Afghan Christian released; now he will die

[Sixpack]

The snakes have released him on 'formal' grounds,

.....obviously so he can be slaughtered in some back ally :roll:

[Happy Times]

Its their culture, you have to respect it.

[Dowly]

Why should I respect something, that forces people to a certain religion? And yet, to kill the ones who want to choose their religion.

:nope:

[Happy Times]

Why should I respect something, that forces people to a certain religion? And yet, to kill the ones who want to choose their religion.

:nope: You have to be tolerant, it would be ignorant to say our way of life is better than theirs. :rotfl:

[Skybird]

Okay, I respect that it is like that. Let's remove all financial funding and troop presence. That we respect they are like that does not mean we must actively helpt them to stay like that. Nor must we make them strong so that they help in exporting their primitive habits to our homes. Sence of realism? Yes. Accepting that it is like that? Yes. Tolerate and embrace it, for it's own sake? No.

News from our Dutch neighbours: http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/926

Quote: " Almost half the elected PvdA politicians in major Dutch cities where the PvdA is the largest party, such as Amsterdam and Rotterdam, are now Muslims. (...) The PvdA leader said their “political culture” is often incompatible with Dutch politics, because the immigrants “conduct politics according to the culture of their home countries, where clientelism is the norm"

[Sixpack]

Quote from article: "In many West European countries the parties of the Left are actively catering for the growing Muslim vote. The Left realizes that the Third World immigrants guarantee its power base because these immigrants moved to Western Europe attracted by the generous welfare benefits that the parties of the Left promote."

Utterly disgusting politics going on in f-d up W-Europe and Holland :hulk: But nobody can stop it !!! The lower classes rule. That's democracy at it finest, gentlemen. Allow every moron over 18 with a half brain, whose only interest is social welfare or monthly paycheck to pay off credit cards and mobile phone bills, to vote ! :roll:

I predict in 100 years time there will be very few places for a higher class Caucasian-European (let alone Arian :-j ) to live to his high standards.

I am thinking eventually ghettoes for them. The proces is already taking place in Dutch cities.

It defies the law of nature, I tell ya :know:

All this goes back to the bloody Germans who ruined Europe in the first half of the 20th century. That's the root of our misery. On the other hand, A European empire lead by fascist Germany wouldnt have hesitated to use an iron fist to keep Islam out :nope:

[Sixpack]

Okay, that was to a great extrent silly, yet entertaining I would hope :-j

The core of the problem is that everything has become interconnected:

Economy, politics, cultures, religions. It has become a gigantic globalized game of domino :roll:

http://www.bus2000.it/wallpaper/vario/images/domino.jpg

[Sixpack]

This is also symbolic:

http://www.fysikknett.no/hverdag/bilder/cardhouse.jpg

[SUBMAN1]

Its their culture, you have to respect it.

Hahahaha! That is the funniest thing I have read in a long while!

-S

[Type XXIII]

The snakes have released him on 'formal' grounds,

.....obviously so he can be slaughtered in some back ally :roll:

Well, he was about to be sentenced to death earlier. Would that have been better? You're always finding ways to criticize muslims.

[Sixpack]

I promise you I'll cheer for muslims as soon as they achieve something admirable, okay ? :P

[SUBMAN1]

I promise you I'll cheer for muslims as soon as they achieve something admirable, okay ? :P

I don't quite understand? That will never happen! Islam has brought down the entire Muslim society. You are talking about what used to be among the most powerful countries in the world until Islam brought them to their knees. Islam is a cult, not a religion. It in itself prevents admirable acts.

-S

PS. It is gods punishment to them that they be in the state that they are in.

[joea]

PS. It is gods punishment to them that they be in the state that they are in.

Oh this is one of the stupidist things I've read on this forum lately. :down:

Tell that to the kids who are suffering in these "states" and anyway, why is this guy suffering if he is a Christian and follows the same God (I assume) is punishing them?

[SUBMAN1]

PS. It is gods punishment to them that they be in the state that they are in.

Oh this is one of the stupidist things I've read on this forum lately. :down:

Tell that to the kids who are suffering in these "states" and anyway, why is this guy suffering if he is a Christian and follows the same God (I assume) is punishing them?

I am not talking about the guy. I am talking about Islam as a whole. I feel terrible for this guy that beleives what he beleives yet is going to be killed for it as soon as he walks out of that courthouse. That is just plain stupidity.

-S

PS. God blessed the west for a reason I think. Most likely to keep the world from complete Chaos.

[scandium]

PS. God blessed the west for a reason I think. Most likely to keep the world from complete Chaos.

Your putting on display the very same kind of "we can do no wrong because our religion is right" thinking that's being criticized in this thread. That's the problem with fundamentalism of any stripe: its tendency to allow one to rationalize any act as "good" if it can be said to be done in God's name.

How do youknow the christian God is the "correct" one? How do you even know God exists? And supposing he does, who are you to interpret his will or what he is blessing and why?

The West has only come to the fore pretty recently so I'd say its a little early to assume we're blessed let alone to try and divine any meaning from that; especially given that we weren't even the one's to invent christianity (which began in the Middle East).

[SUBMAN1]

PS. God blessed the west for a reason I think. Most likely to keep the world from complete Chaos.

Your putting on display the very same kind of "we can do no wrong because our religion is right" thinking that's being criticized in this thread. That's the problem with fundamentalism of any stripe: its tendency to allow one to rationalize any act as "good" if it can be said to be done in God's name.

How do youknow the christian God is the "correct" one? How do you even know God exists? And supposing he does, who are you to interpret his will or what he is blessing and why?

The West has only come to the fore pretty recently so I'd say its a little early to assume we're blessed let alone to try and divine any meaning from that; especially given that we weren't even the one's to invent christianity (which began in the Middle East).

