Koran burning will endanger US lives: Petraeus

[jonesthecurl]

wtf are we talking about now?

[Metsfanmax]

The fact that I just nuked this thread.

[The Bison King]

damn it! on several occasions I thought to get involved in this thread, but I never built up the gumption to read enough to get caught up. I was just about to, but it looks like it's been nuked already. Damn...

[alster]

Generally, it's probably for the best in the long-run to burn a few korans now and then. And then take a dump on a few depictions of that mohamed guy. Eventually (probably later than sooner) the muslims being universally pissed off will be tired and loose interest. It's really not healthy to be so upset every time something “offensive” happens. Of course, it's all a product of a tribal, pre-modern society grinded in the modernity's horrors under fascist regimes and the only long-run cure is the shiny beacon of the enlightenment and the post-modern tiredness of the old world. But awaiting that, I'd just try to make them too tired and disinterested to continue being pissed-off. Christians in the West are offended all the time, but they have just relented and generally accepted the whole “you worry about yourself and I take care of my own business” thing. That’s probably the best way to go, a lot less people get cardiac issues that way.

[The Bison King]

Generally, it's probably for the best in the long-run to burn a few korans now and then. And then take a dump on a few depictions of that mohamed guy. Eventually (probably later than sooner) the muslims being universally pissed off will be tired and loose interest. It's really not healthy to be so upset every time something “offensive” happens. Of course, it's all a product of a tribal, pre-modern society grinded in the modernity's horrors under fascist regimes and the only long-run cure is the shiny beacon of the enlightenment and the post-modern tiredness of the old world. But awaiting that, I'd just try to make them too tired and disinterested to continue being pissed-off. Christians in the West are offended all the time, but they have just relented and generally accepted the whole “you worry about yourself and I take care of my own business” thing. That’s probably the best way to go, a lot less people get cardiac issues that way.

I'd like to think that would work, but their culture isn't as saturated in news flashes and images. What I mean is we're lazy and generally don't care what other people do in other countries. They aren't really like that. If Koran burning just becomes a regular thing over here, it'll probably just lead to more generalizing and hate.

[Phatscotty]

I must admit, I do not understand the whole "you burn our paper book, and we are going to murder people" thing

[The Bison King]

I don't understand the whole "you merely should the image of Muhammad now we're going to kill people" thing either

[BigBallinStalin]

I must admit, I do not understand the whole "you burn our paper book, and we are going to murder people" thing

Well, look at it this way. A lot of people over there take their religion very seriously (unlike in general people in the "West"). Also, say for example, I'm Mr. Ahmed, and I run a suicide bombing business. I need some propaganda to get my recruits and money coming in. Ah, yes, "Quran burning Man in US wants to burn Qurans." Now I got something to fire up the people and get my business booming.

You've got realize that there are some people with excellent entrepreneurial skills running the businesses of terrorism. But what gets filtered through the US mainstream media generally is just a mirror reflection of the propaganda being show over there, so you've got to step back and look at the bigger picture.

[BigBallinStalin]

I don't understand the whole "you merely should the image of Muhammad now we're going to kill people" thing either

Just like where you live, there are very traditional people with their traditional views who'd act in a similar manner. Suppose I show some Christians a picture of Jesus on the cross with a big pile of turds on his head. The shit smearing in small streams down his face.

Do you think people would be offended?

"OH, but, BBS, Mohammed with a bomb on his head isn't the same thing!"

Think about it from a Muslim perspective. What would an image of Mohammad with a bomb imply to you?

Also, you have to understand how some people take their religion very very seriously.

[AAFitz]

I must admit, I do not understand the whole "you burn our paper book, and we are going to murder people" thing

Most people cant. I certainly cant. I further do not understand, "we dont believe in your religion so we are going to burn your paper book." Seems like something the nazis would have done at the beginning of a campaign of hate against an entire race and religion that led to a world war.

Luckily we have history to warn us against repeating the same mistake, so that could never happen again.

[The Bison King]

I don't understand the whole "you merely should the image of Muhammad now we're going to kill people" thing either

Just like where you live, there are very traditional people with their traditional views who'd act in a similar manner. Suppose I show some Christians a picture of Jesus on the cross with a big pile of turds on his head. The shit smearing in small streams down his face.

Do you think people would be offended?

"OH, but, BBS, Mohammed with a bomb on his head isn't the same thing!"

Think about it from a Muslim perspective. What would an image of Mohammad with a bomb imply to you?

