Atheists & Agnostics
Related: About this forumHistory offers countless instances of religion enforcing its inane orthodoxy with violence.
Three Muslim men didn't like the way the authors, journalists, and cartoonists thought, so they murdered them. Twelve lives ended. Families shattered. Children parentless. And Bill Donohue of the Catholic League says, "Muslims are right to be angry." Donohue sided with the murderers, condemning only their method but saying that we should not "tolerate the kind of intolerance that provoked this violent reaction" and that it was "too bad" Charlie's editor "didn't understand the role he played in his" own death. Isn't it just like religion to blame the victim?
We saw this 10 years ago when the Danish papers published benignbland might be a better wordcartoons about Islam's pedophiliac founder. As Hitchens was fond of pointing out, though Islamic mobs were beating, burning, "and issuing death threats against civilians," the archbishop of Canterbury and the pope condemned the cartoons, not the overreaction.
We saw this 25 years ago when the Ayatollah Khomeinito borrow from Hitchens again"publicly offered money, in his own name, to suborn the murder of a novelist who was a citizen of another country." Once again, the Vatican and the archbishop of Canterbury condemned the speaker, Salman Rushdie, not the violent criminals.
History offers countless instances of religion enforcing its inane orthodoxy with violence.
- See more at: http://ffrf.org/news/blog/item/22171-charlie-hebdo-bill-donahue-and-the-freedom-of-thought#.dpuf
Yes, these people are extremists and #notallmuslims are violent, but I am really sick of people trying to disassociate this event with Islam and blaming the journalists for their deaths.
Warpy
(111,255 posts)who are looking for excuses to act out their anger. Here, they'd be well represented on 4chan, PUA and MRA groups online and Christian Identity and Army of God in real life, lobbing insults at women and incompetently created IEDs at abortion clinics.
Even the military doesn't want these guys.
Angry Young Men exist in all cultures around the planet and religion of all types gives them a lofty reason for acting out and killing other people for not living up to their ridiculously high standard of piety, which means their potential victims are everybody who isn't an Angry Young Man.
And yes, there are also Angry Young Women, but they're generally relegated to the kitchen and nursery when they hook up with Angry Young Men.
Yesterday's killers are shining examples of the type. The problem is who and what they are. Their excuse is Islam. It could have been anything.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)Not only that, but it gives many people a reason to excuse them, because they were provoked. If not for religion, this would just be a terrorist act of murder and there would be very few people supporting them or blaming the victims. That is what is so difficult for me to watch.
Gelliebeans
(5,043 posts)just add deity and voila instant fake outrage to excuse thug like behavior...to the point of being sadistic.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)It is Islam.... because there are millions of non Islamic angry young men who don't kill in the name of Islam. Without Islam, this crime never would have happened. Would some OTHER crime involving angry young men happen? Yes. But THIS crime happened because of Islam.... which is also probably the reason these youg men are angry to begin with.
onager
(9,356 posts)Those who work at this newspaper have a long and disgusting record of going way beyond the mere lampooning of public figures, and this is especially true of their depictions of religious figures. For example, they have shown nuns masturbating and popes wearing condoms. They have also shown Muhammad in pornographic poses.
So the real problem is the intolerance that provoked the killings.
He does have a point about depictions of "popes wearing condoms." Popes wouldn't do that. Rhythm method only, anything else is a sin.
Exultant Democracy
(6,594 posts)Abraham wouldn't have hesitated to put those editors on a rock and cutting out their hearts if god told him too. That is what makes him a holy paragon and profit to Judaism Christianity and Islam.
defacto7
(13,485 posts)But there are native cultures of south and central America that did the same for similar reasons without western or middle eastern influence. They just didn't have the publicity at the time.
haikugal
(6,476 posts)onager
(9,356 posts)While searching on the Collected Dumbasseries of Bill Donahue, I came across this item from May 2012. And LMAO...
(Note to SPIES: if you find this offensive, I'd like to heartily apologize in advance. No, actually I wouldn't. Just fuck off.)
May 22, 2012 by Jessica Bluemke
...Stewart wondered if there was anything women could do to elicit the outrage over their bodily rights that Fox News correspondents typically reserve for, say, attacks on Christmas.
Perhaps women could protect their reproductive organs from unwanted medical intrusions with Vagina Mangers. Behind him, as he spoke, appeared an image of a woman with her legs spread and a manger scene covering her mistletoe? (Nutcracker? Holiest of Holes? Virgin Mary? Secret Santa? Pick your favorite vagina euphemism. Or come up with your own! Fun for the whole family!)
Anyway, to the surprise of no one, Bill Donohue didnt think this was funny. At all. In fact he called it hate speech.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2012/05/22/bill-donohue-is-so-mad-at-the-daily-show/#ixzz3OHRQ0ibD
Gelliebeans
(5,043 posts)I'm loving the new words I.E. Assholery, dumbasserie...etc you make me snort when I laugh. (I'm late probably, getting the memo, and you have been using these words forever) just wanted say it made me laugh.
onager
(9,356 posts)...after seeing them elsewhere on the Internet. Or maybe not - sometimes I just make up stuff like that because I like to fool around with words. In the past, the Internet Church of the Perpetually Offended have chastised me for doing that. Which is about the last thing that would make me stop doing it.
Sometimes it's very satisfying to wade thru a 4000-word post with references to Aquinas, Augustine etc. plus the really deep intellectual philosophers like Billy Graham. And respond with a simple semi-grammatical statement like: "What a bunch of tiresome fuckwittery."
Response to onager (Reply #9)
Gelliebeans This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cartoonist
(7,316 posts)By killing these people, the murderers have proven either that there is no God, or that their God is powerless. If their god was offended, why didn't he strike them down with a lightning bolt? Why did he need masked men to do his dirty work?
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)Youve gotta respect everyones beliefs. No, you dont. Thats what gets us in trouble. Look, you have to acknowledge everyones beliefs, and then you have to reserve the right to go: That is fucking stupid. Are you kidding me? I acknowledge that you believe that, thats great, but Im not going to respect it. I have an uncle that believes he saw Sasquatch. We do not believe him, nor do we respect him!
-Patton Oswalt
defacto7
(13,485 posts)Why did their deity not protect a Muslim with the name "Mohamed" from death by followers of the same religion? And isn't killing a Muslim with the name Mohamed actually a bit ironic since the killers were protesting the desecration of the name and image of Mohamed? In essence they are guilty of desecrating the prophet Mohamed by killing Mohamed.
Crazy illogical and stupid, drunk on insanity.
Cartoonist
(7,316 posts)They would claim that he wasn't a TRUE Muslim. After all, he was working for an infidel.
defacto7
(13,485 posts)is the circular logic of all people who have to make up stuff to cover up for the impotence of their beliefs. Nothing like the trite "no better Scotsman" argument to make a believer feel all cozy, safe, and vastly superior to the rest of us... and his own.