Are you smoking something? Did you bother to read my posts? Please re-read my post before you accuse me of Your putting on display the very same kind of "we can do no wrong because our religion is right crap.

-S

PS. I don't care if he converted to Bhuddism. He should not be killed for it.

[scandium]

Read your posts and re-read them again. The comment I quoted, along with this one "PS. It is gods punishment to them that they be in the state that they are in", are exactly what I'm talking about.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Okay, I respect that it is like that. Let's remove all financial funding and troop presence. That we respect they are like that does not mean we must actively helpt them to stay like that. Nor must we make them strong so that they help in exporting their primitive habits to our homes. Sence of realism? Yes. Accepting that it is like that? Yes. Tolerate and embrace it, for it's own sake? No.

News from our Dutch neighbours: http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/926

Quote: " Almost half the elected PvdA politicians in major Dutch cities where the PvdA is the largest party, such as Amsterdam and Rotterdam, are now Muslims. (...) The PvdA leader said their “political culture” is often incompatible with Dutch politics, because the immigrants “conduct politics according to the culture of their home countries, where clientelism is the norm"

You're assuming having troops there is helping them (the extremists) permeate their own culture. IMO, Western presence (especially when 'helping' Muslims govern) is certainly the greatest threat to fundamentalists. There's a reason the fundamentalists try to blow us up, and it's not because we're helping them. Abandoning financial and military support to Afghanistan now would simply be abandoning it to the extremists. No matter how bad you want to build a fence around every Islamic country and not let westerners in or Muslims out, it ain't gonna happen...

Oh, and as you may have noticed I don't follow what seems to be the common wisdom on this board that every Muslim is an extremist.

[Skybird]

Quote from article: "In many West European countries the parties of the Left are actively catering for the growing Muslim vote. The Left realizes that the Third World immigrants guarantee its power base because these immigrants moved to Western Europe attracted by the generous welfare benefits that the parties of the Left promote."

Utterly disgusting politics going on in f-d up W-Europe and Holland :hulk: But nobody can stop it !!! The lower classes rule. That's democracy at it finest, gentlemen. Allow every moron over 18 with a half brain, whose only interest is social welfare or monthly paycheck to pay off credit cards and mobile phone bills, to vote ! :roll:

I predict in 100 years time there will be very few places for a higher class Caucasian-European (let alone Arian :-j ) to live to his high standards.

I am thinking eventually ghettoes for them. The proces is already taking place in Dutch cities.

It defies the law of nature, I tell ya :know:

All this goes back to the bloody Germans who ruined Europe in the first half of the 20th century. That's the root of our misery. On the other hand, A European empire lead by fascist Germany wouldnt have hesitated to use an iron fist to keep Islam out :nope:

Not so sure. Hitler admired the Muslims, for their unscrupulousness to use whatever force or tool is needed to take over control in foeign cultures. Islam and fascism is very close to each other, the beylong to the same kind of social theories and poltiical systems. I could easily imagine a Nazi Germany cooperating with Islam from a position of thinking nthat it is oin control of that partnership, like the EU today think it is on control concerning the turkey question.

another "What if?" scenario: who would habe been the stronger faction in such a relationship: the Nazis, or Islam?

that Europe acts weak in regard to islam is becasue the Nazis messed up Europe 70 years ago, I do not fully agree to. Remember that Europe had recovered from that, it gained a leveol of freedom and peace and material welath that tops everything mankind has ever seen in millenias before, in any part of the world. But still - or because of that? - it falls to an aggressive attempt to take it over from outside.

In sports you loose your abilities if you do not train, or do not compete. In psychology, you unlearnb, if you do not prqactice, and do not keep your trust in what had been püroven by experience before, if that experience is not challenged every couple of times and then can proove that it still is valid. We have had 60years of peacfe in europe - unique in European history. Two generations had not been haunted by war. And this has crippled our mental attidue or ability of resist6ence, of fighting, in a wide sense of the word. Our wealth made us weak, lulled our reason, made our muscles soft and untrained. now that we are challenged by Islam, me learn that we are not in shape and lack the fitness to do the sprints and lack the breath to compete in the endurance race. and we are old. Ever saw a 50 year old competing at the Olympics?

[SUBMAN1]

Read your posts and re-read them again. The comment I quoted, along with this one "PS. It is gods punishment to them that they be in the state that they are in", are exactly what I'm talking about.

The problem is - you assume too much.

The second problem is, how do you think we are not blessed when country's like the US are the richest the world have 'ever' seen? Call it like you want it but no country in history has displayed as much wealth as the US - ever! Any history text book can show you this. From the cities to the highways to the massive middle class (which is dwindling I think) - the wealth is immeasurable.

Next inaccuracy - the West, namely the English, Spanish, French... have dominated the world for exactly how long? How many years do you want to go back and still see these same countries dominating the world? Want to add the US in there later on? This is no short time like you describe - so where did this idea come from exactly?

Last - show me a Muslim country that isn't 'Third World'. I personally can't name even one.

No one on this Earth can do no wrong. I am not quite sure where you get this idea from either which is why this sounds more like an accusation directed at me that is baseless and without fact. Matter of fact, your whole post is patronizing, which is why I am asking what it is exactly you are smoking?

-S

[Skybird]

I wonder what "blessings" have to do with history.

The wealth of america and europe is man-made, based on historical and often painful and brutal evolutions the West went through and that others have not been subject to - that's why they lack behind. The geographie of europe helped in forming a climate of competition between many different people in a relatively small room. I consider this to be one of the major drives behind the raising of education, science, philosophy, technology, theology, medicine, etc. now that the new media has oushed us into the age of the global village, this factor is no more that important as before, and is equalized. Consequently, european tradition as the motor of innovation and invention looses it's lead and importance.

