Boozeroony
Member
Count Dookkake said:
Damn you!
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Reverend burns Koran, Afghanis kills 12
- Thread starter kottila
- Start date
- Status
Damn you!
WorriedCitizen
Member
empty vessel said:
How does in your logic burning the quran justify to kill innocent people but 9/11 or some other shit doesn't justify to burn the quran or to kill innocent muslims? It's the SAME SHIT!
The only thing ridiculous is your comparison with slavery. These people are not slaves and the people from the UN are not their oppresors. Infact they are there to help the populace.
Bottom line is that mentaly sane and adolescent people are fully responsible for their own doings. You can twist and turn this around with your one sided political agenda but it doesn't change this simple fact.
Count Dookkake
Member
Boozeroony said:
Also, both involve a lot of screaming.
Then I don't follow. If the violence flowed out of a "clash of civilization", or a threat to their way of life, who is responsible? Surely the Florida church doesn't own more than a minuscule portion of that threat. Is it Washington? Is it the American public corporately for supporting the Afghan wars? All of Europe and the first-world West?empty vessel said:
Boozeroony
Member
Count Dookkake said:
Both ring bells too.
Count Dookkake
Member
Boozeroony said:
And both need to chill.
Hmm, this may be the best analogy of all time.
Boozeroony
Member
Count Dookkake said:
I will not try further.
/salute
empty vessel
Member
Evlar said:
Yes to all of that. There is a lot of moral responsibility to go around. That moral responsibility is, in fact, what drives my own advocacy. Because I am responsible, I have an obligation to act.
Count Dookkake
Member
Boozeroony said:
/returns salute
adamsappel
Member
If some people here can take the violence perpetrated by a tiny majority of Muslims and equate it with Islam as a whole, what is wrong with Muslims equating what a few Americans does as symbolic of the West?
I think nearly everyone in the original thread was well aware that violence would result from burning a Quran. Anti-Islam-GAF knew it would happen because "Religion of Peace lol" while some of Muslim-GAF even thought it would be justifiable, but I don't recall anybody thinking there would be a collective shrug of the shoulders. And that's entirely why the pastor burned it anyway. Now he and his ilk can point and say, "See how they are?" (and Muslims can now say the same about Christians!). While I wouldn't charge the pastor as an accessory to murder, I don't see how it isn't fair to say he provoked it.
I think nearly everyone in the original thread was well aware that violence would result from burning a Quran. Anti-Islam-GAF knew it would happen because "Religion of Peace lol" while some of Muslim-GAF even thought it would be justifiable, but I don't recall anybody thinking there would be a collective shrug of the shoulders. And that's entirely why the pastor burned it anyway. Now he and his ilk can point and say, "See how they are?" (and Muslims can now say the same about Christians!). While I wouldn't charge the pastor as an accessory to murder, I don't see how it isn't fair to say he provoked it.
empty vessel
Member
adamsappel said:
And his denial of any responsibility or accountability is cowardly. Mind you, I'm not talking about criminal responsibility, but just the acknowledgment that he could have any moral responsibility whatsoever for his own actions is completely lost on him. It's a totally anti-social attitude.
Patrick Bateman
Member
Why can't that reverend burn himself? 
captmorgan
Banned
I`ve always wondered why is it when a man does a selfless good deed their religion gets the credit. Person runs a charity, people go wow look how good religion is.
But when some does something "evil" its never religion fault. it always oh that peospn of group of people are just crazy.
But when some does something "evil" its never religion fault. it always oh that peospn of group of people are just crazy.
Foxy Fox 39
Banned
While it was dumb Gaf seems to be more outraged about the burning rather than the guys who did the killing.
It's because whitey brought on the massacre themselves by burning a book in Florida, thereby bringing down the quality of life for those in Afghanistan by making them physically agitated. It's all right here in this book from my sociology class. It's simple: racism=power+prejudice+whiteness. It has to be real power too, like average lower pay among minorities working at Wal-Mart, not faux-power like wielding the power of life and death by slowly carving the head from a person's body because someone who looked like them did something annoying thousands of miles away.Foxy Fox 39 said:
It should be noted that the majority were protesting peacefully, but of course it should also be noted that if you are agitated over the so called desecration of a book by persons thousands of miles away, you are mentally ill and that this mental illness is a by-product of delusional thinking.
