• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The next president needs to have a strong stance against Christian Terrorists.

Thrilla said:
and after all those horrible atrocities... they still don't have the body count extremist atheists do.
Click to expand...

Christian terrorists (terrorists motivated specifically by their religious dogma) are indeed a very small problem, and I'm among those who readily acknowledges that a terrorist-who-happens-to-be-religious is not the same thing as a religious terrorist. By my assessment, the pivotal factor which makes an ideology dangerous (and potentially lethal) is fundamentalism (absolute conviction in the righteousness of one's cause), not religion per se. Religion is a risk factor because it has forms of institutional support and practice which are more likely to foster fundamentalism, but religion (as already mentioned in previous posts) is neither an automatic red flag nor an automatic warrant for escaping scrutiny.

Atheist terrorists (terrorists motivated specifically by their atheism), however, are a nonexistent problem.

If you're about to commit the usual holstered fallacy of citing Lenin, Stalin, Mao, et al then don't bother...just say something simple like "I don't plan on treating the topic seriously" and I'll just go ahead and flush right away.

Otherwise, I'd be genuinely interested in information about any actual cases of atheist terrorists (meaning terrorists whose acts of terrorism were/are specifically based upon rejection of belief in a god or gods). Since atheism per se contains no specific moral warrant at all, I'd love to see a supposed example of one.
 
Last edited:
Billa said:
We've seen what happened in Norway with these Christian terrorists. Anders Behring Breivik planted a bomb and went on a shooting rampage killing 77 people. He said he would do it again against non-Christians and other cultures. We really need a President that profiles these white extremist Christians and stops them committing these terrible acts like they do with the Muslims. The last thing I want is supporters of this guy in my city.
Click to expand...



Obvious Bait Thread, is Obvious.




elephant_in_the_room.jpgjesus-facepalm.jpg
 
ChuckBerry said:
It's like nobody remembers recent history.
Click to expand...

Mycroft said:
Was McVeigh a christian terrorist?
Click to expand...

StillBallin75 said:
By most accounts, McVeigh was somewhat of a lapsed Catholic. If I had to pigeonhole him in a group, it would probably be the militia movement.
Click to expand...

Still, you're about the closest too it. Once again, just going to repost this since this idiotic meme keeps popping up over and over again by people with an agenda rather than wanting to look at the entire scope of things


Zyphlin said:
Poor analogy and one everyone always reaches for to make this point and fails absolutely misreably. There is no legitimate, reasonable way in which to compare the OKC bomber to those of 9/11 in regards to religion. The central point of McVeigh's anger that led to his bombing of the OKC building was his hatred for the government and their infringement on liberteries. He cited his opposition to the brady bill, increased taxes, the demonization of militias, and the raids on Ruby Ridge and Waco primarily due to their basis founded in position of large amounts of firearms. His anger towards these infringements were not founding in his religious beliefs.

McVeign professed that while he believed in "a god", that he had "lost touch with" his religion and never really picked it back up. He had made claims of being agnostic, not believing in hell, and that "science is my religion".

The continual and repeated attempt to use revisionist history to make Timothy Mcveigh to appear an extremist christian whose terrorist attack was motivated based on his christian beliefs, principles, and views is a tired and fraudulent one that is annoying to watch how often its thrown out. Even more than that, when comparing it to 9/11 which was unquestionably at the very least tied towards religious motivations if not fueled primarily and throughout by religious motivations it is disgusting to even see it. The two are not analogous in any way.
Click to expand...

McVeigh was nutballs, motivated by extreme anti-government paranoia far more than any kind of religious or mainstream political movement present in this country.
 
99percenter said:
Bait thread? This problem is huge. Not a bait thread. The FBI says christian terrorism is a bigger problem than islamic terrorism. The OP should get a medal for bringing it up.
Click to expand...

Source?

