Zealot nearly beheads friend he accused of witchcraft, rambles about magic and sacrifice to police

[muriel_volestrangler]

but don't worry, the police think religion was “not pertinent” to the murder case. Is this because he's a Christian, not a Muslim?

Man with ‘strong Christian beliefs’ nearly decapitates son of Oklahoma state trooper in grisly murder: cops

An Oklahoma “religious zealot” and heavy drug user nearly decapitated an acquaintance before calling 911 and admitting to the grisly slaying, police said.
...
Marin had “strong” religious beliefs and was watching videos on YouTube “related to his Christian beliefs and the Book of Matthew” before the murder, according to an affidavit obtained by the Daily News. The documents also alleged that the pair had previous arguments because Marin disagreed with Crockett practicing witchcraft.
...
Marin later called 911 and said, “I murdered someone,” before rambling about magic and sacrifice and telling another dispatcher, “I hacked them to death with a machete," the document says.
...
Dickerson said religion was “not pertinent” to the murder case, the Tulsa World reported.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/okla-man-decapitates-son-state-trooper-grisly-murder-cops-article-1.1993242

[trotsky]

1. Actually, noted intellectual theologians like Karen Armstrong and Reza Aslan tell us that...

religion is NEVER pertinent. Religion is only good and pure and wonderful, and never ever motivates anyone to do bad things. Isn't that nice to know?

[Warren Stupidity]

2. It is never about religion when these things happen.

Religious idiots on youtube can cut people's heads off while proclaiming that they are doing it for their gods and that is not about religion, and they are muslims who we are allowed to hate. So Christians killing witches? Well obviously that has nothing to do with religion. It isn't like the absolute ruler of the largest Christian denomination believes in demons or anything like that. It isn't like people are still being killed for witchcraft on a regular basis around the world by superstitious religious loons or anything. Nah. Never about religion.

[TM99]

3. So Muriel, is this going to be another thread

on how mental illness and religious belief go hand in hand? Or maybe it is a just example of 'biblical literalism' taken to far?

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. No.

[TM99]

15. Sure looks like it

But hey don't let facts and reality get in the way of an agenda.

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. Let's examine your question:

"is this going to be another thread on how mental illness and religious belief go hand in hand?"

No-one has tried to make such a point yet. So far, so good.

"Or maybe it is a just example of 'biblical literalism' taken to far?"

This seems to be nonsense, to me. Nothing here about biblical literalism.

My reply to your "sure looks like it" is "don't let facts and reality get in the way of an agenda". The facts and reality are that no-one is linking mental illness and religious belief, and no-one is talking about biblical literalism, so it doesn't look like it at all. The way you bring up biblical literalism, which seems to have crept in from another thread, makes me suspect you have an agenda.

[rug]

19. I'm sure you just posted this three week old murder in the Religion Group in passing.

No other purpose at all.

[cbayer]

22. Wait! You changed the headline to include the word zealot and you are accusing her

of having an agenda?

To use a phrase that you just used on me, "Hypocrisy. muriel_volestrangler is your name."

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. Yes, I am accusing TM99 of having an agenda.

"Zealot" is a direct quote from the first paragraph of the story; it's used in other headlines for the story, and is the word the victim's brother, who lived in the apartment where the murder took place but wasn't there, used. The NY Daily News used 'strong Christian beliefs', though I'm not sure who put it that way. However, I thought it worth not revealing the 'Christian' rather than 'Muslim' before the body of the post. And "Man with ‘strong Christian beliefs’" is too big, with the rest I wanted to highlight - the 'magic and sacrifice'.

I have a point to make, and I've made it repeatedly - that religious motives for violence are quickly brought up for Muslims, but dismissed for Christians. You can call that an 'agenda' if you want.

TM99's agenda appears to be to disrail a thread with unrelated rubbish about 'biblical literalism'. And to accuse people of saying mental illness and religion go hand in hand, when no-one has said that. And then to claim, without evidence, that they have. Their agenda seems to be 'disrupt the thread'.

[cbayer]

26. Everyone has an agenda, not least of which is you.

You changed the headline to suit your agenda. You chose this particular article from the sensationalist Daily News to suit your agenda.

You are trying to score points against religion by using this horrible event involving a very psychiatrically disturbed and chemically dependent person.

Your point is completely debunked by both the article you post and the headline of the other article. His religiosity is prominent in both of them. In fact, the only dismissal is by one LEO. The religious "motives" are being very quickly and prominently brought up. I think it's wrong to do so when a person is suffering from an untreated and severe psychiatric illness that involves religiosity.

It's just plain wrong.

[Goblinmonger]

40. But that's not the point being made.

As I think is clear, why isn't the religion of this person used when it is used in similar instances with Muslim individuals?

[rug]

41. "Muslim" wasn't even mentioned for 24 posts.

[cbayer]

42. It was used. It was in the headline of every single article that I have seen about this.

The only thing that the OP brings up is that a single LEO made a single statement that religion wasn't involved.

That's it.

But the already damning language about religion wasn't strong enough for the OP, who felt the need to change the headline.

Shame on anyone who uses this kind of tragedy to score cheap points against any group, be they religious or not.

