Teacher Beheaded near Paris

[amorphous_constellation]

A man wielding a large knife attacked and beheaded a teacher near Paris. The teacher had shown caricatures of Mohammad in the classroom.

Can everyone agree that beheading someone for a caricature, even of Mohammad, is unreasonable and is to be condemned?

This does not sound good, no. But I don't understand how the Left is to deal with this.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So yes, they can be proven accurate, inaccurate, right or wrong.

Can't be done.

 

[Polymath257]

This does not sound good, no. But I don't understand how the Left is to deal with this.

Not sure why the left would have any trouble condemning this.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Not sure why the left would have any trouble condemning this.

Well, they wish to be as inclusive as they can be with other groups, belief systems, and 'cultural material' that is not possessed by any given 'dominant' view. This is to try and establish equal subjectivity for the material in any given system. Therefore, the standards to be reached are often in the court of the initial criticizer. The argument would be made that they were not sensitive enough to the individual holding a minority view. It's more complicated, but that's a start

One problem is that certain types of religion are more attractive to those with mental issues.

Maybe so, but that statement is relevant in a world were most people join religions.. I don't think most people really join them, but aren't they usually part of them from the beginning to the end of their lives

 

[Polymath257]

Well, they wish to be as inclusive as they can be with other groups, belief systems, and 'cultural material' that is not possessed by any given 'dominant' view. This is to try and establish equal subjectivity for the material in any given system. Therefore, the standards to be reached are often in the court of the initial criticizer. The argument would be made that they were not sensitive enough to the individual holding a minority view. It's more complicated, but that's a start

While I see this as more of a caricature of the actual positions people on the left take.

In practice, the left tends to support some sort of humanism, which allows for different solutions to the question of how cultures should be organized while also pointing out that the basis of morality lies in human fulfillment.

Maybe so, but that statement is relevant in a world were most people join religions.. I don't think most people really join them, but aren't they usually part of them from the beginning to the end of their lives

And it is also true that some types of religion tend to accentuate already present mental issues, directing them into greater religiosity or to more action (often violent).

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Well, they wish to be as inclusive as they can be with other groups, belief systems, and 'cultural material' that is not possessed by any given 'dominant' view. This is to try and establish equal subjectivity for the material in any given system. Therefore, the standards to be reached are often in the court of the initial criticizer. The argument would be made that they were not sensitive enough to the individual holding a minority view. It's more complicated, but that's a start

I'm about as Left as it gets here. And I condemn these violent extremists just as I denounce Looney Liberal ideology that would justify it with such cultural moral relativist views, as well as those who try to separate religious motives from these actions. It is entirely due to his religious belief the murderer in the OP shouted "Allahu Akbar!" It's the extremist thing to do as they praise their god and carry out his Jihad against the infidel. And those who would say it's a different culture and deserves respect just by existing, they are basically ideology accomplices and accessories to that extremism by being just as dogmatically blind to justify it (this also includes many rules and policies in the Muslim world, including the niqab).

 

[amorphous_constellation]

In practice, the left tends to support some sort of humanism, which allows for different solutions to the question of how cultures should be organized while also pointing out that the basis of morality lies in human fulfillment.

I don't see how that conflicts with what I wrote. To my perception, you are describing the concept of subjectivity in different words. Humans fulfill themselves in different ways, the left sees this. They can also fulfill themselves in ways that conflict with each other, that's the principle issue

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I'm about as Left as it gets here. And I condemn these violent extremists just as I denounce Looney Liberal ideology that would justify it with such cultural moral relativist views, as well as those who try to separate religious motives from these actions.

