crucified people...

So, clearly no Italian can't complain about what ISIS does.

[MannyGoldstein]

140. Not what I wrote.

Try reading for comprehension.

[Bobbie Jo]

159. Seems you've had to reiterate

your point throughout this thread.

Try writing for clarity.

[MannyGoldstein]

206. Mea culpa

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12773518

[Bobbie Jo]

212. Well...

Last edited Fri Feb 6, 2015, 03:02 PM - Edit history (1)

Sorry, couldn't finish reading that. I'm sure it's nothing short of brilliant.

Of course this is just my dull-witted opinion, but I'm not a big fan of those who talk or write about themselves in the third person. Just seems a bit too pretentious and self-absorbed for my tastes. Then again, perhaps I don't meet the minimum IQ requirement to appreciate the genius of your writing.

Give yourself a big ole pat on the back, nonetheless.

eta:

[cherokeeprogressive]

146. Christians were burning people to death "a few years back"? What's your definition of a "few years"?

"Few" is one of those words that have very little meaning to me, much like "moment" and "several".

How long is a "moment"? How many are a "few", and how many more are "several"?

Am I to infer that you believe a "few years" encompasses several centuries (there's that word again; several)?

If so, then, yeah. If not; then let's stop pussy-footing around and talk about what's happening TODAY, and who is in the news perpetrating TODAY'S atrocities.

That work for you?

[ileus]

149. Next up "The Crusades!!!"

Just last month...

[cherokeeprogressive]

166. Close, but... I can't get there from here.

"last month" means in January of 2015.

Now, if you were to say "several months ago", maybe someone could understand you were talking about the Crusades.

It's like we're talking about that night, it must be what, several days ago now that the Titanic sunk. Only we're not talking about it somehow.

[hrmjustin]

150. People can be very cruel. Believers and non-believers can be cruel.

ISIS is evil and the people of the ME need to deal with it.

[BeyondGeography]

153. Obama agrees with you

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026184066

Now get in there and stand up for your President.

[MannyGoldstein]

163. Fortunately, understanding irony requires a minimum IQ

Otherwise 90% of the people posting in this thread would have exploded heads.

[MannyGoldstein]

190. Thought you might enjoy this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12773518

[SomethingFishy]

180. Manny, here is a modern version of Christian Extremism:

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/deja-vu-1988-protesters-throw-bombs-o

"On October 22, 1988, a French Christian fundamentalist group launched Molotov cocktails inside the Parisian Saint Michel movie theater while it was showing the film. This attack injured thirteen people, four of whom were severely burned.[8][9] The Saint Michel theater was heavily damaged,[9] and reopened 3 years later after restoration. Following the attack, a representative of the film's distributor, United International Pictures, said, "The opponents of the film have largely won. They have massacred the film's success, and they have scared the public." Jack Lang, France's Minister of Culture, went to the St.-Michel theater after the fire, and said, "Freedom of speech is threatened, and we must not be intimidated by such acts."[9] The Archbishop of Paris, Jean-Marie Cardinal Lustiger, said "One doesn't have the right to shock the sensibilities of millions of people for whom Jesus is more important than their father or mother."[9] After the fire he condemned the attack, saying, "You don't behave as Christians but as enemies of Christ. From the Christian point of view, one doesn't defend Christ with arms. Christ himself forbade it."[9] The leader of Christian Solidarity, a Roman Catholic group that had promised to stop the film from being shown, said, "We will not hesitate to go to prison if it is necessary."[9]"


I remember having to cross a picket line to see it, and Life Of Brian...

Muslims don't hold the patent on religious stupidity, and in spite of what Christians claim, it's not all in the past.

[btrflykng9]

187. Using religion to justify doing nothing when people are being brutalized is

shameful.

That's exactly what your post has conveyed. Justifying a vicious act of atrocity against another human being and then saying you're not, does not mean you have not done just that.

And please do not yet again write "What's unclear about paragraph 4?" as your reply.

[MannyGoldstein]

188. What's unclear about paragraph 4?

I get that it ruins your narrative, but that just makes it "uncomfortable for you", which is much different than "unclear".

Does that make sense, or do I need to explain it using different words?

[dissentient]

191. It looks like President Obama has been reading DU, and your thread in the past few days.

[MannyGoldstein]

192. There's a perfectly-reasonable explanation, I swear...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12773518

[n2doc]

201. Just a few years...

[MannyGoldstein]

208. +1000

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12773518

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

217. The Inquisition's auto-da-fe

commonly involved public burning at the stake.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-da-f%C3%A9

[glasshouses]

221. Yes but then they eventually grew out of the stone age unlike some islamic countries

[countryjake]

223. Thanks Obama!

Oops!

Dammit, Manny, you're getting me confused again.

I meant to say, "Thanks, MannyGoldstein!" (you haven't ordered the droning of anybody, lately, have you?)




This is the kind of killing that makes me feel really bad because it's done in my name.