[TM99]

23. Well Rug & CBayer pretty much

nailed you on your shit, so I don't really need to waste time on your deflective reply.

Nice try though.

[muriel_volestrangler]

25. Rug is on 'ignore'; cbayer showed nothing - just said I had an agenda.

So, no, no-one has "nailed me on my shit"; I have not 'deflected' anything. I've pointed out you're talking rubbish. You just make accusations without evidence. Your post (can I say 'your shit'? Yes, why not - your shit) does seem to be aimed at deflecting from discussion of the different standards the media and police apply to Christian and Muslim suspects, though.

Feel free to repeat rug's no-doubt masterly argument, if you think it 'nails' me.

[TM99]

30. The usual bullshit.

Yes, Cbayer and I continue to call you on your shit.

You chose an article from three weeks ago to make a nebulous point that somehow Muslims and Christians are treated differently when it comes to criminal cases and the media in the US.

Do you have short-term memory loss? Just a few months back there was another long and rancorous discussion about a man who killed his son because he believed in demons. The man had a mental illness which was untreated. The man was a Muslim. The same shit was said then about religion being the 'root' cause when it was actually about mental illness. You and the same bunch of anti-theists tried your religion = mental illness schtick then, so given this is basically the same damned type of case with the same sensationalistic media headlines, and the same deflecting verbiage, it is hard to not suspect an agenda.

Why would I not also bring in Biblical literalism as another possible meaning for just such a post as this? Well, you are discussing it in another thread here on these boards. You believe that it is a prominent component of all religion, and if this is not about a man's mental illness, then it must surely be about his literalistic belief in his religious texts that caused him to commit homicide.

Your attempts to show that this is somehow different because it was a Christian and not a Muslim is just factually wrong. When Alton Nolan beheaded Colleen Hufford, any quick attempts to link it with ISIS (who had just recently beheaded a journalist) were quickly dismissed.

From the NY Daily News article - http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/okla-man-beheads-woman-workplace-fight-report-article-1.1953778

Police said there was no evidence that Nolen’s newfound faith figured in the grisly attack on Hufford and another woman who worked at the plant.

“This suspect was angry about some sort of incident that happened at the business,” Sgt. Jeremy Lewis of the Moore Police Department said. “These women really had nothing to do with that. He was just acting out against them. They are the first people he came in contact with.”

From the OP article:

Dickerson said religion was “not pertinent” to the murder case, the Tulsa World reported.

So yes, please tell us all again how this case with a mentally disturbed Christian man is different from another recent case with a mentally disturbed Muslim man? Where exactly are the different standards of behavior between the police and the media in both of these cases? They both happened to have occurred in Oklahoma, so we are waiting for you to show us the very obvious to you double standard here.

Given there isn't one, and you can't make one given the facts as presented, it is reasonable to assume you have an ulterior motive for posting this. So sue me if I doubt your motives and suspect that it relates to either the mental illness angle or the literalistic angle which are favorite debating points (and wow do I use that term loosely!) of the anti-theists here at DU, yourself included.

[muriel_volestrangler]

31. No, I did not say "religion = mental illness" then, or at any time

Your entire premise is thus a load of bollocks. You think you know me and what I say, but clearly you don't. Your prejudice, based on not being able to remember what I said, has led you to accuse me of having an agenda that I don't have. Everything your saying in this thread is based on your mistake there.

You ought to get a basic fact right before launching into false accusations about people's agendas.

[TM99]

34. My premise is not a load of bollocks.

Why did you post this? Why now?

Your stated reason is that it shows that Christians are treated differently than Muslims. Previous posts and my facts in reply to you show that this is not true.

So I conjecture that there is an ulterior motive and it is not unreasonable to do so given a strong anti-theist stance.

Simple questions for you. Do you believe that religious believers are delusional? Do you believe that those who follow a religion are more likely or simply do suffer from mental illness. Are you able to distinguish even within your OP that the man who is mentioned is suffering from a mental illness separate from any and perhaps all religious belief?

If you are willing to answer those, then yes, I am willing to dismiss my first conjecture as inaccurate. We can move on from there to the second.

[muriel_volestrangler]

43. I posted it because I read about the case this morning

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/Religious-Tests-And-The-US-Constitution

I think religions are false claims about reality that some people keep going for their own benefit, and that the more gullible people fall for. They thus fit the non-psychiatric definition of 'delusion'. I wouldn't call a believer 'delusional' in general; since they are falling for one particular delusion, they may be delusional about that specific thing. I don't think religious followers suffer from a mental illness; I have no idea if they would be more or less likely to. I don't think you can separate the particular murder in the OP from his religion, though, given his accusation of his victim beforehand of 'witchcraft', and his talk afterwards of magic and sacrifice.

You've diagnosed a mental illness in the murderer; do you regard being a heavy drug user as a mental illness? Is the murder what made you decide it's a mental illness? Or was it the 'troubled thoughts' on Facebook, which are about religion?

[TM99]

44. OK, let's chat then.

First, why didn't you just post that link? I and many others here, religious or not, are in total agreement on the separation of church and state.

What does that topic have to do with this OP?

On the topic of delusions, religions, and mental illness you are one of those here who seem to want it both ways. You want to use the colloquial meaning AND at the same time imply that there, you know, may or may not be a connection with religion.