I prefer to keep religion and history as separate like religion and politics. Although, of course, a great deal of history is dealing with and focussed on religion.

[SUBMAN1]

I wonder what "blessings" have to do with history.

The wealth of america and europe is man-made, based on historical and often painful and brutal evolutions the West went through and that others have not been subject to - that's why they lack behind. The geographie of europe helped in forming a climate of competition between many different people in a relatively small room. I consider this to be one of the major drives behind the raising of education, science, philosophy, technology, theology, medicine, etc. now that the new media has oushed us into the age of the global village, this factor is no more that important as before, and is equalized. Consequently, european tradition as the motor of innovation and invention looses it's lead and importance.

I prefer to keep religion and history as separate like religion and politics. Although, of course, a great deal of history is dealing with and focussed on religion.

Exactly - it is hard to seperate the two since a lot of what drives past cultures is religion. I do fear for our future though in that the drive for innovation and invention is definitely on the decline. I'd say patent law is one of the root causes of this decline with the forever patants being applied so liberally these days - even to the very people that didn't even invent the idea in the first place. What happened to public domain to spur on new invention and innovation?

Write me a book on the subject Skybird! :)

-S

[TLAM Strike]

Last - show me a Muslim country that isn't 'Third World'. I personally can't name even one. Techinicly as of now none of them could be considered 1st or 2nd world countries simply because they are not allied (really allied, not we let you fly over our country) with the west or east.

[Wim Libaers]

that Europe acts weak in regard to islam is becasue the Nazis messed up Europe 70 years ago, I do not fully agree to. Remember that Europe had recovered from that, it gained a leveol of freedom and peace and material welath that tops everything mankind has ever seen in millenias before, in any part of the world. But still - or because of that? - it falls to an aggressive attempt to take it over from outside.



The closest connection to the Nazi's that I can see, is that almost everyone who tries to have an open discussion about these problems, is silenced by left-wing media with the accusation that he is a racist, fascist, Nazi,...

[scandium]

Read your posts and re-read them again. The comment I quoted, along with this one "PS. It is gods punishment to them that they be in the state that they are in", are exactly what I'm talking about.

The problem is - you assume too much.

The second problem is, how do you think we are not blessed when country's like the US are the richest the world have 'ever' seen? Call it like you want it but no country in history has displayed as much wealth as the US - ever! Any history text book can show you this. From the cities to the highways to the massive middle class (which is dwindling I think) - the wealth is immeasurable.

Next inaccuracy - the West, namely the English, Spanish, French... have dominated the world for exactly how long? How many years do you want to go back and still see these same countries dominating the world? Want to add the US in there later on? This is no short time like you describe - so where did this idea come from exactly?

Last - show me a Muslim country that isn't 'Third World'. I personally can't name even one.

-S

Interesting. So because the West is wealthy it must be blessed by God? I didn't realized he moonlighted as an economist. Since you bring up the US and its wealth, let's examine closer how it came upon it:

First we have the discovery of the "New World" which wasn't really all that new. In fact, the North American continent had existed for millenia before we "discovered" it and had been habited for centuries by tribes of indigenous people. I don't see too many of these original Americans (or Native Americans) being all that "wealthy" today. I'm sure that was God's will that we subjugate them and in fact commit genocide by wiping one race of these native peoples out completely. God's will is indeed mysterious.

Then there were the races we exploited to build our nations on the backs of in the "New World". In the US, that would be the blacks who were enslaved and carted off to the New World in chains to pick cotton for our pioneering industrialists, and in Canada the Chinese whose backs the Canadian Pacific railway was built upon (costing many of them their lives). Interesting how God blesses his chosen people. Though I didn't realize that aside from being an economist he was also a racist who blessed all this wealth that w've created through our exploitation of so many races along the way.

In terms of how long the English, Spanish, and French have "dominated" the world (I didn't know God was into domination either, though we've already established that by your reasoning he's into bondage [slavery] and the two do often go hand in hand... interesting) the answer would be no more than several centuries. Much of which was spent warring with each other. The American civil war, where his "blessed" killed each other in droves, fits with this though as well I suppose. I hadn't realized that was part of some divine plan either. Though in terms of the history of mankind this period of "domination" is but a mere pinprick in history.

Lastly, its been fun but when it comes down to it "God's will" as you seem to see it, makes no sense. But that's the whole problem with trying to simplify complex historical events into narrow religious preconception where everything is based on divine determinism.

[Ducimus]

Why should I respect something, that forces people to a certain religion? And yet, to kill the ones who want to choose their religion.

:nope:


The irony in this is that Christianity used to do just that. I think George Carlin said it best:

if you read your history you know that god is one of the leading causes of death and has been for thousands of years. Hindus, Moslems, Christians, Jews, all taking turns killing one another, because god told them it was a good idea. The sword of god, the blood of the lamb, Vengeance is mine, onward Christian soldiers. Millions of dead people. All because they gave the wrong answer to the god Question:

Do you believe in god?

No.

BAM! Dead.

How about you? Do you believe in god?

Yes."

Do you believe in MY god?

No.

BAM! Dead!

My god has a bigger dick than your god. That's all it is!

For thousands of years all the bloodiest and most brutal wars have been based on religious hatred.

To sum, I think the biggest difference, the most important difference between the Muslim and Christian dogma is that the former hasn't left the 18th century, the latter has abandoned it's practices that have islamic counterparts ages ago. (IE burning at the stake, trial by ordeal, inquisition , punishment of heretics, etc etc).

[The Avon Lady]

To sum, I think the biggest difference, the most important difference between the Muslim and Christian dogma is that the former hasn't left the 18th century, the latter has abandoned it's practices that have islamic counterparts ages ago. (IE burning at the stake, trial by ordeal, inquisition , punishment of heretics, etc etc).
First of all, why do you mention the 18th century vis-a-vis Islam? You should be referring to the 7th century.