Also it would help your argument concerning the worth of this thread if the OP didn't go on about how it needs to be dealt with like we do with "the muslims", nevermind the fact that we specifically do not and can not discriminate against Muslims in terms of law enforcement or anti-terrorism actions to begin with. Additionally attempting to compare the thread of individual loan wolf entities, of which typically it seems from my memory of these instances mental issue is inherent, to loosely organized world wide terrorist groups in terms of capability and danger to the NATIONS security rather than individual security is a bit ridiculous as well. A ridiculous path that seems to be eagerly picked up on by some of our most hyper partisan of posters some of which go on to talk about the ****ing 700 club as if they're an equivilent entity to Al-Qaeda. Finally, your own ridiculous and rather typical for you flawed and ignorant logic correlates anyone who IS or even was at some point christian and does something horrible that it must be brought about, due to, or related to their religion. The holocaust, for example, was rooted in FAR more far reaching reasons, motivations, and ideology than Hitler's Christian Faith. Similarly, McVeigh was not a practicing or even self-professed Christian at the time of the OKC bombing and yet because he was christian at one time or another that somehow equates to "christian terrorism". With that kind of idiotic and frankly unrealistic logic, there is an epedimic of christian terrorism sweeping this country as some kind of organized campaign of crime since the vast majority of those that commit crime in this country are christian (since the vast majority of hte country is christian) and by your amazing logic, if one is christian and does something wrong then it must be due to their christian beliefs.

For ****s sakes people. The best part of this is watching those who rail against the notion of targeting Muslims and even possibly just focusing on possible "extremist" muslims sitting here cheering at the notion of "lets go after the extreme Christians". Ignore the fact that we're talking on a federal, not state or local level, and we've no entity of "fundamentalist extreme christians" in this nation or outside of it that have demonstrated the knowledge, forethought, manpower, intelligence gathering, training, and material capabilities needed to substantially affect the security of the United States. At the very least there is an Islamic terrorist group that has managed that.
 
Last edited:
cmakaioz said:
Christian terrorists (terrorists motivated specifically by their religious dogma) are indeed a very small problem, and I'm among those who readily acknowledges that a terrorist-who-happens-to-be-religious is not the same thing as a religious terrorist. By my assessment, the pivotal factor which makes an ideology dangerous (and potentially lethal) is fundamentalism (absolute conviction in the righteousness of one's cause), not religion per se. Religion is a risk factor because it has forms of institutional support and practice which are more likely to foster fundamentalism, but religion (as already mentioned in previous posts) is neither an automatic red flag nor an automatic warrant for escaping scrutiny.

Atheist terrorists (terrorists motivated specifically by their atheism), however, are a nonexistent problem.

If you're about to commit the usual holstered fallacy of citing Lenin, Stalin, Mao, et al then don't bother...just say something simple like "I don't plan on treating the topic seriously" and I'll just go ahead and flush right away.

Otherwise, I'd be genuinely interested in information about any actual cases of atheist terrorists (meaning terrorists whose acts of terrorism were/are specifically based upon rejection of belief in a god or gods). Since atheism per se contains no specific moral warrant at all, I'd love to see a supposed example of one.
Click to expand...

you are asking me to argue for positions I do not claim.
i did not say, nor have ever said, "atheist terrorists" are motivated by their non belief.
I have never claimed atheist terrorism is a problem.

Stalin, Mao, pol pot, etc.. were in fact extremists.... and they were in fact atheists... and they did, in fact, provide a much larger body count that the religious extremists.
can we dissect motivations in order to absolve our beliefs.. absolutely.( i agree that they were not, nor could be, motivated by a non-belief)
as a religious person, i reject and condemn the atrocities committed by past religious figures in the name of their perverted religious beliefs.... i want nothing to do with them, nor do i appreciate some assclown on the internet insinuating they are my people by virtue of a shared religious belief.... they aren't.

we might be able to have a discussion, you and me ( that remains to be seen, .. it depends entirely on your attitude)... but i have zero problem with getting in the gutter with the like of 99percenter... if only to show people how absurd his "arguments" are.
 
99percenter said:
Bait thread? This problem is huge. Not a bait thread. The FBI says christian terrorism is a bigger problem than islamic terrorism. The OP should get a medal for bringing it up.
Click to expand...



link to the FBI specifying this?... i've looked, i can't find anything to back your claim here.
 