As a professional in the field, I find that troublesome. I have stated as much many times on these boards. It is offensive in many ways, and worse, it is just not how the field of psychology views religion, delusions, or mental illness.

Religious symbolism, dogma, rituals, etc. can certainly be a part of a true psychiatric delusional state. The person may or may not be religious either before or after the event. Therefore, to imply that religion or religious belief itself is a root or even tertiary cause is inaccurate.

I can suspect given what has been reported that a likely mental illness diagnosis would be forthcoming. Even if that diagnosis is not there, a drug induced psychotic state can demonstrate everything that is on display in this case. So yes, there is more going on with this man than just 'religious belief in witchcraft'.

If you wanted to discuss the separation of church and state, you could have used the linked story provided here or many others. If you wanted to discuss any possible discrepancy in the way that a Muslim murderer and a Christian murderer are treated in the media and the justice system in America, you really needed to provided much better examples of both. As it stands you have not.

So with what you have shared here, I maintain that my initial assessment is likely quite accurate. This OP comes across as another in a long line of posts by anti-theists attempting to link mental illness and religion. You are being called out on it by several of us because it is both inaccurate and offensive.

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. I didn't post that link because I didn't want to discuss separation of church and state

I wanted to discuss the Marin case, which that link mentioned. I had not heard of it before; in comparison with the murder by the Muslim in Oklahoma, it seemed to have been little noticed on DU.

In individual cases, mental illness and religion can both be present. When a killer has ideas about 'witchcraft', 'evil' or 'possession', it looks like religion has made them fearful of something imaginary, and it has told them that this is a danger to them and the world. In such cases, if they kill someone, religion must take a large part of the blame.

You are continuing to say I want to imply a connection between religion and mental illness. That's untrue, and you have no evidence for it. That is what's inaccurate and offensive here - you claiming you can speak for me, and saying I have bad motives for my OP. You aren't trying in any way to apologise for this unfounded accusation. I caused no offense in the OP. You just guessed, incorrectly, about how I thought, and took offence at your wrong guess.

And, if you're a professional in the field, that "short term memory loss" remark was reprehensible.

[cbayer]

46. There is just not the data to support your supposition here.

When a killer has ideas about 'witchcraft', 'evil' or 'possession', it looks like religion has made them fearful of something imaginary, and it has told them that this is a danger to them and the world. In such cases, if they kill someone, religion must take a large part of the blame.

Religion is sometimes involved in psychiatric states because when inexplicable things are happening, people will grab on to whatever they can to make sense out of it. Many people develop beliefs that have to do with the government and the cia spying on them or controlling their brains. Should the government or the CIA take a large part of the blame when that happens?

Some people are religious before the events and some are not at all religious. Some are religious after the event is over and some have no religious beliefs at all when not psychotic.

When you say religion is responsible and must take a large part of the blame when a psychotic person becomes violent, you are indeed making an unsubstantiated connection between religion and psychiatric illness.

You caused no offense in the OP? You most certainly did.

You think someone making a remark about short term memory is reprehensible, but calling people delusional for having religious beliefs is just hunky dory? Unbelievable.

[muriel_volestrangler]

48. As we have established, time and again, 'delusion' has a non-psychiatric meaning

which long predates the psychiatric one. So, yes, saying that people fall for a false claim is not offensive; while a 'professional' asking if I have short term memory loss is offensive, and deeply unprofessional.

Again, I did not cause offence. People who think they can dictate what other people 'really mean' are the ones causing offence.

"Religion is sometimes involved in psychiatric states because when inexplicable things are happening, people will grab on to whatever they can to make sense out of it. Many people develop beliefs that have to do with the government and the cia spying on them or controlling their brains. Should the government or the CIA take a large part of the blame when that happens? "

That 'because' is rather limiting. Religion is also involved when it has told people that evil spirits take control of other people. Belief in that doesn't just happen when someone has a psychiatric problem; the Pope claims to believe it. But if people believe it, and then develop a mental illness, they can decide, as we have seen in cases, that a powerful, evil demon is controlling someone - and religion has told them that this endangers the person's very soul. So, in their disturbed state, they end up doing something violent, because they think that will drive the demon out.

The govt/CIA do not tell people they are controlling their brains. They do not tell them that anyone can control anyone's brains. If someone is violent to themselves or others because they believe the government is doing mind control on someone, then those who spread such ideas (Alex Jones? David Icke? I don't know if they do say that, precisely, but people like them) should take some blame, yes. The blame is because religions encourage beliefs that are delusional, such as 'possession'. In a similar fashion, I blame people who say that children should not receive any medical treatment for a life-threatening condition, and some idiot parent believes them. Frequently, of course, it's a religion that has said that.

[cbayer]

50. So does short term memory, but you found it reprehensible.

It was obviously a tongue in cheek response meant to point out that you had conveniently forgotten about another thread. Do you really for a single second think you were being accused of having dementia? Are you dictating what that person really meant?

You may have been offended but it is far from deeply unprofessional. It was so benign as to be laughable, unless one is looking for a reason to get outrage.

You did cause offense. Your OP and your goal in posting it are offensive.