Second of all, where was "burning at the stake, trial by ordeal, inquisition , punishment of heretics, etc., etc.", commanded by Jesus to Christians? What are the legal theological sources in Christianity for all those etcetera etceteras that you mentioned?

There is a pattern here.

[Type XXIII]

Second of all, where was "burning at the stake, trial by ordeal, inquisition , punishment of heretics, etc., etc.", commanded by Jesus to Christians? What are the legal theological sources in Christianity for all those etcetera etceteras that you mentioned?

There is a pattern here.

Those actions were justified with texts from the old testament and papal decrees.

Similar to how some parts of Sharia law are based on Hadith, analogies and religious councils.

A pattern indeed.

[The Avon Lady]

Second of all, where was "burning at the stake, trial by ordeal, inquisition , punishment of heretics, etc., etc.", commanded by Jesus to Christians? What are the legal theological sources in Christianity for all those etcetera etceteras that you mentioned?

There is a pattern here.
Those actions were justified with texts from the old testament and papal decrees.

Similar to how some parts of Sharia law are based on Hadith, analogies and religious councils.

A pattern indeed.
I was very specific when I asked about what Jesus commanded?

There are 100s of commandments in the Torah, yet Christianity has never espoused abiding by them. How did the Church decide which to chose? Was there a Commandment of the Month Club?

There there is no punishment of burning at the stake in the Torah. Capital punishment by "Sreifa" - fire - is through a gruesome process of pouring molten lead down the convicted's throat. But let's assume the Church were just ignorant on this point and took the Torah literally.

Where is trial by ordeal suggested in the Torah? There is no such thing.

Where is inquisition and its tortures suggested in the Torah? Again, there is no such thing.

Most of these things were pure concoctions, with no foundation in the origins of either Jewish or Christian theological law.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Type XXIII]

I was very specific when I asked about what Jesus commanded?

There are 100s of commandments in the Torah, yet Christianity has never espoused abiding by them. How did the Church decide which to chose? Was there a Commandment of the Month Club?

There there is no punishment of burning at the stake in the Torah. Capital punishment by "Sreifa" - fire - is through a gruesome process of pouring molten lead down the convicted's throat. But let's assume the Church were just ignorant on this point and took the Torah literally.

Where is trial by ordeal suggested in the Torah? There is no such thing.

Where is inquisition and its tortures suggested in the Torah? Again, there is no such thing.

Most of these things were pure concoctions, with no foundation in the origins of either Jewish or Christian theological law.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Jesus never commanded that, what I was pointing out is that Christianity, sadly, doesn't always follow the intentions of Jesus.

And we can make humour out of the Christian church' attitude towards the commandments of the old testament. It appears there has always been commandments that have been followed, and others that have been ignored. Sometimes there has been logic in the selection, other times not.

The Christian church has always followed more (and less) rules than those stated in the Bible. And those things mentioned had foundation in Christian theological law, as a pope's word was, and still is, considered, at least in the Catholic church, as law.

[The Avon Lady]

I was very specific when I asked about what Jesus commanded?

There are 100s of commandments in the Torah, yet Christianity has never espoused abiding by them. How did the Church decide which to chose? Was there a Commandment of the Month Club?

There there is no punishment of burning at the stake in the Torah. Capital punishment by "Sreifa" - fire - is through a gruesome process of pouring molten lead down the convicted's throat. But let's assume the Church were just ignorant on this point and took the Torah literally.

Where is trial by ordeal suggested in the Torah? There is no such thing.

Where is inquisition and its tortures suggested in the Torah? Again, there is no such thing.

Most of these things were pure concoctions, with no foundation in the origins of either Jewish or Christian theological law.

Correct me if I'm wrong.
Jesus never commanded that, what I was pointing out is that Christianity, sadly, doesn't always follow the intentions of Jesus.
That was my point. There is no pattern in the Church's history in these points we're discussing. However, this is a pattern with regards to Islam's commandments and Muslim's actions today.
And we can make humour out of the Christian church' attitude towards the commandments of the old testament. It appears there has always been commandments that have been followed, and others that have been ignored. Sometimes there has been logic in the selection, other times not.
Once again, no pattern here. Precisely my point.
The Christian church has always followed more (and less) rules than those stated in the Bible.
As an observant Jew, I can tell you that Christianity does not and never has hsitorically accepted or practiced the vast majority of Torah commandments.
And those things mentioned had foundation in Christian theological law, as a pope's word was, and still is, considered, at least in the Catholic church, as law.
As god's irrevocable word or as the words of human Popes and church leaders that can legally be superceded by future church leaders? Again, big difference here between Christianity and Islam.

[Vinay]

Hindus, Moslems, Christians, Jews, all taking turns killing one another, because god told them it was a good idea.

Hindus killing whom? Which Hindu god told it is a good idea? Where is Christian's killing people in the name of religion? Jews killing people in the name of Religion?

And the news:
Afghan Christian Granted Asylum in Italy
link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060329/ap_on_re_as/afghan_christian_convert;_ylt=Apk8ytrDtmKeZY1Y2mk8 PVdn.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NTMzazIyBHNlYwMxNjk2)

[Type XXIII]

There is a similarity. Christian law was only partly based on the Bible. Muslim law is only partly based on the Qu'ran. Contemporary religious leaders have their influence in both religion.

And I included the paranthesis (and less) exactly because most laws never have been followed.

And as for the pope's word, well, by papal decree, the Pope is infallible. The question about the divinity of the pope's word is open for speculation.