Also, you have to understand how some people take their religion very very seriously.

Obviously people take there religion seriously on both sides. The difference is no body straps bombs to themselves for Jesus (ok, maybe there's been a case or two, I can't prove that but you know what I mean)

I heard once that the reason you can't show Muhammad is because Muhammad didn't want his image to be confused with the image of Allah, and wanted people to remember that he was just a man. This never really made sense to me because if Allah has no image... and Muhammad also has no image, doesn't that just make him seem more god like? Wouldn't he seem more human if people could just see him as a man, rather than make him some sort of presence that is only spoken of, and seen as a word?

[tzor]

I must admit, I do not understand the whole "you burn our paper book, and we are going to murder people" thing

Many people take the written word seriously. Muslims believe that their scripture is the literal "Word of God." (But only in the original language.) Jews take this even one step further; an old Torah scroll is treated like a member of the community and is actually given a burrial when it no longer can be used.

[GabonX]

Some like myself who is fully versed in Christianity as an altar boy, boyscout, and even a Christian preparatory high school, with plenty of understanding of such teachings, probably have much more fun watching those who actually claim to believe in Christianity, not even understand its teachings. Thank you for another opportunity.

A swing and a miss!

Gods laws are of course open to interpretation which is usually where any conflict ensues. However, in this case, its easy to argue that burning the book that a massive population holds as holy and dear, would indeed violate many of the laws of Christianity, or even perhaps the entire overall message of Christ in fact.

The "interpretation" argument holds some water, but more often than not the people who make that argument are those who find that there is something they disagree with in their chosen religious text and rather than abandon their religion they cop out and pretend that those words don't mean what they clearly do mean.

What Christian laws indicate that burning a book perceived as being satanic literature from a false prophet would violate God's laws? Be specific...



I'm not saying that nothing like that exists in Christianity, but I'm certainly not aware if it does. The Bible orders Christians to be peaceful towards people of other faiths (because God will get them in the after life), but I'm not aware of anything which indicates that Christians need to respect the beliefs of others..

So please, educate us.

I am not hear to educate anyone. I am here to laugh at those like yourself who are not educated, or better, claim to be.

If you are so ignorant as to not see the hatred that this book burning was meant to, and will inspire, and thereby be an act of aggression that most agree is against the entire teaching of Christ, that that's up to you. I myself suggest you educate yourself in the teaching of your own religion that you seem to think you understand, but clearly do not.

I'm not a christian you dumb f*ck. I've lost track of how many times I've had to say that on these boards, but I've never said anything which would indicate that was the case.

To call me a christian with no evidence of that being the case other than your own intellectual simplicity is both pathetic and bigoted.

Sorry I cant help, but there's a lot of copies of the bible out there for you to read. Good luck and sorry I couldn't be of more assistance. Perhaps I will one day be punished for refusing to shepherd sheep in obvious need.

The problem with people like you is that you project your own moral standards onto religion, and ration the tenants of religions sync with your own moral standards. Religion is not some inherently peaceful thing which was created solely to bring peace, love, and brotherhood to this world. Do you have any idea how many "God's of War" there have been throughout history?

What you've done here is projected your liberal late 20th century sensibilities onto a religion that's 2000 years old and delusionaly asserted that those things are in sync with one another, ie that Christians must respect what is perceived as Satanic literature from a false prophet because it might offend people if they don't...

You've asserting that burning a Koran somehow violates the entire message of Christianity and that "most agree" that this is the case. The problem is that you haven't shown any evidence that's the case.

You're a self aggrandizing moron that's failed on all counts, despite being given every opportunity to back up your claims.

[GabonX]

Also, this:

Generally, it's probably for the best in the long-run to burn a few korans now and then. And then take a dump on a few depictions of that mohamed guy. Eventually (probably later than sooner) the muslims being universally pissed off will be tired and loose interest. It's really not healthy to be so upset every time something “offensive” happens. Of course, it's all a product of a tribal, pre-modern society grinded in the modernity's horrors under fascist regimes and the only long-run cure is the shiny beacon of the enlightenment and the post-modern tiredness of the old world. But awaiting that, I'd just try to make them too tired and disinterested to continue being pissed-off. Christians in the West are offended all the time, but they have just relented and generally accepted the whole “you worry about yourself and I take care of my own business” thing. That’s probably the best way to go, a lot less people get cardiac issues that way.