And now you are just doubling down in your attempt to blame religion for psychiatric disease. This is both offensive to those who are religious and those with psychiatric disease.

There are lots of beliefs about the CIA and the government and mind control and all of that. So I ask again, is the government responsible when someone becomes delusional about these things?

You have no expertise in the field of psychiatry or psychologically, just beliefs based on faith. You have no data to support what you are saying. And what you are saying is much more offensive and reprehensible than asking someone about their short term memory.

Again, people can become very religious when they are psychotic without ever having had the experiences you describe or having been religious previously. There isn't any correlation.

But you know, religion is a disease that poisons everything and together we can find a cure and when we do, incidents like this will never happen again and everything will be perfect.

Unless of course it involves a muslim…… or something.

[muriel_volestrangler]

55. Why are you asking that again? I explicitly answered that

Here it is, since you didn't bother reading:

"The govt/CIA do not tell people they are controlling their brains. They do not tell them that anyone can control anyone's brains. If someone is violent to themselves or others because they believe the government is doing mind control on someone, then those who spread such ideas (Alex Jones? David Icke? I don't know if they do say that, precisely, but people like them) should take some blame, yes."

And so I won't bother reading or responding to the rest of your post, since what I saw before that was just you repeating what you'd already said anyway. And making stupid accusations like "and now you are just doubling down in your attempt to blame religion for psychiatric disease". There is nothing remotely like that in what I wrote. You're just making up crap.

[cbayer]

57. I'm neither making up crap nor making stupid accusations.

But that you are not going to read my post or respond to it in any substantive way is not surprising at this point. When you get to baseless personal attacks, there is generally only one reason for it.

Gotta go. I have a case to prepare against those that have talked about NSA spying because they are in large part responsible for the heinous acts of grossly psychotic people who have developed beliefs that their brains are being picked.

[muriel_volestrangler]

58. "When you get to baseless personal attacks" - you got there a long time ago

You are accusing me of saying religion leads to mental illness. Your purpose in joining this thread has looked like defamation from the beginning.

[TM99]

56. This is rich.

So, yes, saying that people fall for a false claim is not offensive; while a 'professional' asking if I have short term memory loss is offensive, and deeply unprofessional.

1. I am not YOUR therapist.
2. You are not a patient or client of mine in a group therapy environment.
3. This is not a workplace.
4. DU is like the neighborhood pub. If I am spouting off on legal issues that I know nothing about and Bill, an actual lawyer, says "Hey J, you are full of shit. That's not accurate." He IS NOT being unprofessional. He knows the law, and we are in a non-professional environment.

You knew damned well that my comment was a dig and not a 'professional diagnostic question'. From your last reply, you knew exactly what thread I was referencing from months ago. Did you think perhaps that others might forget the similarities in both your OP and your responses now? Well, some of us didn't.

You claim knowledge that you simply do not have. Yet when called out on it time and time again by others who actually do, you claim innocence and offense.

This has been occurring in this Religion forum now for months. You and others continuously want to connect religion and mental illness through the use of the word delusion. When religious people tell you it is offensive, do you stop? No. When people with mental illness say it is offensive, do you stop? No. When trained mental health professionals say, not only is it offensive, but it is inaccurate, do you stop? No.

So go back to the A&A safe haven where you are allowed apparently to spout such offensive and inaccurate dribble. But as long as you attempt to do so here in the Religion forum, then yes, some are going to call you out. Some are going to challenge you. And some are not going to be all sugar and sweetness while doing so.

[muriel_volestrangler]

59. You're making up bullshit about me too; that, too, has been your purpose from the beginning

At one point I thought it was because you mistook me for someone else. But, no, you continue to make false accusations without evidence. I now realise it's due to simple malice on your part.

You're a disgrace to whatever profession you have, incidentally.

[TM99]

60. Your insults aside, I am

simply responding to what you write in this thread. I am also able to review what you have said in others. You are consistent. I will give you that.

You assume malice now? It just gets richer and richer.

Yeah, I am done.

[Lordquinton]

66. What is wrong with Mental illness?

Why is there such an uproar when the suggestion is made? Why do you, a supposed psychiatrist, or some such, keep on stigmatizing the people you were allegedly supposed to be helping?

Why is it preferable in some religious circles (largely roman catholic ones) that a person be possessed by daemons, rather than admit that they have a mental illness?

[cbayer]

67. Please tell me exactly what you saw in my post that would

lead you to think that I am saying that there is something wrong with mental illness and that which shows that I am stigmatizing those with mental illness.

I look forward to correcting your obvious misreading of my statements.

In terms of your last question, because of the stigmatization, marginalization and lack of adequate services, there is pressure for people to look for answers other than a psychiatric illness. This is tragic, but not likely to change until we address the massive problems in our mental health system.

Part of the problem is the colloquial and derogatory use of words and phrases which describe psychiatric illness. When people use the word retard, that hurts people with mental retardation. When people call sane people delusional, that hurts people with actual delusions.

[Lordquinton]

72. because every time the mere mention that religious worship

technically falls under the DVSM definition of delusion, a particular group gets really bent out of shape at the idea, and goes on a massive offensive about being accused of being mentally ill. Your over reactions here do way more to stigmatize mental illness than to help the problem.

It's never (unless confronted) "Hey, there may be some people who suffer from delusions, but the majority of believers just do it because that's their family tradition" or something like that. You throw up a straw man that the person who says belief in god is a delusion (technically is) to be that they were calling all believers delusional, which hurts the mentally ill because you're saying they did something wrong there. (colloquial you here, to avoid the inevitable derailment)

Maybe if more believers like you condemned the practices of exorcism, instead of throwing up their hands and saying "What can you do?" there would be something done about it. Maybe you should be aiming this at the Pope, who is enabling the active harm of mentally disabled church members by endorsing the practice of exorcism?

[cbayer]

73. It's the DSM and religious worship doesn't technically fall under

the definition provided by psychiatric diagnostic manuals at all. So if "a particular group gets really bent out of shape", it's probably because they are pushing back against rubbish.

LOL, on trying to twist this into me causing more stigmatization. That must have taken an enormous amount of intellectual dishonesty and cognitive dissonance. But when one has a resource in abundance, it never hurts to use some of it.

Try to understand this. When perfectly sane people who do not fit the criteria for a serious psychiatric symptom are repeatedly labeled with that symptom (even if there is some lame claim that it is "colloquial&quot , that hurts the people who actually suffer from it. It's the reason that "retard" isn't tolerated on this site.

You really should take the opportunity to educate yourself on the RCC's position regarding psychiatric illness as it pertains to exorcism. Otherwise, your statements look uninformed at best and ignorant at worst.

I'm not a believer. I've told you that repeatedly. You can't seem to get your head around that, though. Why is that? One member asked me recently to deny christ three times and called me a liar when I wouldn't. Seriously. Do you want me to do that as well?

Your distortions of me, what I say and my position on things is almost unparalleled. Why, some might even call them delusional. I wouldn't, but the case could be made.

I'm a threat because I'm not what you expect or want me to be.

That's just too bad.

[TM99]

47. You are communicating in bad faith.

In individual cases, mental illness and religion can both be present. When a killer has ideas about 'witchcraft', 'evil' or 'possession', it looks like religion has made them fearful of something imaginary, and it has told them that this is a danger to them and the world. In such cases, if they kill someone, religion must take a large part of the blame.

No. And to believe, to state, or to imply otherwise IS making a connection between religion and mental illness.

I do not need to 'speak for you'. I am simply replying, as have others, to what you are actually continuing to say in this thread.

Ah, the offender takes offense.

You claim to be bringing up this topic in good faith to discuss the differences between Christian and Muslim treatment for the same types of acts. Do you remember that thread about the Muslim man and his delusions? Of course you do.

[muriel_volestrangler]

49. The thread about the Muslim man and his delusions?

I said:

Possession by Shatan is presented as truth. "The Truth", in fact.

I'd blame a "psychic researcher" too, if one had spent ages trying to persuade the man that their claims were real.

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/1218117235#post20

No. And to believe, to state, or to imply otherwise IS making a connection between religion and mental illness.

That's just rubbish. If a religion has told someone that an evil spirit is a mortal danger, and the person does violence because they believe it, then the religion must take some blame. As someone saying life-saving treatment is wrong must take blame if someone believes them and avoid the treatment as a result.

[Brettongarcia]

68. Earlier we cited dozens of prof. Psychiatric articles that suggested Religion is not incidental but

actually causal, in producing many delusions.

Think about it: wouldn't telling people that say, Jesus can physically appear to them any second, tend to encourage that delusion? And therefore, magical thinking and delusions in general?

Corroborating this common sense notion, the professional literature furthermore suggested that these effects, delusions, could be produced even in those not otherwise inclined - by mental habits, or biology - to have them.

So that we are not dealing with people who already had mental problems ... that later happened to take the form of religious delusions.

We are dealing in large part with people who would have done OK ... until religion got them.

[Warren Stupidity]

32. Perhaps you can make an argument without accusing people of having dementia.

"Do you have short-term memory loss?"

That is a rude obnoxious and over the top comment. Please stop.

[rug]

33. In keeping with the hypocrisy theme,

"That is a rude obnoxious and over the top comment. Please stop."

[Warren Stupidity]

5. Would you like it to be?

[bvf]

13. Do you even have to ask? n/t

[cbayer]

7. It is nothing but that.

[phil89]

52. Mental illness doesn't cause violence

You do know that, right?

[TM99]

54. Mentally ill individuals

can be violent when in psychotic delusional states. Not all of course. We are discussing a particular case. We are also discussing particular instances where a mental illness is the root cause of a tragically violent act and not the false correlation to religious belief.

But you know that right?

[Warren Stupidity]

64. How do you know that religious beliefs were not a factor?

[rug]

65. Why don't you ask him to explain what he actually said?

[Brettongarcia]

69. So belief in miracles is not a delusion?

[cbayer]

6. OMG! A Daily News piece about how a victim of our disastrous mental health system

and heavy drug user, who became grossly psychotic with a religious theme, completely decompensates and kills someone.

BTW, see all those burns all over his face. That's a dead giveaway of a meth addict.

Religion, together we can find a cure.