However, Christian law is no longer practised (possible exception: the Vatican State), while Sharia is. That is the major problem. Don't get me wrong, parts of Sharia are sensible and just, and some parts are in conflict with western values, but still acceptable, but some parts are neither sensible, nor just, nor acceptable.

[Konovalov]

Hindus killing whom?

As an Australian citizen and as a person who has spent quite a few years now studying political violence the most foremost act that springs to mind was the horrible bunring to death of an Aussie Christian missionary in his car along with his two sons.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/australia/story/0,,1488484,00.html

And from the Indian Express:



The Indian Express, Bhubaneswar, Jan 23, 1999

Missionary, sons set afire
by Srimoy Kar & Bijay Chaki
BHUBANESWAR, Jan 23: The campaign against Christians, so far largely limited to Gujarat, took an ominous turn with an Australian missionary and his two sons being torched to death in Keonjhar district early this morning.

Based in Baripada since 1965, Graham Stewart Staines, 58, ran a leprosy hospital and was the secretary and treasurer of the Evangelical Missionaries Society in Mayurbhanj. Staines was sleeping in his jeep with his two sons, nine-year-old Philip and seven-year-old Timothy, when a group of 100 people allegedly poured petrol and set the vehicle ablaze. The incident occurred in Manoharpur under the Anandpur police station.

According to reports from Baripada, another Australian, Gilbert Venge, and a lecturer, Rajendra Swain, who accompanied Steins to Manoharpur, escaped as they were sleeping inside the village church. The attackers spared the church.

Subhas Chouhan, convenor of the state unit of Hindu Jagaran Samukhya, alleged that Staines was killed because he was ``proselytising.'' Sayingthat people may have killed him in a ``fit of rage,'' Chouhan said that the issue should not be communalised.

Janata Dal president Ashok Das has blamed the Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad for the incident. He also criticised prime minister A B Vajpayee for giving a call for a national debate on conversions.

The incident has sent shockwaves through the Government and the Congress party. While no official word came from either, both the Home Ministry and the Congress high command are keeping a close tab.

Home Ministry sources said a report from the Orissa Government would be sought. Vajpayee has also been alerted about the incident. Meanwhile, Australian High Commission officials told The Indian Express in New Delhi that they were still awaiting details. A consular official is planning to fly to Calcutta en route to Orissa tomorrow while the High Commissioner has spoken to Home Secretary B P Singh about the incident.

This is the second incident within the last two months when Christianshave been killed in Orissa. Two undertrial prisoners, both Christian, were dragged out from prison by a tribal mob and burnt to death in front of the police at R. Udaygiri on December 8. Besides, 111 houses belonging to the community were also burnt to ashes. Sources said some villagers tried to prevent the mob from setting Staines's jeep ablaze but were chased away. It was regular for Staines to spend the night in the jeep whenever he was on tour, sources said. Staines, described by local residents as ``popular and affable'' was well known for his charity work. He had gone to Monaharpur yesterday afternoon to attend a camp organised by the local church. He is survived by his wife Glades and daughter Easter, 13, both of whom were at Baripada.

Glades said she was ``greatly shocked but not angry.'' She is believed to have told the Australian High Commission that she and her daughter ``are not stranded in Baripada and the locals are sympathetic.'' The funeral is scheduled for tomorrow.

Prayer halls attacked

A group of about 25 persons attacked two prayer halls in tribal-dominated Doswada village under Songadh rural police station in Surat on Friday evening.

According to the police, the miscreants destroyed furniture, musical instruments and walls of the prayer halls managed by the governing bodies of the Indian National Gospel Churches Federation and Good News Ministries Churches of Northern India for the last one decade.

[The Avon Lady]

There is a similarity. Christian law was only partly based on the Bible.
OK.
Muslim law is only partly based on the Qu'ran.
Please prove your point.
Contemporary religious leaders have their influence in both religion.
I contend that Christianities leader are much more flexible because of the fact that there is very limited amounts of god's word compared to Judaism and Islam.

On the other hand, Islamic leaders are doing nothing more than preaching original Quranic based Islam when referring to Jihad, Sha'aria, Dhimmitude, infidels and dawa.
And I included the paranthesis (and less) exactly because most laws never have been followed.
Which was my point. Can you say the same about Islamic Sheiks and Imams?
And as for the pope's word, well, by papal decree, the Pope is infallible. The question about the divinity of the pope's word is open for speculation.

However, Christian law is no longer practised (possible exception: the Vatican State), while Sharia is. That is the major problem. Don't get me wrong, parts of Sharia are sensible and just, and some parts are in conflict with western values, but still acceptable, but some parts are neither sensible, nor just, nor acceptable.
OK.

[The Avon Lady]

Hindus killing whom?

As an Australian citizen and as a person who has spent quite a few years now studying political violence the most foremost act that springs to mind was the horrible bunring to death of an Aussie Christian missionary in his car along with his two sons.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/australia/story/0,,1488484,00.html

And from the Indian Express:

The Indian Express, Bhubaneswar, Jan 23, 1999

Missionary, sons set afire

And you think this exceptional incident is comparable to Islam's explicite laws regarding apostate Muslims?

Smoke and mirrors. :shifty:

[Konovalov]

Hindus killing whom?

As an Australian citizen and as a person who has spent quite a few years now studying political violence the most foremost act that springs to mind was the horrible bunring to death of an Aussie Christian missionary in his car along with his two sons.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/australia/story/0,,1488484,00.html

And from the Indian Express:

The Indian Express, Bhubaneswar, Jan 23, 1999

Missionary, sons set afire

And you think this exceptional incident is comparable to Islam's explicite laws regarding apostate Muslims?

Smoke and mirrors. :shifty:

No I didn't say that and wasn't trying to make such a point at all. It is just but one example of religous tension and conflict within India that exists between Hindu, Christian, Seihk, and Muslim. That is all.