The Reverend, as obnoxious as he might be, is only guilty of insults. The murderers, are guilty of being primitive murderers and unworthy of the existence they live. They should learn that blasphemy is nonsense and is only a rule idiots adhere to.
The Reverend, as obnoxious as he might be, is only guilty of insults. The murderers, are guilty of being primitive murderers and unworthy of the existence they live. They should learn that blasphemy is nonsense and is only a rule idiots adhere to.
Devolution
Member
Ugh.
Poke the bear some more.
Can we just take all the uber religious assholes and make them all live in the Sahara together? Self-cleaning oven mode.
Poke the bear some more.
Can we just take all the uber religious assholes and make them all live in the Sahara together? Self-cleaning oven mode.
MetalAlien
Banned
No he didn't.Zenith said:
titiklabingapat said:
Not a single drop!
titiklabingapat
Member
Lots of stupidity and the worse of religious extremism are in full glory with this situation.
One one side, you got the ignorant Christians provoking and now with blood on thier hands, obviously.
On the other side, you got the ignorant muslims who would murder people because an inanimate object was burnt.
At the end of the day, innocent people died.
One one side, you got the ignorant Christians provoking and now with blood on thier hands, obviously.
On the other side, you got the ignorant muslims who would murder people because an inanimate object was burnt.
At the end of the day, innocent people died.
Devolution
Member
MetalAlien said:
But do you think Koran book burning has anything but a negative effect or outcome? People who instigate shit, knowing the consequences, aren't necessarily guilty of the consequences (in this instance) but they sure as hell aren't making religious tolerance easier.
MetalAlien
Banned
He burned a book. His book. Now if he steals a book and burns some other persons book. Then he did something wrong. Crazy people will always find a reason to kill. Today they killed 12 people for that book, tomorrow they might do it for some other insane reason.Devolution said:
Devolution
Member
MetalAlien said:
Don't be so simplistic or willfully ignorant, it's a symbolic move designed to piss off people who believe another religion. Are you honestly defending his shenanigans?
MetalAlien
Banned
-viper- said:
I doubt they even cared about the book, they wanted to spread fear and they saw this as a way to do it.
Devolution said:
Absolutely.
Devolution
Member
MetalAlien said:
Why.
There's a very strange kind of cognitive dissonance happening here, but before I describe it, here's my feelings on the events:
The people who attacked, killed and beheaded innocents are monsters. They are vile, subhuman filth. They are not worthy of mercy or even understanding. Fuck them. I don't give a crap about the book, or the words in it, or its burning when it comes to being weighed against even a single human life.
However, there are people in this thread who, while acknowledging that the rioters were instigated by the Quran burning, and also acknowledging that the Pastor knew and had been told that his actions would certainly lead to this type of event, and that this type of reaction was his primary purpose in burning the Quran, still has no responsibility for the event.
It couldn't be plainer. He wished to achieve this result and deliberately set into motion events that would achieve it. Moreover, he actively sought out publicity for the event so that it would be broadcast as far and wide as possible.
I'm not arguing, because those are the facts. I'm simply restating them as plainly as possible.
Of course he doesn't have blood on his hands. He made sure that his actions kept him as far away from the actual blood as humanly possible. He's a coward and an instigator and a piece of shit. And now people are dead.
The people who attacked, killed and beheaded innocents are monsters. They are vile, subhuman filth. They are not worthy of mercy or even understanding. Fuck them. I don't give a crap about the book, or the words in it, or its burning when it comes to being weighed against even a single human life.
However, there are people in this thread who, while acknowledging that the rioters were instigated by the Quran burning, and also acknowledging that the Pastor knew and had been told that his actions would certainly lead to this type of event, and that this type of reaction was his primary purpose in burning the Quran, still has no responsibility for the event.
It couldn't be plainer. He wished to achieve this result and deliberately set into motion events that would achieve it. Moreover, he actively sought out publicity for the event so that it would be broadcast as far and wide as possible.
I'm not arguing, because those are the facts. I'm simply restating them as plainly as possible.