Not sure how the Muslim reference fits here at all. You think if this had been a Muslim, that people would have said that religion did play a part? Possibly, but probably only the same ones who feel it was a critical part of this heinous event.

[edhopper]

8. Yes they would

and did.

http://humanevents.com/2010/07/20/muslim-beheads-wife-claims-victim-status/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/04/man-beheads-wife-on-roof-of-apartment-in-berlin_n_1567509.html?

http://shariaunveiled.wordpress.com/2013/10/30/munichgermany-muslim-man-beheads-his-wife-with-an-axe/

[cbayer]

11. Who is they? Who in these articles is blaming religion?

Well, actually the first article, which is from a stridently conservative islamophobic site does, but I would hope we aren't taking their side.

In the other two articles, there is nothng indicating that anything other than mental illness was at play here.

[edhopper]

14. Thee buffalo story

was all over the news. And the Muslim reference was always prevalent.
Yes it's about mental illness, but when a Muslim is involved, that is always stated.
That's all I was trying to say.

Last post today, have to leave.

[cbayer]

16. It's always stated whenever someone has developed religiously based delusions, imo.

Particularly in this group.

It would be great if we could all recognize that serious, untreated psychiatric illness and/or substance abuse is a national disgrace and never use these cases to score points in the fight either for or against religion.

[trotsky]

27. See, that's what's wrong.

It would be great if we could all recognize that serious, untreated psychiatric illness and/or substance abuse is a national disgrace and never use these cases to score points in the fight either for or against religion.

I bet every single person in this group recognizes that mental illness is a problem that really needs to be addressed. You will get no argument there. So why repeat it as often as you do in order to knock it down? Why insist on misrepresenting others' positions and demonizing them? Again with the straw man being the only thing you can argue against. You're better than that, aren't you?

And you're the ONLY ONE who ever talks about "scoring points." No one else gives a shit about points, they just want a discussion. An open, no-holds-barred discussion. But for some reason you don't want that to happen.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. Yes, I do think that if he'd been a Muslim, the near-beheading would have been tied to it

like Oklahoma state representatives with this beheading (warning - autoplay): http://newsok.com/oklahoma-house-caucus-claims-moore-beheading-was-terrorism-not-workplace-violence/article/5346844

[cbayer]

12. Look at the links put up by edhopper above.

You are pulling out one anecdotal case.

And, correct me if I am wrong, but you seem to be saying that if a person is christian, we give them a pass when they become psychotic and violent, but we don't do the same for muslims?

I don't think that is accurate and a single incident in which some OK state legislators decide that an act was religiously based and want to do something about them muslims in their midst does not make the case.

The Feds determined this to be workplace violence.

[muriel_volestrangler]

20. I'm saying this Christian got a pass, even when he rambled about magic and sacrifice

after the murder. That points to religion being involved, but the police have decided to ignore it. If a Muslim rambled about 'sacrifice' after nearly beheading someone, I think the media and police would be all over it.

[cbayer]

21. Everyone who commits a heinous crime due to untreated psychiatric illness

and/or substance abuse should get a pass when it comes to religion.

Using them to make cheap points is much worse than whatever point you are trying to make.

Should they try to deconvert him? Do you think that would solve the problem.

Are you aware that in many, many of these cases the person has no unusual religious beliefs and even no beliefs at all once their underlying illness is treated?

If your only point here is that christians get better treatment than muslims when it comes to the MSM, I think we can probably all agree.

[Warren Stupidity]

28. hmmm... but you have assumed the conclusion there.

"due to untreated psychiatric illness and/or substance abuse" - well sure if the cause is psychiatric illness or - well substance abuse in itself doesn't cause beheadings, so we can stop at psychiatric illness - then the cause is not religion, unless of course it was a psychotic delusion with religious content, then we are in a bit of a pickle as to the cause. But certainly this couldn't have been a psychotic delusion with religious content, as this person wasn't acting insane and babbling religious nonsense, oh wait....

But other than armchair remote psychiatric diagnosis by headline professionals most of us can't really diagnose why this idiot did what he did.

[trotsky]

29. Well, Warren, clearly there is one thing we all CAN know.

Religion PLAYED NO ROLE IN THIS WHATSOEVER SO STOP SAYING THAT!

[rug]

10. Do you know how many psychotropics he's recived in the three weeks since this article was printed?

Here's a more thorough, and less sensational, article.

Stillwater near-beheading suspect has family history of homicide

- snip -

Marin told detectives he fantasized about killing four or five people and that Crockett was one of those targets, police said in a press conference Thursday.

- snip -

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/state/victim-s-head-mostly-severed-from-body-stillwater-police-say/article_56dfc3a5-bab7-529d-88c1-8e0d4f3b0074.html

And I always had the impression you respected facts.

[cbayer]

18. But he can be used to score points! I doesn't matter that he is a victim

of the tragedy that is our psychiatric health care system.

[phil89]

53. So you think mental illness causes violence?

Sorry, that's incorrect.

[rug]

61. From your post I'd say reading ability more likely effects comprehension.

Discarding what you think I said, mental illness per se does not cause violence but there are certainly some, as in this case, whose mental illness is manifested in violent acts.