[Type XXIII]

Muslim law is only partly based on the Qu'ran.

Please prove your point.

Sharia laws, or fiqh laws actually, (since sharia = the divine laws set by Allah, fiqh = the scholars' opinion of what sharia is) is based on the Qu'ran, Hadith, analogies, and the scholars' consensus.

Go ask Skybird if you don't believe me.

However, a difference between Islamic and Christian law is that the Qur'an is always right in Islam, while the Bible isn't in Christianity.

[Skybird]

Sharia is meant as a tool that helps man to keep up the faith, as revealed and explained in the Qu'ran, in the correct manner. Where Chrstian theology focusses on believing in the right thing (the object of believing), Islam focusses on the right manner of believing (the act of believing itself). Islam is highly ignorrant to the many changes and the fact that there has been several very different versions of the Quran, highly influenced not by allah, put political opportunism, instead it claims that there always has been one version only, and that it has been like that from the very beginning; thus opportunism is a major strategy of actingg of Islam, especially when dealing with infidel factions. It bypasses most of the historical facts we know about it's emergence. Since Islam says there is only one Quran and that Quran is the reveleation of God'S will, it is hostile to the western idea of what theology is: where in the west a tradition developed that included the critical examination of the basis if faith, and sometimes readjusting both the focus of faith, and the correct way how to keep up that faith, Islam got deathlocked in a "theology" that in form of circular argument is less depending on "reason", and more on rite and cult and immitating repitition: it allows theological debates on Islam and Quaran only to take place in a way and according to rules that make sure that in the end the validity of the quran as it is is guaranteed. Simplified: western tradition learned to ask: "Could this belief be true? What may be wrong?" Muslims ask: "Why is it that Quran is true?", excluding that way all outcomes that indicate that it may not be right at all. Different conclusions are ruled out from the beginning. Type XXIII's reference to the scholar's consensus is misleading, because these scholar's consensus has been streamlined since long and is formed by a canon of uniformed opinions that do not allow different views. Of course, during history there has been people trying to establish other thelogical traditions, and others forms of legislative interpretations. The huge majority of such biographies ended tragic (death, or prison). Islam does not tolerate other ways than it's own.

Recommended reading:
Tilman Nagel, 1994: Geschichte der islamischen Theologie
Tilman Nagel 1981: Staat und Glaubensgemeinschaft im Islam, 1+2

[Ducimus]

My point was Religion in general (regardless of major denomination) is equally guilty of various traviesties that many find appualing. In other words, historically speaking christianty (and its many offsets) is no better then islam. The major difference between the two, is one has advanced along enough to abandon its violent means, and the other has not. Arugably that is all the difference needed for the jedochristian devoted to say , "im better then you" i suppose. :roll:

Those violent means dont have to be the direct word of Jesus, they were done regardless via interpretation of "the will of god". Just like Muslims still do today. Chrisitans have just redirected their ferver to non violent means is all, but that doesnt make their ferver any less in degree. Some of the christian hate groups out there are particuarlly entertaining. :roll:

At any rate, thats my 2 cents, and im done. Religion in general is, not my cup of tea.

[Skybird]

In other words, historically speaking christianty (and its many offsets) is no better then islam.

Not true. Historically, Muslims factions have waged more wars amongst themsleves, and have waged more wars against people of different faiths, then Christian factions. And while the church acted with quite some cruelty towards heretics and threats to it's power and politcial ambitions during the dark age, Muslim porthodoxy did the same, but was more successful in it's attempt to wipe out different views on Allah, Quran, religion in general, legislative in special. What you say is the mainstream today: to give the wrong impression that Chrstian West has no reason or right not to see anything different (Islam in this case) as of equal value to itself. Chrstianity has had it'S violant chpaters, for sure. But Islam has had significantly more of that. and part of the Chrstian violance was caused by the previous ongoing attcks of Islam against Chrstianity. The first attacked the latter, not the other way around.

The major difference between the two, is one has advanced along enough to abandon its violent means, and the other has not.

By tendency that is right. However, I want to point out that statistically the Western "democracies" of the past 110 years have caused as much bloodshed and loss of life than all tyrannies and dicatorships and both world wars together during that timeframe. The latter do the killing themselves. The first let the killing happen for the sake of their own interests. "Die Staaten sind die kältesten aller Ungeheur." And that is true for ALL states.

[TteFAboB]

Chrisitans have just redirected their ferver to non violent means is all, but that doesnt make their ferver any less in degree. Some of the christian hate groups out there are particuarlly entertaining.

Agreed, like the "Catholic Women for Pro-Choice".

However, that was a joke, and an opportunity to remember how many religious groups and people are nothing more than "Churchians" in the sense they are structured and operate as a political faction - most often than not atheist - instead of anything that closely resembles a religion, except in facade, or has any foundation to be considered as such.

Just in case you don't know absolutely nothing about Catholicism other than the Holy Inquisition and the Pope-Mobile, the Didaqué from year 90-100 states (poorly translated, don't have the original at hand): "Thou shall not kill children by abortion, nor born children"; "The path to death is the murder of children". This is enough to disqualify any Catholic group of Women for abortion as Catholics, they can call themselves anything, except Catholics, but it doesn't end there, the Canon from 1398 adds: "The provoker of abortion, following the effect, incurs excommunication latae sententiae", that is "ipso facto commissi delicti".

So, there's no way, no possible twist, for Catholic Women to be pro-abortion. Pro-abortion women can be anything, except Catholic, and a few other things, such as good mothers and all, anyway, my point is, not only is such a group un-catholic, but also anti-catholic, the name of an entity cannot alter its essense.

I can denominate Skybird to be a sheep, but if he's a wolf, even in a sheep's skin, he's still a wolf.

