Random Politics & Religion #00

Balder died for your sins!

Faith-based groups, who play a key role in resettling refugees to the United States, say they are dismayed by the wave of anti-refugee fervor set off by the Paris terrorist attacks and are urging supporters to contact elected officials on behalf of victims of the Syrian civil war.

Evangelical Christians, as well as Christians more broadly, are a core group in the Republican electoral base and are among the most passionate advocates for aiding refugees.

A push by Republican presidential candidates to ban Syrian refugees "does not reflect what we've been hearing from our constituencies, which are evangelical churches across the country," said Jenny Yang, vice president for advocacy at World Relief, an evangelical organization that helps resettle refugees. "Most of the people have been saying we want to continue to work with refugees, that what happened in Paris ... doesn’t reflect who refugees are." ...

What they did is reprehensible.

But what about all the Muslim people I know who changed their Facebook profile picture to show solidarity for France?

Your answer is probably: what happened in Turkey represents the true followers of Islam, while those FB supporters are liberal Muslims.

Your problem is that you view the world in an "us good, them bad" mentality, and try to explain everything that happens around you accordingly. You should instead try to better understand why certain people behave in a certain way under certain circumstances.

Turkey has suffered a similar (in death count) bombing last month during a peaceful protest.

Turkey also has been intervening in Syria against IS. Turkey isn't really some orthodox Muslim country. A good chunk of its population are not that religious (compared to Middle Easertn countries).

We would all agree on condemning the chants but only you would readily jump in with his explanations that are influenced by his preconceived notions about..everything.

They were turkish, not syrians.

No religion is inherently violent, the violence is a result of individuals who are bringing their violent mindsets and behavior to the stage.

What idiot is ballparking that 10% of Muslims are supportive of terrorism? Most people just want to live their lives peacefully without anybody *** up their community.

No religion is inherently violent, the violence is a result of individuals who are bringing their violent mindsets and behavior to the stage.

In a 2007 Pew Research poll in response to a question on whether suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets to defend Islam could be justified, in Europe:

64% of Muslims in France believed it could never be justified, 19% believed it could be justified rarely, 10% sometimes, and 6% thought it could be justified often.
70% of Muslims in Britain believed it could never be justified, 9% believed it could be justified rarely, 12% sometimes, and 3% thought it could be justified often.
83% of Muslims in Germany believed it could never be justified, 6% believed it could be justified rarely, 6% sometimes, and 1% thought it could be justified often.
69% of Muslims in Spain believed it could never be justified, 9% believed it could be justified rarely, 10% sometimes, and 6% thought it could be justified often.

In mainly Muslim countries:

45% of Muslims in Egypt believed it could never be justified, 25% believed it could be justified rarely, 20% sometimes, and 8% thought it could be justified often.
61% of Muslims in Turkey believed it could never be justified, 9% believed it could be justified rarely, 14% sometimes, and 3% thought it could be justified often.
43% of Muslims in Jordan believed it could never be justified, 28% believed it could be justified rarely, 24% sometimes, and 5% thought it could be justified often.
28% of Muslims in Nigeria believed it could never be justified, 23% believed it could be justified rarely, 38% sometimes, and 8% thought it could be justified often.
69% of Muslims in Pakistan believed it could never be justified, 8% believed it could be justified rarely, 7% sometimes, and 7% thought it could be justified often.
71% of Muslims in Indonesia believed it could never be justified, 18% believed it could be justified rarely, 8% sometimes, and 2% thought it could be justified often.

Has anyone conducted a poll about how many Americans or Christians consider the U.S.' use of dropping two atomic bombs on civilian cities in the sovereign nation of Japan as justified?

I'm not saying there aren't violent Muslims.

I'm just saying that maybe questions and figures need context.

This is a fallacy, though enough people repeat it that I understand why it keeps getting repeated without being fact checked. Hitler was basically an agnostic/atheist and considered religion a necessary evil in controlling people.

So hey, what do you know. Even some of history's most evil individuals get it right from time to time.

That said, I wish people would stop citing him as an evil Christian. We've got plenty to pick from, going Godwin is inappropriate.

lol no it isn't, he is a known Catholic, devout at that.

