Taliban confuses armed contractor's building for day care

[Scrib]

I'm talking about general religious power you moron. Murder, repressing homosexuals, it's all about power. The religious people that have the power to do it do.All I meant.

Well guess what, asshole, I am not talking about general religious power. I am talking specifically about the religious ideology that drives people to commit mass murder and about how without that ideology, the mass murder is not as likely to happen. Get that through your thick fucking skull. All your tangents about general religious philosophy are irrelevant because Islam can NOT be compared to other contemporary religions.

And what do you think drives that ideology? The weakness of secular powers in the country no? This is what I'm trying to get across to you: religious power==weaker secularization==less rationalization to fit in with the norms we expect from secular societies. It is simple.

In societies where religious dominance unacceptable you quickly see religious people rationalize themselves into secular believers. This happens to Muslims in the West and, iirc, it happened to the Mormons: they quickly discovered that God wanted them to like black people, just as God wants all liberal Christians to respect everyone else's wishes when he tells them he'll burn people who have the wrong ones. This is clearly irreconcilable.

What separates Islam from other contemporary religions is that a significant portion of Muslims are in places without this secularization. At least, when we're talking about Christianity. For other religions with a less martial history or absolutist dogma there is a much deeper gap.

I've also not failed to notice how that line of discussion is completely missing now.

That line of discussion was one of the ones that you decided to give a mental blowjob because you totally missed the fucking original point. I never said that all religious behavior was wrong, I said the mass-murdering kind was wrong. And religious or not, the numbers make all the fucking difference.

The difference is just that: secularization. When Christians or Muslims have power they are justified in acting how they please.It is built into the very nature of hell and damnation. I notice that you don't actually challenge the basis for this.

What basis? That people who have power often abuse that power? That's nothing new and nothing special. What's special is that you have never seen Christians go around blowing themselves up or flying planes into fucking buildings. Muslim fanatics have taken religious terror to a whole new fucking level, which no other religion has ever done.

Absolutism and damnation. An absolute justification for any action. This of course is tied to abuse of power: you have to have it or you rationalize your way into peacefulness like the Western Christians have.

Read above: Christians can no longer blow or burn up people not because it is irrational if you believe in damnation. They have simply been socialised out of it by secularization.

As for the degree of religious terror: I don't particularly care to be honest. The violence is commensurate with the technology the fundamentalists have access to. It's just the Middle East's bad luck that they didn't get rid of their fundamentalists in the time of the muskets.

1- Religious violence provides an unlimited justification for violence and death
2-Religious violence is thus a greater crime
3-Then if a religious man kills one person only, as he intended to, he committed a greater crime or sin than if a murderer killed that same one person.

Is that not your claim? Right, I thought so.

Jesus H Christ, you are fucking stupid.

1. Religious violence provides "justification" for committing more murders and acts of terror than other potential reasons.
2. If more people are killed as a result of religion, then by simple NUMBERS it becomes a greater crime.
3. Bull-fucking-shit. The crime is greater only if he kills more people than a more "typical" murderer such as a burgler or drug dealer. The religious aspect when dealing with a single murder is likely to only have an impact when he is sentenced for his crime, as an honor killing is not a legal justification for homicide.

Uh..no. You've stated multiple times that killing someone for religion is worse in and of itself, not because more people die. If it's just more people die then who cares? That's a vacuous truth.

But hey, if you just mean that religion is a greater cause of crime in total (as opposed to a greater crime which is what you said which makes no fucking sense) then fuck it, I see your point. I have no interest in trying to actually quantify such a statement.

What I did say is that the sort of moralizing and thinking that follows from some of your claims smelt like bullshit to me.

Oh I'd very much like for you to explain how claiming that mass murder in the name of God is worse than a single murder for other reasons is bullshit. Furthermore, I would like you to explain how, if the whole fucking reason for the murder is Islam, the murder will still take place if Islam was taken out of the picture?

You said that murder in the name of god was worse than otherwise,(when called on it you specifically separated the practical harm caused by more deaths and the evil of religious murder) then you went onto some weird tangent about mathematical/objective evil which was like a bad season of a TV show no one wants to talk about, now you try to slant the discussion by comparing murder/mass murder. Smart. But no thank you.

Depends.

Holy shit, see what I mean? You can't even agree to a simple statement like that! How the living fuck can it be a good thing to have more children die? What good can POSSIBLY come of a greater loss of life? Just GIVE IT UP man. You've proven that you really don't have a point to make, you just like arguing. Christ, this is getting to be right out of a Monty Python sketch.