Thrilla said:
and after all those horrible atrocities... they still don't have the body count extremist atheists do.

go figure <shrug>

Mcveigh wasn't a christian extremists terrorist.. he was a nutbag militia-type extremist who thought he was paying the federal government back for their terrorism ( waco, ruby ridge). not a bad motive, but certainly a heinous inexcusable act on his part.


but no, Christian terrorists are not a "huge problem"... they are a very minor problem. ( except to militant atheists)
gangbangers are a much bigger problem... drug cartels are huge problem
Click to expand...

And then, of course, we have the fact that the holocaust wasn't done "in the name of religion" as Islamic terrorism, the crusades, and the inquistions were.
 
Zyphlin said:
Source?

Also it would help your argument concerning the worth of this thread if the OP didn't go on about how it needs to be dealt with like we do with "the muslims", nevermind the fact that we specifically do not and can not discriminate against Muslims in terms of law enforcement or anti-terrorism actions to begin with. Additionally attempting to compare the thread of individual loan wolf entities, of which typically it seems from my memory of these instances mental issue is inherent, to loosely organized world wide terrorist groups in terms of capability and danger to the NATIONS security rather than individual security is a bit ridiculous as well. A ridiculous path that seems to be eagerly picked up on by some of our most hyper partisan of posters some of which go on to talk about the ****ing 700 club as if they're an equivilent entity to Al-Qaeda. Finally, your own ridiculous and rather typical for you flawed and ignorant logic correlates anyone who IS or even was at some point christian and does something horrible that it must be brought about, due to, or related to their religion. The holocaust, for example, was rooted in FAR more far reaching reasons, motivations, and ideology than Hitler's Christian Faith. Similarly, McVeigh was not a practicing or even self-professed Christian at the time of the OKC bombing and yet because he was christian at one time or another that somehow equates to "christian terrorism". With that kind of idiotic and frankly unrealistic logic, there is an epedimic of christian terrorism sweeping this country as some kind of organized campaign of crime since the vast majority of those that commit crime in this country are christian (since the vast majority of hte country is christian) and by your amazing logic, if one is christian and does something wrong then it must be due to their christian beliefs.

For ****s sakes people. The best part of this is watching those who rail against the notion of targeting Muslims and even possibly just focusing on possible "extremist" muslims sitting here cheering at the notion of "lets go after the extreme Christians". Ignore the fact that we're talking on a federal, not state or local level, and we've no entity of "fundamentalist extreme christians" in this nation or outside of it that have demonstrated the knowledge, forethought, manpower, intelligence gathering, training, and material capabilities needed to substantially affect the security of the United States.
Click to expand...

Hitler said in the mein kempf that his faith was the motivation in going after the jews.
 
99percenter said:
Bait thread? This problem is huge. Not a bait thread. The FBI says christian terrorism is a bigger problem than islamic terrorism. The OP should get a medal for bringing it up.
Click to expand...

Oh brother. Proof?
 
tessaesque said:
And then, of course, we have the fact that the holocaust wasn't done "in the name of religion" as Islamic terrorism, the crusades, and the inquistions were.
Click to expand...

Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: 'by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.'
straight from the mein kampf
 
Thrilla said:
Stalin, Mao, pol pot, etc.. were in fact extremists.... and they were in fact atheists...
Click to expand...

But even in this case they were not either primarily motivated by their athiest beliefs NOR was athiesm their tool in creating the attrocities they caused. Athiesm was no more significantly wrapped up in their attrocities from my undestanding of them than Christianity was in Hitler's.
 
99percenter said:
Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: 'by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.'
straight from the mein kampf
Click to expand...

Do you even know what propaganda is?
 
Zyphlin said:
But even in this case they were not either primarily motivated by their athiest beliefs NOR was athiesm their tool in creating the attrocities they caused. Athiesm was no more significantly wrapped up in their attrocities from my undestanding of them than Christianity was in Hitler's.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree.
 