Hitler's public relationship to religion has been characterized as one of opportunistic pragmatism.[10] His regime did not publicly advocate for state atheism, but it did seek to reduce the influence of Christianity on society. Hitler himself was reluctant to make public attacks on the Church for political reasons, despite the urgings of Nazis like Bormann. Although he was skeptical of religion,[11][12] he did not present himself to the public as an atheist, and spoke of belief in an "almighty creator".[13][14] In private, he could be ambiguous.[15][16] Evans wrote that Hitler repeatedly stated that Nazism was a secular ideology founded on science, which in the long run could not "co-exist with religion".[17] In his semi-autobiographical Mein Kampf (1925/6) Hitler declared himself neutral in sectarian matters and supportive of separation between church and state, and he criticized political Catholicism.[18] The book presents a nihilistic, Social Darwinist vision, in which the universe is ordered around principles of struggle between weak and strong, rather than on conventional Christian notions.[19] In Mein Kampf, Hitler makes a number of religious allusions, claiming to be "acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator" and to have been chosen by providence.[14][20] In a 1922 speech he said,"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter [...] who [...] recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them..."[21] In a 1928 speech, he said: "We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity ... in fact our movement is Christian."[22] Given his hostility to Christianity, Laurence Rees wrote that "The most persuasive explanation of these statements is that Hitler, as a politician, simply recognised the practical reality of the world he inhabited... Had Hitler distanced himself or his movement too much from Christianity, it is all but impossible to see how he could ever have been successful in a free election".[23] Alan Bullock wrote that even though Hitler frequently employed the language of "divine providence" in defence of his own myth, he ultimately shared with the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin a materialistic outlook "based on the nineteenth century rationalists' certainty that the progress of science would destroy all myths and had already proved Christian doctrine to be an absurdity".[24] According to Geoffrey Blainey, when the Nazis became the main opponent of Communism in Germany, Hitler saw Christianity as a temporary ally.[25] He made various public comments against "bolshevistic" atheist movements, and in favor of so-called "positive Christianity" (a movement which sought to nazify Christianity by purging it of its Jewish elements, the Old Testament and key doctrines like the Apostles' Creed).[18] While campaigning for office in the early 1930s, Hitler offered moderate public statements on Christianity, promising not to interfere with the churches if given power, and calling Christianity the foundation of German morality. Kershaw considers that use of such rhetoric served to placate potential criticism from the Church. According to Max Domarus, Hitler had fully discarded belief in the Judeo-Christian conception of God by 1937, but continued to use the word "God" in speeches.

Are you *** serious?

From the guy who wants to close the borders to literally every type of immigrant and refugee that doesn't meet an extremely narrow set of criteria favorable to you personally? (South and Central Americans? Out. Muslims (and probably non-Muslim refugees from the region))? Out. Etc.

But I'm leading the kneejerk reactions because I posed a question regarding context.

Get the *** out, fear monger.

Well, most religions are actually inherently violent if you take the source material literally, but everyone except extremists and crazy people generally acknowledge 1500 to 2000+-year-old source material is to be taken as allegory, or at least with a grain of salt.

Ramy: If that's what you want to believe, more power to you.

the first two letters stand for Islamic State.

I...what?

This is an issue of major scholarly debate about one of the best-known figures in public history. It seems sort of silly to ignore something that even scholars on the topic are divided about. -.-;

Edit: Ugh. Arguing minutia about Hitler on the internet. Why is this my time waster of choice? What have I doooooone?

It is so strange how people only rush to the defense of one religion here, Islam.

It is so strange how people only rush to the defense of one religion here, Islam.

violent crazies don't need Islam to be violent & crazy. they'd do it in a vacuum of religious indoctrination were there one in the place of Islamic teachings. they cling to whatever stories they can mold into their uses. denouncing an entire religion as 'violent' makes you ignorant at best, and a hate-monger at worst.

we are all far more alike than different.

So, as you understand it, the Syrian refugees attended a Turkey vs. Greece game? Do I even need to point out the absurdity of comparing the risk of terrorism from refugees to the risk of gun violence?

Belgium Waffles.

There would be peace in the world if everyone liked waffles.