[PLAYER57832]

That would be a good point if there was something in Christianity which would indicate that burning a Koran violated God's laws.

I'm not aware of any such thing, but it's always fun watching people that pride themselves on their atheism give lessons on theology..

How about the "do unto others" part. Or, for that matter, the bit about "shake the dust from your feet". It said to leave, avoid, not to go in and take a crusade against them. At least, not when folks aren't actively attacking us (and, some Christians, though not I, take exception to even that). As for attacking, Muslims are not attacking us on the whole. Some idiots who call themselves Muslims are attacking us or advocating attacks on us, just as some idiots who call themselves Christian are attacking or advocating attacks on not just Muslims, but Christians who don't subscribe to all the same ideas.

There were plenty of pagans and other religions around at the time of Christ. He concerned himself with Jews, and those who wanted to hear his message, not all those others. Seems that is the model we should follow.

[PLAYER57832]

Atheism, by the way means not necessarily believing in a deity. It means nothing about believing in the teachings of a particular religion. That is also a point overlooked by self-righteous believers quite often. I enjoy watching that happen as well, and again, thank you.

A point of clarification.

Atheism means you believe there is no God. Agnostics are the ones not sure. Within that, there are churches or philisophical societies that fall within those belief systems. I take it, you mean that you don't subscribe to any one of those?

[PLAYER57832]

As an AMERICAN, I support the display of opinion, though burning a K'ran or insulting anyone's religion in such an abrasive way is idiotic, because it tends to backfire heavily. In fact, letting these idiots do as they will is probably the best argument against such acts.

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

I love God so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him so I try to keep others from breaking his laws so I break his laws to do so because I love him

How is that a relevant or reasonable response to PLAYER's statements?

Apparently youre one of those who cant see the simplicity. First its not a response. Its relevant however as a continuation of the same idea:

However, as a CHRISTIAN, I am always insulted when someone tries to claim they are acting under direction of my lord when committing hateful acts.

Secondly, Its representation of the circular logic of the exact people Player is talking about here, IE those who break Gods law, in the hypocritical crusade to protect it. Its similar to the I do cocaine, so I can do more work, so I can buy more cocaine ads of the eighties, though, not exactly the same.

Most importantly, there is no reason to suggest it needs to be reasonable, and quite frankly, you are very, very lucky that is the case.

I will point out however, that you are off topic here, because you are really discussing forum policy in a thread about koran burning and your post has nothing to do with that whatsoever, and as such, is spamming, the exact thing, you are incorrectly suggesting I may be doing. I would further suggest that as a teacher no less, you perhaps put a little more thought into your posts before posting such things, but that of course, is up to you. Feel free to pm me if this explanation is too complicated, or, perhaps not complicated enough for you. You also might want to check out the post he was comparing it to. You might see a difference.

I admit that at first glance, I was not sure if you were referring to me or to the topic of my post. However, given the poster, I leaned toward the "other"... glad you clarified, though.

[tzor]

As for attacking, Muslims are not attacking us on the whole.

Generally speaking, Muslims do attack Christians. From Africa, to India and Indonesia. (In India they aslo attack Buddhists, but you don't want to see an angry Buddhist, they attack back with equal nastiness.) You don't see this in the United States because we tend to raise the bar for everyone. (One good example is that Roman Catholics in the United States were embracing the principles of Democracy when others in Europe were looking at democracy in terms of the collapse of France and thus a very bad thing.)

[PLAYER57832]

I don't understand the whole "you merely should the image of Muhammad now we're going to kill people" thing either

I must admit, I do not understand the whole "you burn our paper book, and we are going to murder people" thing

I agree with both points. This is one very big reason why the Latin church split of originally.

That said, Many Roman Catholics take extreme offense at satyre of the Virgian Mary, many other groups (a lot of newer "evangelical" or "charismatic" type church followers feel this way) take offense at images of Christ. In this country, it usually results in lawsuits, closing of art displays, banning of books and displays in schools and public areas... not killing. However, go back 3 centuries and our nation was founded by, among others, a bunch of people who came here because they could not worship the way they wanted and then turned around to declare that they could prohibit anyone else from practicing in different ways. I consider myself pretty tolerant, yet, at some point, I would take steps against blatant disrespect of my religion. (in my son's school, for example).

Since Islam is a much newer religion than Christianity, maybe it has yet to meld down away from those extremes. OR, maybe they still exist here in Christianity, but the foaming at the mouth radicals have been largely silenced by the majority.