Of course he doesn't have blood on his hands. He made sure that his actions kept him as far away from the actual blood as humanly possible. He's a coward and an instigator and a piece of shit. And now people are dead.
MetalAlien
Banned
You have the right to express your opinion no matter how repugnant. As long as he's not blocking traffic or whatever, if he wants to stand on his soapbox and show how much he hates Islam, so be it. You get that right too. We can't just pick and choose what part of speech we wish to call free.Devolution said:
OuterWorldVoice said:
It's only because we tolerate it that we are better than the crazies that killed those people. He have to defend that morons right to be ignorant. It's shaking our hands in the face of terror and saying we are not like you.
Devolution
Member
MetalAlien said:
The intent here is not one to be defended. Sorry I fundamentally disagree.
The reverend intended to instigate, sure. But unless the Reverend issued a direct command or had a place of an authority to command said individuals to the action, the sole responsibility of an individual's action is their own.
These people could have reacted in numerous other measures had they chose to, but they instead chose the absurd idea of killing people.
To accept otherwise is to accept a policy of fear where every individual subject to the whims of others. This is ultimately what the violent acts are intended to achieve, to terrorize others and to invoke a crisis of conscience in your actions while they are expected to show none.
These people could have reacted in numerous other measures had they chose to, but they instead chose the absurd idea of killing people.
To accept otherwise is to accept a policy of fear where every individual subject to the whims of others. This is ultimately what the violent acts are intended to achieve, to terrorize others and to invoke a crisis of conscience in your actions while they are expected to show none.
MetalAlien said:
I defend his right to do that. But part of being a civilization is exercising restraint in both speech and action. He achieved nothing but death and the fomenting of hatred with this action. As a matter of fact, his action is presumably counter to any of the "logical" things he could want to achieve, like less Islam, for example.
So I defend his right to say what he wants, but the things he chose to say and the manner in which he spoke them, are morally and even objectively indefensible.
The fact is you're arguing about a 5000 foot philosophy, but people in this thread are pissed about the results and the content of what he said. He's also been given access to a bully pulpit grander than any normal citizen would have, because of the very toxicity of his views. Free speech is not even remotely being threatened here.
vas_a_morir
Banned
I don't think these people know how much damage they are doing to Muslims and the perception of Islam. It's almost sad, but also frustrating.
cartoon_soldier
Member
Atrus said:
I think it was the false news that spread around that not just one but hundreds of Korans were burned that instigated the people.
Basically, Religious zealot idiots on both sides = instigated people who commit dumb acts.
The bad part for the US and the coalition forces on the ground is that the incident happened in a town that was deemed fairly quiet and peaceful.
OuterWorldVoice said:
He has no responsibility for the event.
He bought some paper and ink, and he set the paper and ink on fire. It was his paper and ink to burn.
He's a religiously intolerant asshole, but religiously intolerant assholes still have freedom of expression and can still buy and own objects.
OuterWorldVoice said:
You're confusing me here. This seems entirely incongruous with what you said earlier.
For clarity, regardless of your opinion of his action, do you think he has the right to do what he did?
Do you think he should be criminally punished?
If not, I'm not sure what I'd be arguing with you about.
vas_a_morir
Banned
jaxword said:
People would be upset. But I don't think the Bible burner would be to blame for the actions of religious zealots.
Chuckie
Member
OuterWorldVoice said:
So were do you draw the line? A while ago a teacher in Africa named a teddybear Mohammed after one of her kids in her class. The result was a lot of people calling for her death because of blasphemy.
Is it 'common sense' to not name anything Mohammed because we might piss off some extremists?
Basicly I can post a cartoon insulting Jesus and call it freedom of speech, but if post one of Mohammed and an extremist kills someone and it is suddenly my fault.
It means the extremists have already won. You cannot mock their religion, because they will retaliate.... so if you mock them it is YOUR fault they retaliate.
If you mock my brother, he will not do anothing.... if you mock me I will punch you teeth out. So appearantly it is ok to mock my brother, but if you mock my ideas, it is your own fault you lost your teeth.
Devolution
Member
Tence said:
Doing inflammatory shit just to do it, isn't the same as radical Muslims getting pissed at something you did without the intent TO specifically piss them off. It might be the same to them, but it isn't the same to me, and I'd hope others.
- Status