• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

11 year old girl facing death penalty for "blasphemy"

Alceste

Alceste

Vagabond
Revoltingest said:
Sure they did. But the country as a whole did not.
You don't make money by manufacturing expensive products, training a huge work force, & then sending
them some place where the delivery team is killed or maimed, & the product blown up or abandoned.
A measure of how capitalistic a country is would correlate with a measure of economic liberty, eh?
Index of Economic Freedom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Of the top countries, how many wage so many wars? Hint: Only one
Click to expand...

Free trade =/= capitalism. Capitalism is private ownership of the means of production, with material benefits accruing to the property owner rather than the laborers who produce the goods. Free trade is an ideal held by capitalists where the public, by means of their elected representatives, does not have the power or authority to intervene in any economic activity the property owners might choose to engage in.

The entire Bush government was made up of capitalists who specifically profit from defense spending. Do you imagine they all suddenly forgot how much money they could make from starting a few wars when they saw their first government paycheque?
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Alceste said:
Free trade =/= capitalism. Capitalism is private ownership of the means of production, with material benefits accruing to the property owner rather than the laborers who produce the goods. Free trade is an ideal held by capitalists where the public, by means of their elected representatives, does not have the power or authority to intervene in any economic activity the property owners might choose to engage in.
Click to expand...
I call "red herring". The top countries in the list engage in rampant capitalism.
And several have arms industries.

The entire Bush government was made up of capitalists who specifically profit from defense spending. Do you imagine they all suddenly forgot how much money they could make from starting a few wars when they saw their first government paycheque?
Click to expand...
Tis easy to say. Who profited by how much?
What say you of Obama's continuing the wars? Do he & his staff personally benefit?
And going back to other war mongers, how did Johnson's & Nixon's staffs benefit?
(Although I credit Nixon for actually ending a war.)
 
Last edited:
Sir Doom

Sir Doom

Cooler than most of you
Not to distract from the economic debate...

But I was thinking... they want this girl executed for burning some pages of the Quran. After demanding her arrest, they rioted and burned down a bunch of homes.

It seems to me they probably put a few Qurans in danger of being burned by doing this. Executions all around, yes?

>.>
 
Alceste

Alceste

Vagabond
Revoltingest said:
I call "red herring". The top countries in the list engage in rampant capitalism.
And several have arms industries.

Tis easy to say. Who profited by how much?
What say you of Obama's continuing the wars? Do he & his staff personally benefit?
And going back to other war mongers, how did Johnson's & Nixon's staffs benefit?
(Although I credit Nixon for actually ending a war.)
Click to expand...

I think the US is a plutocracy. It's not useful to try to distinguish between the government and private industry. The Democrats are in the pockets of bankers, the Republicans are pockets of arms dealers, and they all have a personal financial interest in maintaining monstrous level of public spending on arms and warfare, which the public will only tolerate when you tell them there is something to fight.
 
Orias

Orias

Left Hand Path
fallingblood said:
I think your historical knowledge is somewhat lacking. Christianity has never took over the world with an iron grip. In fact, it really has never taken a hold of much of Asia, or parts of Africa and South America.

As for motivation, it has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with defining us vs them.
Click to expand...

Straw man acknowledged.

Sorry, I thought you would know what I meant when I said after the Christians killed off an entire population of pagans they took over the known world.

And as for motivation, it was based purely off of religion and self preservation of inspiring belief and culture.

You say I lack historical knowledge, but wherein this post of yours do you exactly prove that?

So I'll ask again, what other motivation could there be for a religious movement that kills and eradicates an entire population of self professed pagans. If it has nothing to do with religion but defining "us vs them", then how is religion excluded from this well observed culture?
 
ChristineES

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
I hate reading those kinds of stories. They make me angry and very sad and I don't like being angry. I can't expect extremists to change, but I wish someone (moderate) would save the child and send her away from there. I actually get tears in my eyes and I feel guilty because I wish there was something I could do.
:(
 
dawny0826

dawny0826

Mother Heathen
This is an issue of ignorant people and a government in need of change, which the article and the article that is linked within the article, states is acknowledged. It seems that the government and police involved in the situation are treating the case as sensitively as possible, considering the risk of additional violence from Pakistani citizens.

I don't see these issues as religious based issues. I see these as ignorance based issues. Hopefully, something positive will result and the government will put on their big boy pants and do the right thing.
 
SLAMH

SLAMH

Active Member
The problem is that the extremists are taking control, and they have got the people to think that this is God's law. I'm not trying to argue that this is not the real Islam or anything, because all in all there is no anyway to prove how my views on Islam are necessary more credible than theirs. The point is that Islam must be let free and not being a tool possessed by some organized groups. If this happens, so then anyone can criticize and evaluate it for the benefit of all, and by this no opinions would be regarded as divine commands, but merely human judgments.
 
jasonwill2

jasonwill2

Well-Known Member
fallingblood said:
I think your historical knowledge is somewhat lacking. Christianity has never took over the world with an iron grip. In fact, it really has never taken a hold of much of Asia, or parts of Africa and South America.

As for motivation, it has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with defining us vs them.
Click to expand...

waitasec said:
:yes:
and of course, the "us" are justified
Click to expand...


Orias said:
Straw man acknowledged.

Sorry, I thought you would know what I meant when I said after the Christians killed off an entire population of pagans they took over the known world.

And as for motivation, it was based purely off of religion and self preservation of inspiring belief and culture.

You say I lack historical knowledge, but wherein this post of yours do you exactly prove that?

So I'll ask again, what other motivation could there be for a religious movement that kills and eradicates an entire population of self professed pagans. If it has nothing to do with religion but defining "us vs them", then how is religion excluded from this well observed culture?
Click to expand...