I honestly wasn't serious but it really does depend. while it was a glib statement everything is contingent.

If you mean if I think it is better to kill less kids than more...sure.Is it objectively/mathematically better? I dunno. Is it better for the Taliban? By what measure? Politically? Probably. Morally? Depends.

As for me being a comedy sketch: the simple solution is to just disengage if it bothers you that much. Because it might be fun to attempt to both undermine me and argue me into the ground-having your cake and eat it- but if you truly believe as you do then you either a fool for continuing to engage me. So you are either a fool or a person that is insincerely using mockery as a cudgel to score cheap points in an argument that annoys him like a high schooler.

[Borgholio]

Uh..no. You've stated multiple times that killing someone for religion is worse in and of itself, not because more people die. If it's just more people die then who cares? That's a vacuous truth.

Where? Show me the quote.

You said that murder in the name of god was worse than otherwise,(when called on it you specifically separated the practical harm caused by more deaths and the evil of religious murder) then you went onto some weird tangent about mathematical/objective evil which was like a bad season of a TV show no one wants to talk about, now you try to slant the discussion by comparing murder/mass murder. Smart. But no thank you.

Nice try to spin your way out of this by taking something I did not say and using it to miss the entire fucking point of what I actually DID say. From one of your very first posts you said:

This seems like a subtle change from your original position which was that murdering in the name of religion was a worse crime, not that it made their actions worse from a practical standpoint.

So practically from the beginning you misrepresented my position and went off on an even bigger slant. Your whole series of arguments were based on not comprehending what I said in the first place.

So you are either a fool or a person that is insincerely using mockery as a cudgel to score cheap points in an argument that annoys him like a high schooler.

Oh I'm sincerely using mockery. You deserve to be mocked. Talk about cheap points? You make up completely random bullshit that nobody even fucking said, then you spin up an entire argument about it that is fully unrelated to the original topic at hand, then you whine about slants and tangents when people actually try to break through your ADD and get back to the original point. An original point which, by the way, you conveniently mis-quote and take fully out of context so you can start the whole thing over again. That, sir, makes you nothing more than a fucking troll.

[Scrib]

This seems like a subtle change from your original position which was that murdering in the name of religion was a worse crime, not that it made their actions worse from a practical standpoint.

No it doesn't change anything, because both statements are true. Murdering in the name of religion is worse than a "typical" murder for the reasons I explained above...and it also makes it worse from a practical standpoint because a room full of dead babies is undeniably worse than "just" one or two.

Your words...

Oh I'm sincerely using mockery. You deserve to be mocked. Talk about cheap points? You make up completely random bullshit that nobody even fucking said, then you spin up an entire argument about it that is fully unrelated to the original topic at hand, then you whine about slants and tangents when people actually try to break through your ADD and get back to the original point. An original point which, by the way, you conveniently mis-quote and take fully out of context so you can start the whole thing over again. That, sir, makes you nothing more than a fucking troll.

You're the one who created those arguments from your positions. You argue about objective wrong and when called on it you cry. You argue about secularization's effects on violence (I can't even say that you disagreed because you spent 90% of the time misunderstanding basic shit) and then, when called on it it conveniently drop the whole thing.

But I'm going to have to ask you to stop mocking me. If you keep this up I'm not kidding, in a while I...I don't know what I'd do. I might get a little twinge.

[Borgholio]

Murdering in the name of religion is worse than a "typical" murder for the reasons I explained above

Way to take me out of context AGAIN, you illiterate shithead.

FOR THE REASONS I EXPLAINED ABOVE

Read it this time, you dumb son of a bitch. I was referring to religious murdering sprees being worse due to the fact that they tend to involve a higher body count than secular reasons for murder. If you are not prepared to argue against that point then shut the fuck up.

[PainRack]

Its odd that everyone here keep talking about children........ when the Taliban didn't.

Seriously. He thought it was a Church, converting Muslims, and that they were celebrating their first anniversary. Hence, they decided to attack it.

Nothing about day care.

Nothing about children.

We don't even have any details about the daycare centre or interviews, since the police protected them from the interview with the NYT.

All the details present are from Mr Kuhn, the representative of the NGO, his wife and a Taliban representative.

So, pray tell how this Taliban decides to kill children to save their souls tangent come about. Because they were attacking a daycare centre? Given the atrocious nature of their intelligence in mistaking another building for the target, just what is to say that they deliberately chose to target children so as to save their souls to heaven or any other religious angle?

If they were considered, they were nothing more than targets, collateral damage in their frenzy to attack any Western linked organisation.

[Edi]

Locked by request