Well, I am conflicted myself on whether problems are best analyzed with a reductionist or systematic lens.. Maybe it's often both, in proportions not easily perceived at first

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Well, I am conflicted myself on whether problems are best analyzed with a reductionist or systematic lens.. Maybe it's often both, in proportions not easily perceived at first

It's not too complicated. Centuries of conflict against the West (with the aggressor role having switched more from the Ottoman Empire to the West) have indeed shaped things, with the past century being very significant to what is happening today. A great deal of strife is due to Western military and corporate ventures. We say the same exact thing throughout Asia and Central and South America during the Cold War as the Stalinists were the biggest ideological threat who were also created largely as a response to Western military and corporate ventures.
And Islam, there is also a very violent history and it does have a primary text that gets rather violent itself. For the same reasons we cannot ignore the religious motives behind the Crusades, we cannot ignore the same in modern Jihadists. Because it can't be overlooked or ignored, as getting into Paradise is the goal of both. And we have to remember, Muslims really are their own worst enemies. They sometimes get so violent and nasty with each other that even some places like Tunisia have banned niqabs and burkas as a step towards combating extremism. And this is them dealing with each other, were one group of Ummah says it will be this way, while the other says it will be this way (basically, the core of the Sunni/Shia schism is over difference in opinion and no one being able to prove themselves right or the other wrong).

 

[Estro Felino]

Why do I have the feeling we are going back to the dark ages? What's next? Burning people on a public fire?

Je pleure avec vous et avec tous les Français.
C'est terrible.

 

[Estro Felino]

It's not too complicated. Centuries of conflict against the West (with the aggressor role having switched more from the Ottoman Empire to the West) have indeed shaped things, with the past century being very significant to what is happening today. A great deal of strife is due to Western military and corporate ventures. We say the same exact thing throughout Asia and Central and South America during the Cold War as the Stalinists were the biggest ideological threat who were also created largely as a response to Western military and corporate ventures.
And Islam, there is also a very violent history and it does have a primary text that gets rather violent itself. For the same reasons we cannot ignore the religious motives behind the Crusades, we cannot ignore the same in modern Jihadists. Because it can't be overlooked or ignored, as getting into Paradise is the goal of both. And we have to remember, Muslims really are their own worst enemies. They sometimes get so violent and nasty with each other that even some places like Tunisia have banned niqabs and burkas as a step towards combating extremism. And this is them dealing with each other, were one group of Ummah says it will be this way, while the other says it will be this way (basically, the core of the Sunni/Shia schism is over difference in opinion and no one being able to prove themselves right or the other wrong).

I really appreciate this important and fundamental description of geopolitics of the ME and Arab world mainly.
That is why I would like to be understood, when I say that I want a POTUS who can grant everlasting peace in the Mediterranean Area. And peace is made through agreements, diplomacy, compromise.
Democrat, Republican...it doesn't matter...as long as he makes peace in this area of the world.
Because this 21st century has been nothing but turmoil in those areas and wars waged there bring fundamentalists here to Europe.
So that is why a peace-loving President is super important to us Europeans.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I'm about as Left as it gets here. And I condemn these violent extremists just as I denounce Looney Liberal ideology that would justify it with such cultural moral relativist views, as well as those who try to separate religious motives from these actions. It is entirely due to his religious belief the murderer in the OP shouted "Allahu Akbar!" It's the extremist thing to do as they praise their god and carry out his Jihad against the infidel. And those who would say it's a different culture and deserves respect just by existing, they are basically ideology accomplices and accessories to that extremism by being just as dogmatically blind to justify it (this also includes many rules and policies in the Muslim world, including the niqab).

I have to agree with you on this @Shadow Wolf the action done by some muslims are evil and should be stoped. When it comes to hijab,nicab or burka it is up to the woman if she want to wear it, in my view, but i can not speak for what females in all muslim countries wants.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I have to agree with you on this @Shadow Wolf the action done by some muslims are evil and should be stoped. When it comes to hijab,nicab or burka it is up to the woman if she want to wear it, in my view, but i can not speak for what females in all muslim countries wants.

It would have to be demonstrated that, without the cultural pressure, a woman would freely choose to cover up like that. I am confident only a very slim minority would. Especially to cover the face. I do not accept it is normal for anyone to want or choose to do that as a normal and regular thing without an extreme amount of pressure to do so. To have body language nullified, I do not believe anyone would freely choose this without extreme pressure to do so.
Religious garb is one thing, but only barely allowing the eyes to be seen (if that) is dehumanizing. Amd I do not accept it as something we could expect to be freely chosen by a significant amount of women.

 

[Spirit of Light]

It would have to be demonstrated that, without the cultural pressure, a woman would freely choose to cover up like that. I am confident only a very slim minority would. Especially to cover the face. I do not accept it is normal for anyone to want or choose to do that as a normal and regular thing without an extreme amount of pressure to do so. To have body language nullified, I do not believe anyone would freely choose this without extreme pressure to do so.
Religious garb is one thing, but only barely allowing the eyes to be seen (if that) is dehumanizing. Amd I do not accept it as something we could expect to be freely chosen by a significant amount of women.

I understand your thought about it.
It is said in the Quran that both men and female should dress in modesty, so then the question arise how far should we take the modesty, my personal thought is that both Burka and niqab is to take it to far. Hijab to me seems like an ok choice for female.

My own girlfriend wear hijab outdoors but not at home. She say that to her it feels better to cover up her hair. But yes she notice guys getting curious about her because she wear hijab. So maybe it can go both ways

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I understand your thought about it.
It is said in the Quran that both men and female should dress in modesty, so then the question arise how far should we take the modesty, my personal thought is that both Burka and niqab is to take it to far. Hijab to me seems like an ok choice for female.

My own girlfriend wear hijab outdoors but not at home. She say that to her it feels better to cover up her hair. But yes she notice guys getting curious about her because she wear hijab. So maybe it can go both ways

A hijab I dont see anything inherently wrong with. They can even serve a practical purpose. And you can see her face. You can see her expressions. Shes not obscured or muffled.

 

[Spirit of Light]

A hijab I dont see anything inherently wrong with. They can even serve a practical purpose. And you can see her face. You can see her expressions. Shes not obscured or muffled.

Agree on that

 

[dad]

He believes it does though. In his eyes, he was following Islam more truthfully and fully than those who sit back and do nothing against those who blaspheme against Islam.
It's no different with Christians. Some believe they are required to oppose homosexuality. Some believe they are required to butt out. Neither group can be proven accurate or demonstrated correct (it tends to happen when people follow books riddled with contradictions).

Whoa. Chopping off someone's head is very different than what Christ did or taught. So yes it is very very different. Christians do not believe they are required to accept or reject certain lifestyles they simply read what God said is good and bad and right or wrong. Then they know, and have no need to interject their own opinion. Nothing to do with killing people.
A Christian martyr was someone that gave his life to save as many others as possible. The people that kill as many as possible to gain a better place in 'heaven' or whatever are terrorists, not martyrs.

 

[Mock Turtle]

It's unfortunate that there are people in many religions, or with some ideology (or just plain angry and reactionary), that might react violently to what they see as affronts, but whoever set this in motion might be regretting what they did - and even get some comeback:

Killer who decapitated teacher in Paris 'posted horror pic of victim's remains'

The teacher, identified by French media as Samuel P, had enraged parents by displaying cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad to pupils at his school. Formal complaints had been made about him, including by one parent who published a video expressing his anger. A Twitter thread posted on October 9 contained a video of a man who said his Muslim daughter was one of the pupils in the class, and that she was shocked and upset by the teacher's actions. The man in the video urged Twitter users to complain to the authorities and get the teacher removed from his post. Nordine Chaouadi told Reuters he was the father of a 13-year-old pupil who attended the civics class given by the teacher, whom parents gathered outside the college referred to as Mr Paty.

If the teacher might have made a serious mistake - in judging what might happen - how stupid was the perpetrator of this crime in wasting his life at 18, perhaps thinking he is going to some afterlife?

 

[Estro Felino]

If the teacher might have made a serious mistake - in judging what might happen - how stupid was the perpetrator of this crime in wasting his life at 18, perhaps thinking he is going to some afterlife?

Yes indeed...and I think that the Charlie Hebdo massacre in January 2015 is considered an act of heroism by a very tiny group of fundamentalists. An act to emulate.

 

[PureX]

[QUOTE="TagliatelliMonster, post: 6859785, member: 6592]You can make up any excuse you want. It doesn't change the fact.[/QUOTE]Exactly. The excuses we make up are irrelevant. The fact is that one person chose to destroy another.