Thrilla said:
you are asking me to argue for positions I do not claim.
i did not say, nor have ever said, "atheist terrorists" are motivated by their non belief.
I have never claimed atheist terrorism is a problem.
Click to expand...

Technically true...but you dropped the "atheist body count" meme earlier, which is a pet peeve of mine. Based upon your clarification, I now see that you were doing it to mock 99percenter's would-be arguments.

I'm sorry I missed the relevant direction/context...I tend to lapse into being a bit trigger-happy in response to the Hannity/O'Reilly atheist body count shtick since it's such a regular staple among the dominionist/Comfort & Cameron set.
 
99percenter said:
Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: 'by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.'
straight from the mein kampf
Click to expand...

Believing that one is righteous and good in the eyes of their god ddoes not equal taking action due to their religion. You will rarely, in reality, find any person that does evil who acknolwedges they are evil, horrible, wrong creatures. Most people, by human nature, attempt to justify and explain to themselves that they are good, right, and correct in their action. Even note that he talks about "defending himself against the jew", suggesting that there was an initial action or issue secondary to the religious reasons that has instigated or caused his actions and that his retaliation is just in his mind religiously.

Again, you are taking someone being religious and equating it to "religious attacks". Hitler's motivations for the Hollocaust was varied and ranged to far more things, fro msimple desire for power to the belief of creating a superior race, than simply religion based. Hitler's means of selling his goals, of recruiting for his goals, and for convincing others of his goals also was not significantly rooted first and foremost in religion.

This can not in any way be compraed to say, Abortion Clinic Bombers or those who perpetrated 9/11, both of which are examples where either in the motivation and/or the method of presenting their cause had their religion front and center wrapped into the foundation for the reasoning.
 
I feel like Daktoria sometimes...

Since nobody seemed to get it, my link was merely to point out that we already have a history of domestic terrorism and that the president need not hup-hup some special taskforce because of some otherwise motivated nutjob half a world away. Who gives a damn why disgruntled men blow people up? Isn't the "blowing people up" part the real issue?

Pry your heads out of your asses.
 
Last edited:
cmakaioz said:
Technically true...but you dropped the "atheist body count" meme earlier, which is a pet peeve of mine. Based upon your clarification, I now see that you were doing it to mock 99percenter's would-be arguments.

I'm sorry I missed the relevant direction/context...I tend to lapse into being a bit trigger-happy in response to the Hannity/O'Reilly atheist body count shtick since it's such a regular staple among the dominionist/Comfort & Cameron set.
Click to expand...
finally somebody gets me!:lol:

I understand the pet peeve... I share it too, but from the side of religiosity.

i didn't know Hannity or Oreilly did this schtick too....I'd rather be an athiest than listen to those clowns:lol:
 
99percenter said:
Are Homegrown Terrorists More Dangerous than al Qaeda? :: IPT in the News :: The Investigative Project on Terrorism
Click to expand...

It must be 1933 because someone's moving the Goal Posts.

Here's what you said:

99percenter said:
The FBI says christian terrorism is a bigger problem than islamic terrorism.
Click to expand...


First, what you just linked to never once backs up that claim. Second, the link provides zero evidence of the FBI saying ANYTHING regarding Christian Terrorism or Islamic Terrorism, it's talking about DHS. Third, it's talking about a report that warned of a rise in domestic terrorism but has no indication in your link suggesting it's a "bigger" problem...it just has a bunch of pundits suggesting it is.

For ****s sakes, really? THAT'S what you're trying to pass off as proof for your baseless comment?
 
ChuckBerry said:
I feel like Daktoria sometimes...

Since nobody seemed to get it, my link was merely to point out that we already have a history of domestic terrorism and that the president need not hup-hup some special taskforce because of some otherwise motivated nutjob half a world away. Who gives a damn why disgruntled men blow people up? Isn't the "blowing people up" part the real issue?

Pry your heads out of your asses.
Click to expand...

I agree. All potential blower uppers should be looked at, regardless of political or religious creed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom