Look at what you made me do.

[ZombieHorde]

Hypothetical I

A woman is married to a man she considers to be jealous and violent. She could financially afford to leave to him, but she does not like the idea of being single. She is not afraid of him, because he has a disability which makes him weaker than her.

She has an affair, and then tells her husband. When he finds out, he beats their children. Afterward, he says, "You know I am violent, look at what you made me do!"

Is the woman responsible for her children being beaten? I don't think so. If free will is real, the man is responsible for his own actions.

Hypothetical II

A man is annoyed by Muslims; he considers them to be violent. He could ignore them, but he does not like the idea of Islamic influence in the west.

He burns a Koran. When a group of Muslims find out, they kill some people. Afterward, they say, "You know we are violent, look at what you made us do!"

Is the man responsible for the killings? I don't think so. If free will is real, the group of killers are responsible for their own actions.

[Drale]

1. Yes they have free will but

this is what that "man" was trying to get them to do by burning said Koran. I wants to prove that all Muslims are violent, by getting a small group of them to use violence. So in a way he is responsible.

[pipi_k]

16. And I, as a woman...

want to prove that all men are pigs

so I wear provocative clothing and flirt

When one of them rapes me, I'm responsible for "making" him do it.


right?

[quinnox]

2. If you make false alarm about fire in a crowded sports stadium

as a sick joke or just being mischievous, and if some people get crushed by the rampaging crowd to flee the scene, you would definitely have responsibility for those deaths.

[Ohio Joe]

6. So....

Extremist muslims = unsuspecting crowd?

Where does your appeasement of them end? Were they justified killing over cartoons? What about a woman is stoned to death because she did not follow their laws? Where is your line?

[quinnox]

11. its not about appeasement

its about facing consequences to your actions. Jones wanted to provoke violence, and he succeeded. He painted a huge bullseye on himself in the process. He has every right to burn a book considered holy by millions. He can do this every week if he wishes. And he will face the consequences for his actions, whatever they might be. I for one won't be shedding tears if Jones faces the consequences of his actions which were very stupid in my view.

[Ohio Joe]

15. So killing him would be justified in your mind?

He asked for it so it's ok? holy shit.

[quinnox]

19. Not to my mind

but to the mind of some fervent followers of that religion. And I can't imagine the US government could be too happy either about putting US service men at risk due to this idiotic Jones preacher and his burning of the Koran.

Jones painted a bullseye on himself, not only from Muslim extremists, but from the US government. I wouldn't want those groups united against me, there might be dire consequences to follow.

So, I wouldn't be surprised if something dire happenes to Jones, perhaps now or perhaps in the future. Justified? No. Expected? Yes.

[Ohio Joe]

20. So it is about appeasement

Don't do anything to piss them off... So I'll ask you again, where is your line? How much of what they want you to do are you going to do because they might kill you?

[quinnox]

23. its not about appeasement

its about intelligence. Personally, I think its the height of stupidity to put yourself in the spotlight by burning symbols that are revered and considered holy by a world population of millions.

I wouldn't want that kind of attention. If you are so hot for burning Korans though, knock yourself out. I'm not stopping you. Just be prepared for the consequences of your actions. Its pretty simple.

Or wear signs saying racist things or put Ku Klux Klan stickers all over your car and drive into certain poor neighborhoods of L.A. filled with gangbangers.

We are free to do these things, but the wisdom of doing them is something to think about.

[Bluerthanblue]

22. Extremist 'christ'ian = innocent well intentioned citizen?

There were undoubtedly people in the crowd who had no intention of killing anyone in response to the burning of the Koran. This began as a PROTEST-
"..... the protest leaders had said they wanted to hand in a resolution to the UN and demand it helps bring Pastor Jones and his followers to 'justice.'