Before you go any further, I spent eleven years representing criminal defendants who were mentally ill and, as a result were found to be incompetent to stand trial or were found to be not responsible for the crimes (many exceedingly violent) charged due to mental disease or defect.

So stick to my words if you want to cite me, and do not reshape them for the purposes of whatever preformed point you're attempting to make.

[struggle4progress]

35. ... Police said Marin admitted to the murder. He had a number of reasons for it, but police

would only say that Marin had fantasized about committing multiple homicides, and the victim was one of his targets ...

ME Releases Cause, Manner Of Death For Stillwater Murder Victim
Posted: Nov 04, 2014 10:46 AM EST
Updated: Nov 04, 2014 10:46 AM EST

[struggle4progress]

36. ... The first 911 calls Wednesday came in at 2:46 p.m., one of which was Marin.

Police have said he admitted to killing someone in the 911 call ... The 8 minute, 21 second call with Marin contains blank spaces that were redacted by the Stillwater Police Department. The recording also contains police dispatch information and stretches of silence when Marin is on the phone, but not talking into it. He initially tells the dispatcher to “have the ambulance pick me up at the parking lot,” according to the recording. Five minutes later, he is running from police. The dispatcher asks where he’s at, and then, “What’s going on?”
His response is cut out of the recording. Police say Marin was rambling about witchcraft and magic ...

Slaying suspect stayed on 911 call until he was captured by police
Posted: Tuesday, November 4, 2014 12:17 am
By Megan Sando/Stillwater News Press

[struggle4progress]

37. ... Isaiah Marin has a troubled past. According to a blog written by his own brother

and confirmed through court records, their father was murdered in 1998 in San Antonio, Texas and their mother Dianna Marin was convicted of conspiracy to commit the murder ...

Court Records Show Stillwater Sword Murder Suspect's Troubled Past
Posted: Oct 31, 2014 11:32 PM EDT
Updated: Nov 01, 2014 8:34 AM EDT
BY EVAN ANDERSON, NEWS 9

[struggle4progress]

38. ... Marin-Eason said since her son was murdered, she has no sympathy for her grandson.

"Just like their mother, she chose to have my son murdered and Isaiah also chose to kill that boy,” Marin-Eason said. According to Oklahoma court records, Marin is a religious zealot and a heavy drug user ...

Grandmother speaks after grandson with San Antonio ties arrested for murder
Updated: Saturday, November 1 2014, 11:28 PM CDT
By: Ashlei King

[struggle4progress]

39. ... According to Stillwater police, at this time they have found no evidence

that this homicide was tied to any radical religious motive ...

Stillwater Police Identify Suspect, Victim In Homicide
Posted: Oct 30, 2014 1:22 PM EDT Updated: Oct 30, 2014 5:49 PM EDT
BY XIN XIN LIU, NEWS9.COM

[darkangel218]

51. Ive met some pretty nasty, evil, backstabing "christians" in my life

Wearing a cross and calling yourself "Christian" shouldn'tput someone above the law, or LE assume their ideology is all peaceful. There are some fundies who are just as dangerous as any other terrorist out there.

[struggle4progress]

62. "Marin ... is charged with first-degree murder, and is being held without bail at the Payne Count"

Victim remembered for his love of music
Posted: Friday, November 7, 2014 9:00 am
By Megan Sando/Stillwater News Press

[cbayer]

63. Did you even read this article?

This person is not above the law in any way and no one has assumed he is peaceful. This person was grossly psychotic and became extremely violent as a result of his illness.

Your hostility towards all things religious is blinding you and causing you to say embarrassingly inaccurate things.

[Brettongarcia]

70. Christianity has been made above the law in Christian nations.

It can make countless claims of miracles, and never be called to account for say, Fraud.

[darkangel218]

74. Here is what you said:

cbayer
63. Did you even read this article?
This person is not above the law in any way and no one has assumed he is peaceful. This person was grossly psychotic and became extremely violent as a result of his illness.

Your hostility towards all things religious is blinding you and causing you to say embarrassingly inaccurate things.

You notice I bolded your personal attack. I saw this when you first replied but didn't have time to reply ( to your hate).
You are not the first xtian to attack me like that. And you won't be the last.
I am not even an atheist. I believe in an afterlife.. I am just not sure of what's out there, if anything. And even if I was "sure", I wouldn't push it onto others.
I called on fundamentalists. And I "laughed" when you said that religion is what keeps the world going ( or something like that).

Perheps if you will try to understand what people are saying back to you , instead of jumping on personal attacks, perheps then we could have a conversation.

[cbayer]

75. You're not the first person to make inaccurate assumptions about me because you

don't like what I say to you.


I'm not a "xtian" and it makes no difference to me at all what you call yourself.

Your hostility towards religion is glaringly obvious from this and other posts and your response showed clearly that you either hadn't read the article or completely missed the key points. My noting that and saying that you are blinded by your hostility is not a personal attack, it's a reflection of your views and how you express them.

I am sure I'm not the first and won't be the last to point this blatantly obvious thing out to you.

Perhaps if you would read the source material prior to commenting on it, instead of jumping to conclusions and attacking religious people, we could have a conversation.