If there's anything equal in all religions, it's the possibility of finding decent good men (and women, but not like those from the aforementioned group) somewhere in there, who have nothing to do with transvestity.

In this regard, the only difference between Christianity and Islam in the modern world is that good fine Muslims can live outside the Muslim world next to Christians, however, good fine Christians cannot live in the Muslim world next to Muslims.

And that's where Islam has to reform, mainstream Islam should be the Islam of Konovalov, to name something, and not the ridiculous Islam of Ahmedinejadingdong or the totalitarian-FET Islam of the Ayatolah('s).

There are, and were, and will be, many Muslims who tried to transform and drop the whole political connection of Islam, but the establishment is not willing to loose their grip, they desperatly hold to the past against the winds of modernity, contorting and bending like a submarine that's going too deep, because if their followers ever get the freedom to understand the only dhimmis that exist are their own Immans and Ayatolahs who hijacked their religion and trapped it into a glove, from where their hands can punch and use it to grasp political power, the inevitable would happen, Islam as we know it would fall, Muslims would not live hypnotized and fall for the most basic dirty tricks anymore, played by those who they believe to be their spiritual guides.

That, of course, is not necessarily good for the rest of the world. A freshly blossoning Islam may be good to convert the rest of the ancient Muslims but it would also probably be much more attractive to anybody else than corrupt Churches who allow their names to be used in pro-abortion causes and have been demoralized, not to mention almost completely cleaned of all religious color, scent and texture they once (may have) had, all of which doesn't help them against people who believe all religions are equal in the sense they are all worthless.

[Vinay]

As an Australian citizen and as a person who has spent quite a few years now studying political violence the most foremost act that springs to mind was the horrible bunring to death of an Aussie Christian missionary in his car along with his two sons.

This is not an act of Hinduism. No Hindu god has ever said about killing kafirs. There is no mention of killing innocents by Hindu gods. Regarding the above incident is a law and order problem. It has nothing to do with religion. Do you know that the person who committed this henious crime is punished by the Supreme court of India. I think it is a deadth sentence.

In the name of god no religion except Islam is killing Kuffs (Kafirs). So you cannot blame the religion for the problem if the religious texts did not create such problems.

[jasondef]

A couple of points I think need to be made here.

It is my observation that if the Christian leadership had their way here in America, they wouldn't be much better than the Taliban! The Christian Right is constantly trying to tell Americans what to read, what to say, what to teach, what music to listen to, what to think, what sexual preference you should have, how you should dress,etc, etc, etc, the list goes on. Not only do they I hear them tell these things over and over again every time I try to turn around, they also try to make it the law as much as they can. They'd have a strict dress code (women covered head to toe etc) a banned book list, what disciplines of science the schools can teach, and so forth. The fact that it is not this way is because we have a constitution that decrees a separation of church and state, and freeedom of religion.

The U.S. is not a wealthy, rich, powerful nation because it is mostly Christian. The majority of the countries in the world are third world countries, and so many of those are predominantly Christian.

It is not the the Muslim religion that is trying to kill this Afghan christian, rather it is the government of Afghanistan that is trying to kill this man. I know lots of Muslim people where I live here in Seattle, and they are not preaching to kill this man or kill Christians because their religion tells them to do so. Do not confuse the intolerant government of Afghanistan with the Muslim religion.

I don't agree with Afghanistan's policy, nor do I agree with Taliban, Al-Quada, or any other of the multitude of extremists that have sprung up in the name of Islam. These are groups that have hi-jacked a peaceful religion and twisted it to their own purposes. You'll find that the masses of people all over the world, regardless of religion, from the peasantry of Afghanistan and the Middle-East to the middle class Christians in America, are basically the same everywhere. They just want a peaceful life with family and friends, and get sick and tired of their "leaders" butting into their lives by starting wars and killing loved ones.

[The Avon Lady]

It is not the the Muslim religion that is trying to kill this Afghan christian, rather it is the government of Afghanistan that is trying to kill this man. I know lots of Muslim people where I live here in Seattle, and they are not preaching to kill this man or kill Christians because their religion tells them to do so. Do not confuse the intolerant government of Afghanistan with the Muslim religion.
It is you who is very confused here.

Part of Afghanistan's consitution proclaim governing is to abide by Sha'aria law. That's Islamic law.

And it was the Afghan government that allowed Rahman to wiggle free. But Afganistan's religious leaders, not the government were seething with the decision:

On Monday, hundreds of clerics, students and others chanting "Death to Christians!" marched through the northern Afghan city of Mazar-e-Sharif to protest the court decision Sunday to dismiss the case. Several Muslim clerics threatened to incite Afghans to kill Rahman if he is freed, saying that he is clearly guilty of apostasy and deserves to die.

"Abdul Rahman must be killed. Islam demands it," said senior Cleric Faiez Mohammed, from the nearby northern city of Kunduz. "The Christian foreigners occupying Afghanistan are attacking our religion."
(Source: this AP news article (http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/03/28/ap2626430.html))

Also see Tiny Minority of Extremists Rallies Against Christian Convert in Afghanistan (http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/010757.php).

See this AP story (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/03/23/afghan.christian.ap/index.html), where Said Mirhossain Nasri, senior cleric at Hossainia Mosque, one of the largest Shiite mosques in Kabul, says:

"If he is allowed to live in the West, then others will claim to be Christian so they can, too. We must set an example...He must be hanged"

And in this AP article (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1139395663359&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull), we have other senior clerics stating:

"He is not crazy. He went in front of the media and confessed to being a Christian," said Hamidullah, chief cleric at Haji Yacob Mosque.

"The government is scared of the international community. But the people will kill him if he is freed."

"He is not mad. The government is playing games. The people will not be fooled," said Abdul Raoulf, cleric at Herati Mosque. "This is humiliating for Islam. ... Cut off his head."

