What makes killing Christians appealing?

[rug]

Monks look at the view following an attack by gunmen against a group of Coptic Christians traveling to a monastery in Minya, Egypt, on May 26, 2017. Photo courtesy of Reuters/Mohamed Abd El Ghany

By Ayman S. Ibrahim | 1 hour ago

(RNS) I was born in Egypt, and my heart is broken by this latest massacre of Coptic Christians who were headed to a monastery in the southern Minya province.

I could not bear exploring horrific photos of innocent young girls and boys butchered. They were supposed to be worshipping and praying in the monastery. For many of these children, visiting a monastery is one of the most anticipated trips. Most of these boys and girls are underprivileged with not enough means to travel and enjoy vacations. Going to pray in a holy place is considered their best option in the summertime.

There has been a reoccurring scene of targeting Christians in Egypt in recent months. Last month, in what was later identified as coordinated suicide attacks, a bomb went off at St. Mark’s Cathedral in Cairo, followed by another in a church in Tanta. More than 100 Copts were wounded or massacred. ISIS claimed responsibility.

Copts are victims of the dreadful mix of political instability and religious intolerance.

http://religionnews.com/2017/05/26/what-makes-killing-christians-appealing/

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

1. That same question could be reworded:

What makes killing Muslims so appealing?

What makes killing Jews so appealing?

What makes killing (fill in the blank here) so appealing.

Humans in general are savage, nasty, blood-thirsty, killing machines. We all too easily divide the world into "us" and "them" and the "them" are almost always fair prey.

[angstlessk]

3. touche with a tilde over the e

Exactly...pick a century, pick a religion...who kills who?

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

5. .Actually, it's an accent aigu:

é.

The tilde is that squiggly line over the letter n (ñ).

I know, picky picky picky.

But thank you.

[rug]

4. It's not an academic question calling for a reflexive answer.

Gunmen kill 26 in attack on Christians in Egypt



Authorities inspect the aftermath of an attack on buses and a truck carrying Coptic Christians in Minya Province, Egypt, on May 26, 2017. (Screenshot from video)

https://www.ncronline.org/news/world/gunmen-kill-26-attack-christians-egypt

[angstlessk]

2. What makes killing Christians appealing? Other RELIGIONS!

Ever hear of the Crusades or the Inquisition? Same thing, different century, different RELIGION.

[rug]

6. Ever hear of the 26 killed today?

[angstlessk]

7. Yes and it is as horrible as the Jews killed during WW2 and those killed in Spain

who refused to become catholic...they are ALL dead because of religion...and it is horrible!

[rug]

8. So, you're saying WWII was a religious war?

That will come as news to most historians - and surviving veterans.

These reflexive talking points when it comes to religion really smears any cogent discssion of what in fact happened today.

[angstlessk]

9. No...killing the Jews cause they thought the Jewish community was against them was religious.

[rug]

12. That's an incoherent sentence.

[angstlessk]

10. It is not reflexive to say religions have ALWAYS murdered their opponents.

We have become more civilized in some areas...but that is becoming more tenuous nowadays with trump.

[MedusaX]

11. What is appealing about any violence against others because they are different?

It would no less tragic had it been a random group of people having no common destination or beliefs or similarities whatsoever.

Hatred and intolerance for those who are different is expressed in many ways...
all of which essentially seek to satisfy the intolerant one's need to 'be right' or 'show superiority'
by attacking or punishing all who dare to hold contrary positions or simply happen to be different ...

[Igel]

13. Depends. Often there are multiple answers.

Revenge is a common one, and it's seen in some of the hate crimes in the US: but it's communal revenge, not individual revenge. It's the kind of revenge that caused a pogrom against Xians when the Russians beat the Turks in a battle. But the peasants didn't see people as Russians or Turks, they saw them in terms of religious identity.

Communal jealousy is a big deal. In the '60s Pashtun Afghanistan had a bit of jihad problem. Turns out that one group had sent a lot of men off to work elsewhere, and that brought in resources. The equilibrium in power between two tribes was disturbed, and collective violence ensued. They dressed it in religious garb even though both sides were Muslim.

Power is another one. Xians in traditional Muslim society are subordinate. They agree to not take up arms and to defend the umma, to be subservient; in return, they are allowed privileges like freedom to quietly worship on their on terms. If they are seen supporting the enemy, then the contract is void. In the case of Egypt, some Copts push for building churches and engaging in public worship. Others are seen as backing al-Sisi, who deposed an overtly Muslim leader in favor of a less fervently Muslim leader.

It's the same thinking for which Hitler deposed the Jews "with prejudice" and billed them as both powerful and undermining German greatness any more than Stalin fought the competing value system of Xianity and the "burzhui". No religion here, but the same kind of group/identity being paramount.

The same thinking accounts for the Bosnian/Serb/Croat mess. It's what happens when you see yourself as a group with rights and privileges inhering in the group. Communalism and tribalism has been the bane of the world since civilization started. Liberals used to know that, then they got infected with the disguised ethnic nationalism that is much "identity"--a response to groups like the KKK, but with a "good" justification for it. Bigotry, supremacy, and all kinds of intergroup hatred follow in short order.