Maybe we could even have a conversation that rises above a response of "You can't possibly be serious" and 3 rolling on the floor smilies.

[darkangel218]

77. You just can't let go of personal attacks, can you?

. You're not the first person to make inaccurate assumptions about me because you
don't like what I say to you.


I'm not a "xtian" and it makes no difference to me at all what you call yourself.

Your hostility towards religion is glaringly obvious from this and other posts and your response showed clearly that you either hadn't read the article or completely missed the key points. My noting that and saying that you are blinded by your hostility is not a personal attack, it's a reflection of your views and how you express them.

I am sure I'm not the first and won't be the last to point this blatantly obvious thing out to you.

Perhaps if you would read the source material prior to commenting on it, instead of jumping to conclusions and attacking religious people, we could have a conversation.

Maybe we could even have a conversation that rises above a response of "You can't possibly be serious" and 3 rolling on the floor smilies.

You are the one calling me hostile, when is you posting personal attacks. You made a statement, that the religion keeps the world going ( lol again ). I laughed at your statement, not at religion. As I stated before, I respect people's beliefs , as long as they don't push it onto others ( ie the fundamentalists).
And I have read the article, I was simply making a point.

You can portray yourself as a victim, and blame others , but the only one personally attacking others is you.

[cbayer]

78. Yes, I believe, based on what I have read from you that you are hostile towards religion.

No matter how much bolding you do, you will not be able to make the case that anything I have said to you is a personal attack.

When you are unable to realize that some people benefit from religion and some people's very lives depend upon it, I am going to say that that kind of black and white thinking indicates a distorting hostility towards religion.

If you do respect people's beliefs, it certainly doesn't come across in your posts.

I suggested to you a very good documentary that will eviscerate your expressed ideas that religion isn't important in keeping some people alive. Did you get a chance to see it?

I don't feel victimized at all and I have no idea who and what you think I'm blaming others for. All I am doing here is challenging your stated beliefs.

There is nothing personal about it, it just seems to make you uncomfortable. This invariably happens when one's erroneous beliefs are challenged, whether that person is religious or not.

And I will repeat this. If you did actually read the article and came away with the false conclusion that this guy is being put above the law because of his supposed religious beliefs, then there is some really serious distortion going on.

[darkangel218]

79. "There is nothing personal about it"?

Your hostility towards all things religious is blinding you and causing you to say embarrassingly inaccurate things.
Reply
Alert

You don't know me from Adam ( no pun intended!), and I am not one of the anti religion posters on here or anywhere else, for you to make such statements.
I explained I was referring to fundamentalists in my earlier posts, and you continue your attacks.
Does religious fundamentalism and religion mean the same thing to you, cbayer? Perheps you're confusing the two terms?

This invariably happens when one's erroneous beliefs are challenged, whether that person is religious or not.

And you consider calling people hostile and being rude to them as "challanging their beliefs"?

Lol..

[cbayer]

80. Something certainly upsets you about that word hostile.

I only know you from your posting on DU.

You replied in another thread about religion going extinct by saying you hoped so, that religious believers are brainwashed and that religious people don't have power over their own lives.

Now, how you can honestly then turn around and say that you are not anti-religion baffles me . If you object to the word hostile to describe that POV, would you feel better if used the word intolerant or negative?

Never in that particular post did you distinguish between fundamentalists and other kinds of religious people. I'm not confusing anything at all, dark angel. I'm just challenging your POV.

[darkangel218]

81. No, im not anti religious, im anti fundamentalist religion.

I can worship my cat and call her god, I'm not harming or hurting anyone by doing that. Radical fundamentalism on the other hand is dangereus. Can you admit to that? Can you admit that fundamentalism can affect peoples lives and we'll being, and not in a good way?

I won't hold my breath.

You go on with your insults and call them "challanging my POV". Lol. Have a nice evening, not worth my time.

[cbayer]

82. If you would make the distinction instead of using a broad brush, I think

you would be much less likely to be misunderstood.

We basically agree. I think that fundamentalism is often and in many ways a negative influence on both individuals and society at large.

Too bad you didn't hold your breath. It would have been an easy challenge. I would like to point out that your assumptions about me were again incorrect

If in the future you post a POV that I take issue with and I see it, there is a very good chance that I will challenge. I expect that you will doe the same to me.

You have a nice evening too. Sorry to have wasted your time, lol, but c'est la vie.

[Brettongarcia]

71. Why is Christianity said to be responsble when it causes good things - but never bad things?

The whole basic premise of Christianity is partially this: that you can learn it, and it changes your behavior.

Why is this basic premise of Christianity, its CAUSAL EFFICACY, suddenly abandoned, when it turns out that behavior is bad?

You can't maintain Christianity at all, if you reject the notion that it causes things.

YOu can't hold the idea Christianity effects anything, and causes good, and still reject out of hand the thesis that it causes bad things.

Therefore, we need to consider the thesis that Christianity could cause delusions.

By all accounts, it changes behavior. If you abandon that general premise, you have abandoned Christianity. And you therefore should not be defending it.

Christianity causes things to happen.

[Prophet 451]

76. Neither, it's because he's clearly cuckoo

Christianity has a lot to blame it for but lunatics filtering it through their insanity isn't one of them.