I seriously am suprized you guys don't get what Orias was saying. Christians DID often kill those who did not convert, and they conqured quite a large portion of the world that way.


Sir Doom said:
Not to distract from the economic debate...

But I was thinking... they want this girl executed for burning some pages of the Quran. After demanding her arrest, they rioted and burned down a bunch of homes.

It seems to me they probably put a few Qurans in danger of being burned by doing this. Executions all around, yes?

>.>
Click to expand...

Now here is an interesting thought.
 
waitasec

waitasec

Veteran Member
jasonwill2 said:
I seriously am suprized you guys don't get what Orias was saying. Christians DID often kill those who did not convert, and they conqured quite a large portion of the world that way.
Click to expand...
it was the us vs. them comment i was racting to...i highlighted it
;)

because that is what religion does...separating the us's and the them's
the rights from the wrongs...the christians vs the non christians.
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Alceste said:
I think the US is a plutocracy. It's not useful to try to distinguish between the government and private industry. The Democrats are in the pockets of bankers, the Republicans are pockets of arms dealers, and they all have a personal financial interest in maintaining monstrous level of public spending on arms and warfare, which the public will only tolerate when you tell them there is something to fight.
Click to expand...
Then why do Dems (in the pockets of bankers) also wage expensive wars, & Pubs (in the pockets of arms makers) bail out banks?
And if capitalism is to blame, why do/did socialist countries also wage wars, eg, USSR, N Korea, Nazi Germany?
Again I ask, how much does anyone in public office benefit from these wars? Who steers us to war & how much
did they make from what company? Methinks this is just a conspiracy theory.
 
Father Heathen

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
SLAMH said:
because all in all there is no anyway to prove how my views on Islam are necessary more credible than theirs.
Click to expand...

Sure there is. If there is a god, it would be a being of pure love and pure logic. Therefore anything devoid of compassion or reason is not of god.
 
Falvlun

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
MoonWater said:
If someone started running around killing genetically disformed babies under the pretense of "not wanting them to pollute the gene pool" we wouldn't blame the theory of evolution for their behavior.
Click to expand...
We would if they claimed they were doing it because of the theory of evolution. In fact, social Darwinism is still a popular reason people bring up as to why the theory of evolution is evil and shouldn't be taught.
 
fallingblood

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
jasonwill2 said:
I seriously am suprized you guys don't get what Orias was saying. Christians DID often kill those who did not convert, and they conqured quite a large portion of the world that way.
Click to expand...
I get what Orias is saying (and instead of also replying to his statement, I will just do it here), I just don't agree.

In the time period he is talking about, Christianity ruled a small portion of the world. The majority of the world was not Christian. The problem we have here is that (and I'm not just saying you, it is common for many of us, and I have been guilty of this as well) we often only picture the western world, while ignoring the rest. Sure, Europe was ruled (to a point) and some of the Middle East, but during that time (depending on exactly when we are talking about) Asia, much of Africa, South America, North America, and the variety of other island nations (as well as Australia) did not know Christianity. Even today, Christianity does not represent a majority of the population. It may be the largest religion, but is still is a minority in the grand scheme of things.

Also, many of the pagans who did convert did so on their own free will. Christianity offered something they were not getting else where. Yes, there was also parts in which it was spread by the sword; however, in those instances, one can also find Christian on Christian fighting.

The real motivation here wasn't spreading Christianity. It was spreading the power of a nation. Sure, religion may have been an excuse; but if religion wouldn't have been used, some other excuse would have been used. The reason being, it wasn't about religion. It was about power, and being different.

The real problem here (and we have seen it in this thread as well), is an us vs them mentality. And waitasec made a great point; the "us" usually gets justified. And whether or not one practices the religion is besides the point.
 
jasonwill2

jasonwill2

Well-Known Member
fallingblood said:
I get what Orias is saying (and instead of also replying to his statement, I will just do it here), I just don't agree.

In the time period he is talking about, Christianity ruled a small portion of the world. The majority of the world was not Christian. The problem we have here is that (and I'm not just saying you, it is common for many of us, and I have been guilty of this as well) we often only picture the western world, while ignoring the rest. Sure, Europe was ruled (to a point) and some of the Middle East, but during that time (depending on exactly when we are talking about) Asia, much of Africa, South America, North America, and the variety of other island nations (as well as Australia) did not know Christianity. Even today, Christianity does not represent a majority of the population. It may be the largest religion, but is still is a minority in the grand scheme of things.

Also, many of the pagans who did convert did so on their own free will. Christianity offered something they were not getting else where. Yes, there was also parts in which it was spread by the sword; however, in those instances, one can also find Christian on Christian fighting.

The real motivation here wasn't spreading Christianity. It was spreading the power of a nation. Sure, religion may have been an excuse; but if religion wouldn't have been used, some other excuse would have been used. The reason being, it wasn't about religion. It was about power, and being different.

The real problem here (and we have seen it in this thread as well), is an us vs them mentality. And waitasec made a great point; the "us" usually gets justified. And whether or not one practices the religion is besides the point.
Click to expand...

The Church was the government then, and they actively were trying to convert the pagan nations of Europe, killing those who did not convert.
 
fallingblood

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
jasonwill2 said:
The Church was the government then, and they actively were trying to convert the pagan nations of Europe, killing those who did not convert.
Click to expand...

The Church was also doing a lot that simply had nothing to do with Christianity. In fact, they were killing other Christians, because they didn't agree. They went as far as killing Popes. To think it had anything to do with Christianity really is not looking at the historical situation. Especially considering the circumstances surrounding the history here.

The Church was much more than a religious institution. It was a political and economical institution that operated very similar to preceding governments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top