In either case, the true answer is to support those who are moderate, not make life difficult for ALL Muslims. And, insulting people blatantly, IS making life difficult.. even if in a semi small way. As I said before, I would take offense if someone decided to burn a bunch of Bibles or a church in demonstration. I might even wind up joining forces with some extremists whom I would not otherwise join, particularly if the attacks continued and were not isolated.

[PLAYER57832]

I don't understand the whole "you merely should the image of Muhammad now we're going to kill people" thing either

Just like where you live, there are very traditional people with their traditional views who'd act in a similar manner. Suppose I show some Christians a picture of Jesus on the cross with a big pile of turds on his head. The shit smearing in small streams down his face.

Do you think people would be offended?

"OH, but, BBS, Mohammed with a bomb on his head isn't the same thing!"

Think about it from a Muslim perspective. What would an image of Mohammad with a bomb imply to you?

Also, you have to understand how some people take their religion very very seriously.

Obviously people take there religion seriously on both sides. The difference is no body straps bombs to themselves for Jesus (ok, maybe there's been a case or two, I can't prove that but you know what I mean)

Uhh.. ever hear of a place called Northern Ireland? Or, say, Indonesia... even colonial US (of course that was not bombs... just stocks, drowning, hanging, whipping, etc.)

I heard once that the reason you can't show Muhammad is because Muhammad didn't want his image to be confused with the image of Allah, and wanted people to remember that he was just a man. This never really made sense to me because if Allah has no image... and Muhammad also has no image, doesn't that just make him seem more god like? Wouldn't he seem more human if people could just see him as a man, rather than make him some sort of presence that is only spoken of, and seen as a word?

You did not realize that this same debate exists within Christianity? It takes several forms. This was one of the many distinctions many "plain" peoples groups make (Old Order Amish, etc.), but it also is part of the division between Protestants and Roman Catholics. Roman Catholics bless objects, Protestants do not give objects any such power. (gets technical... Not trying to explain the church beliefs just touching broadly on some of the ways Christians debate this same issue). I am told that Roman Catholics always prefer a crucifix (the one with Christ -- to separate it from other similar symbols and illustrate Christ's suffering), whereas Protestants typically show just the cross (signifying that it is empty, Christ lives). Some Christian groups (mostly Eastern) apparently still believe that any image is wrong, similar to the way some Moslems don't allow pictures of humans, being that they are in God's image.

Yet again, this is just not a reason to seperate out Islam as somehow more oppressive than Christianity (note.. not endorsing Islam or saying I like it, but painting the whole religion in the brush of the extremists feeds those same extremists).

[GabonX]

That would be a good point if there was something in Christianity which would indicate that burning a Koran violated God's laws.

I'm not aware of any such thing, but it's always fun watching people that pride themselves on their atheism give lessons on theology..

How about the "do unto others" part. Or, for that matter, the bit about "shake the dust from your feet". It said to leave, avoid, not to go in and take a crusade against them. At least, not when folks aren't actively attacking us (and, some Christians, though not I, take exception to even that). As for attacking, Muslims are not attacking us on the whole. Some idiots who call themselves Muslims are attacking us or advocating attacks on us, just as some idiots who call themselves Christian are attacking or advocating attacks on not just Muslims, but Christians who don't subscribe to all the same ideas.

There were plenty of pagans and other religions around at the time of Christ. He concerned himself with Jews, and those who wanted to hear his message, not all those others. Seems that is the model we should follow.

First off, let me commend you for attempting to support an argument with substance. This is worlds better than what the previous poster was trying to do.. With that said, I don't see that these passages indicate that burning a Koran would be wrong, and there's arguably tacit support for such an action if you put the second quote in context...

I'm not sure the "do unto others" part applies, as burning a Koran is attacking an idea, a faith, an ideology, but not actually people in a physical sense. I don't see how burning a book is doing something "unto" another person. This line of reasoning also hinges on the assumption that Christians care what non-Christians do with a Bible.. We had actually discussed the "shake the dust from your feet" passage fairly recently on here. Metsfan took one of the surrounding lines from that passage out of context and was claiming that it showed Christianity supported murdering people if they didn't convert, and hence violence in Christianity is comparable to violence in Islam. Lol

Let's take a look at that passage:

5 These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, 6 but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 And proclaim as you go, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ 8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, [2] cast out demons. You received without paying; give without pay. 9 Acquire no gold nor silver nor copper for your belts, 10 no bag for your journey, nor two tunics [3] nor sandals nor a staff, for the laborer deserves his food. 11 And whatever town or village you enter, find out who is worthy in it and stay there until you depart. 12 As you enter the house, greet it. 13 And if the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it, but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. 14 And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. 15 Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town.

It goes on to describe violence they will encounter as a result of their preaching.

What the passage is discussing is how to approach people in foreign lands, specifically the secular Jews of the time. I'm not sure that this passage applies to how Christians should worship at home in modern times.

It is interesting that Mathew 8 states "cast out demons" which actually seems to support the burning of Korans if they are thought to be false scripture, which is something that (basically) everyone except Muslims agree on..

[Woodruff]

How about the "do unto others" part.

I'm not sure the "do unto others" part applies, as burning a Koran is attacking an idea, a faith, an ideology, but not actually people in a physical sense. I don't see how burning a book is doing something "unto" another person.

You may not be attacking them in a physical sense, but physical attacks are absolutely not the only form of legitimate "attack".

This line of reasoning also hinges on the assumption that Christians care what non-Christians do with a Bible.

I think most Christians would care very much if there were a Bible-burning.

[PLAYER57832]

How about the "do unto others" part.

I'm not sure the "do unto others" part applies, as burning a Koran is attacking an idea, a faith, an ideology, but not actually people in a physical sense. I don't see how burning a book is doing something "unto" another person.

You may not be attacking them in a physical sense, but physical attacks are absolutely not the only form of legitimate "attack".

This line of reasoning also hinges on the assumption that Christians care what non-Christians do with a Bible.

I think most Christians would care very much if there were a Bible-burning.

You hit the nail on both heads, Woodruff.
Per the Bible burning...
Some more than others. It is the symbolism that matters.
However, some Christians might actually be driven to violance by destruction of what they consider to be relics.. or other Christian items.

As for the other... sometimes the greatest violance is in "mere ideas". After all, ideas is all Christ himself put forward. Of course, to me, that means that fighting ideas with ideas is more powerful than trying to fight them with violance.

[GabonX]

How about the "do unto others" part.

I'm not sure the "do unto others" part applies, as burning a Koran is attacking an idea, a faith, an ideology, but not actually people in a physical sense. I don't see how burning a book is doing something "unto" another person.

You may not be attacking them in a physical sense, but physical attacks are absolutely not the only form of legitimate "attack".

I was under the impression that the whole point of Christianity was to combat wrongful practices and ideas. Assuming that Christians aren't also Muslims, an ideological struggle with Islam (as opposed to submission and acceptance) is inevitable.

This line of reasoning also hinges on the assumption that Christians care what non-Christians do with a Bible.

I think most Christians would care very much if there were a Bible-burning.

There was a Bible-burning.. A few of them actually

[AAFitz]

To call me a christian with no evidence of that being the case other than your own intellectual simplicity is both pathetic and bigoted.

You mean like where you call me an atheist?

Sorry I cant help, but there's a lot of copies of the bible out there for you to read. Good luck and sorry I couldn't be of more assistance. Perhaps I will one day be punished for refusing to shepherd sheep in obvious need.

The problem with people like you is that you project your own moral standards onto religion, and ration the tenants of religions sync with your own moral standards. Religion is not some inherently peaceful thing which was created solely to bring peace, love, and brotherhood to this world. Do you have any idea how many "God's of War" there have been throughout history?

What you've done here is projected your liberal late 20th century sensibilities onto a religion that's 2000 years old and delusionaly asserted that those things are in sync with one another, ie that Christians must respect what is perceived as Satanic literature from a false prophet because it might offend people if they don't...

You've asserting that burning a Koran somehow violates the entire message of Christianity and that "most agree" that this is the case. The problem is that you haven't shown any evidence that's the case.

You're a self aggrandizing moron that's failed on all counts, despite being given every opportunity to back up your claims.[/quote]

You seem pretty angry and keep posting; "fail" but its clear you are the one who has failed on all counts and have no idea of what you are talking about. There actually is no problem with my answers. You started with me and questioned my opinion and my statements. I simply gave my answers and my opinion of why I believe it to be correct. I never suggested it was or could be anything more than my opinion. It is you who are the self-aggrandizing moron if you think you asking somehow suggest that requires me to post any evidence or anything further of what you ask. Sure you asked me to educate you, but as I said, Im just here to laugh, not educate the uneducated. But again, Thanks for yet another opportunity!