But the best in this article is the last paragraph:

Raoulf is considered a moderate cleric in Afghanistan. He was jailed three times for criticizing the Taliban's policies before the hard-line regime was ousted by US-led forces in 2001.

But the bottom line is ask your friends how they explain away or chose to ignore Mohamed's own words:

baddala deenahu faqtuhu

"if somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him"
- Bukhari, vol. 4, bk. 52, no. 260

Recommeded reading: Defining the "moderate Muslim" (http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/010776.php).

Jasondef, here are some questions (http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/010774.php) to ask your friends. Let us know how they respond.

[Vinay]

I don't agree with Afghanistan's policy, nor do I agree with Taliban, Al-Quada, or any other of the multitude of extremists that have sprung up in the name of Islam. These are groups that have hi-jacked a peaceful religion and twisted it to their own purposes.

It is totally wrong to blame the Afghanistan government. Because this will happen in any country where the law is based on the Sharia. According to Sharia any one who converts from Islam need to be eliminated since he did not believe in Allah. This is what has happened. The Afghan government even though under tremendous pressure to execute the person has released him.

I know lots of Muslim people where I live here in Seattle, and they are not preaching to kill this man or kill Christians because their religion tells them to do so.

Make the U.S law based on Sharia and you will be compelled to either convert to Islam or you have to run from the U.S. What we are seeing is the extremist face of Islam. It all depends on the people. If they are surrounded by majority who did not believe in Allah, they will not have any problem. In Islamic nations which is under the tight control of the Islamic preachers then Islam becomes as said in the Quran.

[Konovalov]

This is not an act of Hinduism. No Hindu god has ever said about killing kafirs. There is no mention of killing innocents by Hindu gods. Regarding the above incident is a law and order problem. It has nothing to do with religion. Do you know that the person who committed this henious crime is punished by the Supreme court of India. I think it is a deadth sentence.

In the name of god no religion except Islam is killing Kuffs (Kafirs). So you cannot blame the religion for the problem if the religious texts did not create such problems.

Vinay,

I agree with you that this is not an act of Hinduism per se. But please to say that this this was simply a law and order problem appears like nothing short of spin to me. This incident was an act of premeditated violence which had religion at the core as the motivating factor. Ravindra Pal (alias Dara Singh) and others in that group which brutally murdered a father and his two young children, were members of Sangh Parivar, an extreme fanatical Hindu group which has a strong presence in much of Gujarat and Uttar provinces. The group Sangh Parivar, and specifically Ravindra Pal believed that Graham Staines and his family had been forcibly converting poor Hindus to Christianity and this was constituted as a fundamental threat to his religion. Again this was not a law and order issue. Such a statement would have been fine if the motive was theft or rape, but the facts in the case were that this was an act of murder because one persons religion felt under threat by anothers. Religious violence does not require strict and specific theological direction. Again, to say that this act had nothing to do with eligion is patently false.

Yes, a death sentenced was handed down against Ravindra Pal (Dara Singh), the ringleader, back in 2003 but mid last year this sentence was reduced to life imprisonment. And If I recall correctly 10 or 11 others who had been sentenced to life were then pardoned and set free! :o

[The Avon Lady]

This is not an act of Hinduism. No Hindu god has ever said about killing kafirs. There is no mention of killing innocents by Hindu gods. Regarding the above incident is a law and order problem. It has nothing to do with religion. Do you know that the person who committed this henious crime is punished by the Supreme court of India. I think it is a deadth sentence.

In the name of god no religion except Islam is killing Kuffs (Kafirs). So you cannot blame the religion for the problem if the religious texts did not create such problems.

Vinay,

I agree with you that this is not an act of Hinduism per se. But please to say that this this was simply a law and order problem appears like nothing short of spin to me. This incident was an act of premeditated violence which had religion at the core as the motivating factor. Ravindra Pal (alias Dara Singh) and others in that group which brutally murdered a father and his two young children, were members of Sangh Parivar, an extreme fanatical Hindu group which has a strong presence in much of Gujarat and Uttar provinces. The group Sangh Parivar, and specifically Ravindra Pal believed that Graham Staines and his family had been forcibly converting poor Hindus to Christianity and this was constituted as a fundamental threat to his religion. Again this was not a law and order issue. Such a statement would have been fine if the motive was theft or rape, but the facts in the case were that this was an act of murder because one persons religion felt under threat by anothers. Religious violence does not require strict and specific theological direction. Again, to say that this act had nothing to do with eligion is patently false.

Yes, a death sentenced was handed down against Ravindra Pal (Dara Singh), the ringleader, back in 2003 but mid last year this sentence was reduced to life imprisonment. And If I recall correctly 10 or 11 others who had been sentenced to life were then pardoned and set free! :o
You're right.

Now go back to Vinay's opening words: "This is not an act of Hinduism".

No one is arguing that there is no such thing as religiously motivated violence amongst numerous religions world-wide. We are discussing religiously dictated or promotedviolence.

Islam has no match.

[Vinay]

Below is the Statement by George Fernandes, Minister of Defence after visiting Orissa

http://www.indianembassy.org/pic/PR_1999/January99/prjan2899.html

I agree with you that fantics exist. After the rise of Militant Islamism there has been a rise in Extremist leaders (those who don't know the basics of religion) who tried to get support form the people.

Such henious incidents are extremely low in India. Check from the date of Independent India and you will notice that such incidents have occured only in very limited numbers.

Again you tried to link it with Hinduism. The religion Hindusim never explains in whatsoever manner the usage of violence.

Regarding the court, it still functions on the British model. Till there is no concrete evidence against the culprit the culprit is left free. There is a hue and cry in India regarding Justice denied to Jessica Lal who was shot dead. The court has taken up the case again.