Mr Hadaad said he had addressed the demonstrators himself, urging them to register their protest and walked with the protesters for the first hour but then left to attend to a domestic issue at home. "Oh yes, we just told them to protest so that we show our feelings. It was a peaceful demonstration," he said. ......
"..One organiser, Islamuddin Ghafouri, said there had been no intention to attack the United Nations Assistance Mission Afghanistan when they set off to hand in their resolution, but as the neared the compound "a group of young men who were walking in the front of the crowd ran towards the office." Police responded to their charge by firing their weapons in the air but it served only to further anger the mob. "The men got angrier," he said.
.........(more: )
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/8423538/UN-launches-investigation-into-Afghanistan-murders.html

The problem with 'crowds' is that the mob mentality can escalate very quickly- hence the prohibition of not 'yelling fire' in a crowded room.

The intent has a bearing in whether something is wrong.

Can you honestly claim that Terry Jones' intent wasn't to inflame hatred? That he didn't understand what he was doing was likely to cause harm?

Why did he agree NOT to burn the Koran last Sept. then?

Terry Jones = simply speaking his mind?

No malicious intent?

What he did may have been legal. But it was stupid, selfish, and wrong.

[Ohio Joe]

24. I've not made any comment as to his intent

Any time anyone burns anothers holy book, there is a bad intent, that should go without saying. Extremist muslim reaction to insults has nothing to do with mob mentality. Ask Theo Van gogh or any of the Danish cartoonists. How far do you propose we go to appease the extremists?

[Bluerthanblue]

27. you don't see Jones as an extremist?

I sure as hell do.

Mob mentality did factor into what happened imo- but I believe that there are individuals who intended revenge.

I'm not defending the response- it was completely absurd- This action did not come totally out of the blue, without any kind of provocation at all.

What some of the protesters did was wrong, and inexcusable.

I think it's important that Jones' action be condemned as well. Not in an attempt to excuse the actions that followed - (there is no excuse), but because Jones' actions themself are extremist, destructive and intended to create conflict.

[Lost-in-FL]

3. There's no free will, but the illusion of it. nt

[Uben]

4. The guy knew what he was doing........

.....he wanted publicity, even if it came with the blood of others on it. He got it. Now, he should rot in hell for eternity.

[Sonoman]

26. I'm with you on this.

I have spent way too much time around fundies to think otherwise.

I hope their fucking church burns with every stinking one of those cowards inside.

Sonoman

[lunatica]

5. Everyone is accountable for what they do or don't do

Everyone.

Bush didn't personally kill anyone. But he sent men and machines and bombs who other people used to kill people.

Your argument falls apart very quickly.

[ZombieHorde]

12. I am not seeing how your argument contradicts mine.

I don't consider Bush to be a murderer.

[lunatica]

29. I do.

People who deliberately incite violence and murder are accountable for their part in the entire incident.

They are accountable.

[ZombieHorde]

30. I would agree with you if he was a cult leader and he was instructing his cult to kill.

But he just burned a book. The act of burning a book, or a flag, is a harmless protest. If people did not freak out and start killing strangers, we wouldn't even be talking about it. Book burning is not the cause of the violence, the murderers' religious faith is the cause of the violence.

[RagAss]

7. Nobody does anything. Everything just happens.

[ZombieHorde]

13. I sometimes agree with that. nt

[Bluerthanblue]

8. flawed comparison- Terry Jones marketed himself and his 'church-

he goaded those he claims to be 'better than' and put on a mock trial-

He goes around preaching hatred, and fostering Islamophobia.

He did what he did for what reason? To incite people against Islam- his action wasn't benign, he intended for it to inflame people.

He masquerades behind his 'religion' using his power as a 'pastor' to influence others.
(Southern Poverty Law Center statement: )
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/02/07/burn-a-koran-day-pastor-plans-new-desecration-of-islamic-holy-book/


And as to your first example, the woman does bear some responsibility.

If she knew her husband to be jealous and violent, she had a responsibility to get the children out of harms way.



(speaking from painful experience on this one)

The DO'er's are ultimately the guilty ones. But we do bear responsibility for the concequences of our actions, and inactions.

[ZombieHorde]

17. What action would be required for you to be goaded into killing random strangers?

Someone burning their copy of your favorite book? Someone creating a really bad cover of your favorite song?

[Bluerthanblue]

25. :shrug: I don't understand

your point.

You may as well ask me what would be required for me to intentionally enrage and defame random strangers, not caring what results my actions will likely cause.



The Murder of the UN workers and security people was absolutely WRONG.

Jones is not simply an innocent bystander. He didn't break the law- but what he did was wrong.

[ZombieHorde]

28. My point was, violent people are violent, peaceful people are peaceful.

Although exceptions exist, this little rule is useful.


When a Republican kills someone, we blame right wing propaganda. We don't blame ourselves, even though we (DU) mock them, we mock their religious beliefs, we mock their signs, etc.

[Angry Dragon]

9. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

:popcorn:

[handmade34]

10. dysfunctional people

play these games all the time... at many different levels, in many different situations

push buttons
use passive aggressive behavior
make excuses

it's the kid that piches the other when no one is looking then goes crying to the adult when he gets hit by the other...

freedom of speech isn't free and it's time for us to demand grown up behavior from our grownups

no one is innocent (except the children that the disabled husband beat)

[Liberal Veteran]

14. This seems like as a good a place as any to say it: A pox on both their houses!

1. Being pissed off at the actions of a moron doesn't give you a free pass to murder people.
2. Being a bigot doesn't give you a free pass from ostracism when you do something that has no other purpose than to piss people off.

[handmade34]

18. well said

[Edweird]

21. Thank you. "I'm a member of the religion of peace. Why did you make me kill random strangers?"

[Bandit]

31. I person wants to see people panic so he yells Fire in a crowded theatre

People get killed in a stampede of panicked people. Is the man responsible for the deaths?

[ZombieHorde]

32. Peopel who yell during movies are assholes, but I don't think your pransker would be responsible.

Fires happen, and adults should know how to conduct themselves during an emergency.

If people fall apart and go crazy because a guy yelled one word, then the problem is with our society.

[11 Bravo]

36. Lamest. Analogy. Ever.

If people are told that there is a fire in a crowded theater, then the patrons therein would be in danger; and they can reasonably be expected to respond by trying to escape. If there is a fire in a redneck, asshole, pastor's barbecue pit, fueled by a fucking book, no one is at risk.

[Bandit]

37. Do you know anything at all about history?

More deaths have been attributed to religion than just about anything else on earth. When you mess with a person's religion you are messing with their entire being and yes death very often results..Anyone that thinks differently is very limited in their grasp of history..

[rustydog]

33. If your man has a set of balls and a true belief in the power of his God

Shouldn't he haul his balls over to the muslim nation he hates and burn their bible in front of them?
No, he surely wouldn't because such a despicable act is protected speech here. He is a gutless son of a bitch who caused the deaths of innocent people.
With a right comes a responsibility. A Christian preacher teaching hatred, supporting prejudice and distrust is not someone whose actions I would support.

[Shagbark Hickory]

34. +! Ah.. we got a thinker on our hands, here.

[JoePhilly]

35. Your hypotehtical fails.

The two cases you put forward are not really similar.

In #1, the woman has no reason to suspect that the angry husband will attack the children for her actions.

In #2, the man absolutely knows that the extremist Muslims are likely to attack other westerners for his actions. In fact, he HOPES it will happen so he can use their attack to prove his point about all of Islam being evil (not just those involved, but all of Islam).

Your analogy would be better if the woman's reason for the affair was to intentionally provoke the husband into beating the children, just so she could then use his violence against the kids to claim that all men are violent and evil.

[ZombieHorde]

38. Has Jones claimed he was trying to provoke people into violence?

I read a few different news articles on the subject, and I have not seen that. I read one which he said he knew it could happen, but the goal of his mock trial was to show the Koran is bad.