Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Self-labeled ‘Christian counterpart of Osama bin Laden’ allegedly planned clinic bomb

  1. #11
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,763

    Re: Self-labeled ‘Christian counterpart of Osama bin Laden’ allegedly planned clinic

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Wonderful news to hear he's arrested. This is what happens when people take extremely old words and twist them to justify their purposes and using the religion to make their mind accept the acts it wishes to do. Christians aren't responsible for this, but the religion played a part in it.

    I disagree. The Christian religion played no part in this at all. The nutter who was planning the bombing is 100% responsible for his actions.
    Last edited by danarhea; 09-13-10 at 11:46 AM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  2. #12
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Self-labeled ‘Christian counterpart of Osama bin Laden’ allegedly planned clinic

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    I disagree. The Christian religion played no part in this at all. The nutter who was planning the bombing is 100% responsible for his actions.
    So he didn't justify his actions through believing it was correct based on his beliefs regarding Christianity and the bible?

    Notice you said it played no part in it.

  3. #13
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,763

    Re: Self-labeled ‘Christian counterpart of Osama bin Laden’ allegedly planned clinic

    I don't believe the religion played a part in it. The religion itself is about peace. This is the problem that I have with any religion. People interpret them for their own self-serving interests. This is why assholes flew planes into the TWC, and this is also why this asshole was planning to bomb a clinic. But this does not reflect on the religions at all. Jesus never said kill those you disagree with.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  4. #14
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Self-labeled ‘Christian counterpart of Osama bin Laden’ allegedly planned clinic

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    I don't believe the religion played a part in it. The religion itself is about peace. This is the problem that I have with any religion. People interpret them for their own self-serving interests. This is why assholes flew planes into the TWC, and this is also why this asshole was planning to bomb a clinic. But this does not reflect on the religions at all. Jesus never said kill those you disagree with.
    Jesus, and more specifically those repeating his words, stated things. People interprite said things. There are MANY things that Jesus did not SPECIFICALLY say that people interprite from the bible, both good and bad. This isn't unique to the bible, this is the case in just about anything.

    The issue is your desire to ignore reality in fear that by admitting reality you give comfort and aid to those that exaggerate reality.

    It is incorrect, factually, to say religion played NO part in this. When a man is clearly stating his reasoning and justifications for doing what he does are based on his religion and his belief it is impossible to say his religion had "no part" in it.

    Now, saying that religion was a part of it, saying that HIS view and beliefs regarding Christianity helped spur his actions, is not saying that "All christians are bombers" or "Christianity CAUSED this" or "All Christians are responsible for this". Yet you seem scared to deal with reality because you think that ignoring the reality of the situation will hinder those that seek to exaggerate about the situation...but in reality you are doing nothing different than they are, save for going in the OTHER direction.

    EVERYTHING about religion is interpritation. This persons interpritation has spurred him to justify in his mind that its perfectly okay for him to potentially kill people in terrorist attacks. Now we can hypothesize that he would've found some way to justify it being "okay" for him to do this if he didn't have hi religious views, but that would be nothing more than a guess. The fact is that the justification he used to find a way that his mind was okay with him doing or organizing attrocities like this was based singularly around his religious beliefs and views.

    His religion in no way shape or form had "no part" in this. That doesn't mean all of Christianity should be condemned, that doesn't mean his interpritation is the majority intepritation or what Christianity "really is", it doesn't mean all Christians are terrorists. It does however mean that his religion was a part of why this attack happened.

  5. #15
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,763

    Re: Self-labeled ‘Christian counterpart of Osama bin Laden’ allegedly planned clinic

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Jesus, and more specifically those repeating his words, stated things. People interprite said things. There are MANY things that Jesus did not SPECIFICALLY say that people interprite from the bible, both good and bad. This isn't unique to the bible, this is the case in just about anything.

    The issue is your desire to ignore reality in fear that by admitting reality you give comfort and aid to those that exaggerate reality.

    It is incorrect, factually, to say religion played NO part in this. When a man is clearly stating his reasoning and justifications for doing what he does are based on his religion and his belief it is impossible to say his religion had "no part" in it.

    Now, saying that religion was a part of it, saying that HIS view and beliefs regarding Christianity helped spur his actions, is not saying that "All christians are bombers" or "Christianity CAUSED this" or "All Christians are responsible for this". Yet you seem scared to deal with reality because you think that ignoring the reality of the situation will hinder those that seek to exaggerate about the situation...but in reality you are doing nothing different than they are, save for going in the OTHER direction.

    EVERYTHING about religion is interpritation. This persons interpritation has spurred him to justify in his mind that its perfectly okay for him to potentially kill people in terrorist attacks. Now we can hypothesize that he would've found some way to justify it being "okay" for him to do this if he didn't have hi religious views, but that would be nothing more than a guess. The fact is that the justification he used to find a way that his mind was okay with him doing or organizing attrocities like this was based singularly around his religious beliefs and views.

    His religion in no way shape or form had "no part" in this. That doesn't mean all of Christianity should be condemned, that doesn't mean his interpritation is the majority intepritation or what Christianity "really is", it doesn't mean all Christians are terrorists. It does however mean that his religion was a part of why this attack happened.
    Ah, I see what's happening here. We are arguing from 2 different angles. LOL. Stating this the way you are stating it now made me see your point. I agree.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  6. #16
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Self-labeled ‘Christian counterpart of Osama bin Laden’ allegedly planned clinic

    Yep, that's I guess one of my issues with this. I see what you're saying at times, or trying to say, that you can't "Blame" the religion. Like saying "Christianity CAUSED this" or "Christianity is to BLAME for this". And I agree with you there, and I agree with you in regards to the Islam thing often as well.

    The problem is, so many people who do that then try to be the mirror image of the "[religion] is to blame" crowd by exaggerating in the OTHER direction. Rather than going from "[religion] played a part in this" and ramping it up to "[religion] is to blame" they go from "[religion] isn't to blame" to "[religion] played no part in this". They run off an exaggerate, just exaggerating how little rather than how much the religion was involved in the situation.

    Similarly, I think those kind of things hurt THEIR case with people somewhat in the middle on the issue just as much as the other side hurts theirs when they do their exaggeration.

    To take it from an example with nothing to do with Religion....

    There's been instances where kids have severly injured or killed other kids due to mimicing wrestling rules. Does this mean wrestling is to "Blame" for those deaths. No, wrestling didn't somehow magically cause one kid to do something to another kid. That said, it definitely played a part in it and was something you could say was a "cause". Would the kid possibly have just hurt/killed the other kid in a different way because he's just irresponsible and doesn't care about anothers well being? Perhaps, but we don't know. What we would know is that he saw something being done on TV and that gave him the soundness of mind to be able to do things and tell himself it was okay.

    I think often, BECAUSE of the exaggerators on the other side, people get so defensive of the situation that they try and downplay or ignore reality for fear of it giving ammunition to the other side. I think that if you're honest and up front about the issue all together then the reality of it will be seen clearly by those who are honestly looking at the situation and the people that believe the other side would've believed it regardless of whether or not you under exaggerated the situation.

    So I get what you were saying Dan, I just think it was coming out in such a way that your words were saying far more than you were perhaps intending or meaning them to.

  7. #17
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,763

    Re: Self-labeled ‘Christian counterpart of Osama bin Laden’ allegedly planned clinic

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Yep, that's I guess one of my issues with this. I see what you're saying at times, or trying to say, that you can't "Blame" the religion. Like saying "Christianity CAUSED this" or "Christianity is to BLAME for this". And I agree with you there, and I agree with you in regards to the Islam thing often as well.

    The problem is, so many people who do that then try to be the mirror image of the "[religion] is to blame" crowd by exaggerating in the OTHER direction. Rather than going from "[religion] played a part in this" and ramping it up to "[religion] is to blame" they go from "[religion] isn't to blame" to "[religion] played no part in this". They run off an exaggerate, just exaggerating how little rather than how much the religion was involved in the situation.

    Similarly, I think those kind of things hurt THEIR case with people somewhat in the middle on the issue just as much as the other side hurts theirs when they do their exaggeration.

    To take it from an example with nothing to do with Religion....

    There's been instances where kids have severly injured or killed other kids due to mimicing wrestling rules. Does this mean wrestling is to "Blame" for those deaths. No, wrestling didn't somehow magically cause one kid to do something to another kid. That said, it definitely played a part in it and was something you could say was a "cause". Would the kid possibly have just hurt/killed the other kid in a different way because he's just irresponsible and doesn't care about anothers well being? Perhaps, but we don't know. What we would know is that he saw something being done on TV and that gave him the soundness of mind to be able to do things and tell himself it was okay.

    I think often, BECAUSE of the exaggerators on the other side, people get so defensive of the situation that they try and downplay or ignore reality for fear of it giving ammunition to the other side. I think that if you're honest and up front about the issue all together then the reality of it will be seen clearly by those who are honestly looking at the situation and the people that believe the other side would've believed it regardless of whether or not you under exaggerated the situation.

    So I get what you were saying Dan, I just think it was coming out in such a way that your words were saying far more than you were perhaps intending or meaning them to.
    Could be. This "communication" stuff can sometimes be a real bitch.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •