# The pope and his Islamic quotes



## mrhnau (Sep 19, 2006)

I just read this, regarding the recent comments from the pope.

I find it a bit ironic... The pope quoted implicated that Islam has tended to be irrational and violent. Islamic leaders around the world have gone bananas over the quote. One might even say that they are acting irrationally and some groups are encouraging the assassination of the pope, which sure is violent. Are they in fact proving that the pope is correct? They seem more concerned over _words_ than _murder_ by the radical fundamentalists.

This reminds me of the Danish cartoons portraying Mohhamed (sp) with a bomb in his turban. Papers in Saudi Arabia portraying Jesus in a bad manor would go simply unnoticed. No uproar from the catholic church or the US. Just seems a bit two-faced...


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Sep 19, 2006)

I've been wondering about that myself.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 19, 2006)

"All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested. O what a disgrace if such a despised and base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ! With what reproaches will the Lord overwhelm us if you do not aid those who, with us, profess the Christian religion! Let those who have been accustomed unjustly to wage private warfare against the faithful now go against the infidels and end with victory this war which should have been begun long ago. Let those who for a long time, have been robbers, now become knights. Let those who have been fighting against their brothers and relatives now fight in a proper way against the barbarians. Let those who have been serving as mercenaries for small pay now obtain the eternal reward. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul now work for a double honor. Behold! on this side will be the sorrowful and poor, on that, the rich; on this side, the enemies of the Lord, on that, his friends. Let those who go not put off the journey, but rent their lands and collect money for their expenses; and as soon as winter is over and spring comes, let hem eagerly set out on the way with God as their guide."

~ Pope Urban II

Guess there is more then one religion which has tended to be violent...

Crusades
Inquisitions
Witch Hunts
Ordeals

"Many Christians believed Nazism to be a Christian movement.[1] Even in the later years of the Third Reich, many Protestant and Catholic clergy persisted in believing that Nazism was in its essence in accordance with Christian precepts.[1]+  ~http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism_and_religion

Nope, not alone in fanatacism within the religion...


> This reminds me of the Danish cartoons portraying Mohhamed (sp) with a bomb in his turban. Papers in Saudi Arabia portraying Jesus in a bad manor would go simply unnoticed. No uproar from the catholic church or the US. Just seems a bit two-faced...



Yes, it does.  But I think both sides are definately guilty on both doing it, and complaining about it.  The West has become a little more "accepting" of satire, even of religion though.  Largely because we got more variety.  Jesus is portrayed in humor even over here, so it would be harder for most people over here to complain


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 19, 2006)

Reminds me of a conversation a couple of friends were having while we played pool:

Friend 1:  "Pool is a gentleman's sport."

Friend 2:  "No, it isn't.  Pool is a redneck sport."

Friend 1 points to two large men playing a couple tables down:  "Bet you wouldn't say that to them."

Friend 2:  "What, they're going to kick my butt?  That makes them rednecks!  You just proved my point!"


----------



## King (Sep 19, 2006)

Pretty appaling response. I remember reading an article about some Islamic leaders instigating its followers to fire bomb churches. I can't find the article I read originally, but I found something worse:

"The killing of an Italian nun and her bodyguard Sunday at a children's hospital in Mogadishu, Somalia, raised speculation that it was carried out in reaction to the pope's remarks on Islam. (Full story)"

"In addition, Palestinian security sources said a church in Tulkarem was attacked Sunday with Molotov cocktails, and there was an attempted attack on a church in Tubas, near Jenin."

"Authorities were also investigating Molotov cocktail attacks on three churches in Nablus on Saturday, as well as an attack on a church in Gaza."

All from one link: http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/09/17/pope.islam/index.html?section=cnn_topstories

Religion is so blood-stained.


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 19, 2006)

I pretty much agree with all the responses thus far, but there is also something I would like to expound upon....



King said:


> Religion is so blood-stained.


 
It should be pointed out that this is not a product of religion per se, it is a product of human sociocentrism and ethnocentrism. I could point to similar programs that occured under secular ideologies such as Stalinist Russia or Maoist China.

Such events are amost inevitable when groups that adhere to ethnocentric and absolutist values have access to a reservoir of military power. Even those that subsist in small groups with relatively little military or social power are prone to commit acts of violence, as we have seen in our own recent history with the Columbine school shootings or the mob beatings of open homosexuals.

This is very scary stuff and it just illustrates the need for the voice of reason and compassion in today's world.

Laterz.


----------



## Ping898 (Sep 19, 2006)

You know they don't help their cause in proving the Pope was wrong or malicious with his comments by going out and killing Catholics and firebombing Catholic churches....
I don't know that I agree or disagree with the Pope's comments, I haven't paid too much attention to them, but I do feel like killing people because of his comments is a bit of an over reaction.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 19, 2006)

Nothing better than getting violent over being called violent. 

I would say that the Christian faith is dramatically different from its Mideveal/Crusade past. The Islamic faith on the other hand seems to want to go back in time to the Caliphate.


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 19, 2006)

Ping898 said:


> You know they don't help their cause in proving the Pope was wrong or malicious with his comments by going out and killing Catholics and firebombing Catholic churches....
> I don't know that I agree or disagree with the Pope's comments, I haven't paid too much attention to them, but *I do feel like killing people because of his comments is a bit of an over reaction*.


 

I feel this statement is a bit of an under reaction.  I mean, "a bit"?  Killing people because of somebody's words is just _a little_ over the top?

As to whether it helps their cause or not, first you have to determine what the cause is.  If their cause is to gain respect through an appeal to common values, then no - this doesn't help.  If the cause is to gain "respect" by making people afraid to say anything against them, it helps immensely.


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 19, 2006)

Blotan Hunka said:


> I would say that the Christian faith is dramatically different from its Mideveal/Crusade past.


 
It is in some parts of the world. There still seems to be quite a lot of Christian violence taking place in Ireland, though, and abortion clinics are routinely attacked by fundamentalists within our own borders.

However, the changes that have taken place in "the Christian faith" are largely a product of the sociohistorical environment it finds itself in. As I have said in other threads, religions evolve in response to their environments.

Laterz.


----------



## HG1 (Sep 19, 2006)

The Islamic extremists are proving the Pope correct. Until the general Islamic population takes responsibility to police it's own radical brethern & stop pointing the finger at other religions as the problem. The world view will continue to see Islam as an intolerant violent religion that screams "Jihad!" at the slightest perceived infraction.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 19, 2006)

Blotan Hunka said:


> Nothing better than getting violent over being called violent.
> 
> I would say that the Christian faith is dramatically different from its Mideveal/Crusade past. The Islamic faith on the other hand seems to want to go back in time to the Caliphate.




Don't have to go back that far.  Hitler used Christianity to justify himself, the last residential school was shut down in 1996.  Ireland has had a bit of a protestant vs Catholic problem...

Anyways, the Popes comments seemed rather "Pot and Kettle" and the Islamic response did as well.


----------



## Ping898 (Sep 19, 2006)

heretic888 said:


> It is in some parts of the world. There still seems to be quite a lot of Christian violence taking place in Ireland, though, and abortion clinics are routinely attacked by fundamentalists within our own borders.
> 
> However, the changes that have taken place in "the Christian faith" are largely a product of the sociohistorical environment it finds itself in. As I have said in other threads, religions evolve in response to their environments.


 
Keep in mind that not all Christians are Catholics.  The pope "speaks for" only Roman Catholics and in some parts Polish Catholics, but not every other Catholic or Christian denomination.  And though I have nothing to back this up, I think your fundamentalists most often are not of the Roman Catholic faith.

Roman Catholics have a very bloody past and the fighting in Ireland isn't much better, but I like to think that in many ways they have learned from their past and you aren't likely to see the Roman Catholic "nation" take up arms in a cause like the Crusades any time in the near or not so near future.....


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 19, 2006)

Ping898 said:


> And though I have nothing to back this up, I think your fundamentalists most often are not of the Roman Catholic faith.



No, the fundamentalists I am referring to are almost always American Protestants, although it is a little known fact that the Inquisition is still active in some parts of South America by the Catholic Church.



Ping898 said:


> Roman Catholics have a very bloody past and the fighting in Ireland isn't much better, but I like to think that in many ways they have learned from their past and you aren't likely to see the Roman Catholic "nation" take up arms in a cause like the Crusades any time in the near or not so near future.....



I don't believe anybody has really "learned from their past", as people in general and Christians in particular are pretty clueless when it comes to historical factuality. My opinion is that the religions have simply evolved in response to the social and economic environments they now find themselves in.

Laterz.


----------



## Ping898 (Sep 19, 2006)

CoryKS said:


> I feel this statement is a bit of an under reaction. I mean, "a bit"? Killing people because of somebody's words is just _a little_ over the top?


 
The joys of the internet, intent or underlying expression is often lost....it is not an underreaction so much as an understatement, as it was intended to be.


----------



## Ping898 (Sep 19, 2006)

heretic888 said:


> No, the fundamentalists I am referring to are almost always American Protestants, although it is a little known fact that the Inquisition is still active in some parts of South America by the Catholic Church.
> 
> I don't believe anybody has really "learned from their past", as people in general and Christians in particular are pretty clueless when it comes to historical factuality. My opinion is that the religions have simply evolved in response to the social and economic environments they now find themselves in.
> 
> Laterz.


 
But you see some of the groups you are referring too are not Roman Catholics and that is what I am referring too.  American Protestants are not Roman Catholics and have no connection to the pope and personally I know nothing of South America so can not respond to it.  But Christians or people who call themselves Christians are not necessarily Catholics, and though Roman Catholics are far from perfect on the whole, one need only to look at the abuse debaticle of the last few years to know that, that doesn't mean they haven't learned from their past actions when given an opportunity.  I haven't seen a Roman Catholic go an blow up a Muslim mosque because of cartoon depicting Jesus in an ugly way or try to rally everyone in the faith for a religious war because the comments by a Muslim religious leader.....


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 19, 2006)

Ping898 said:


> But you see some of the groups you are referring too are not Roman Catholics and that is what I am referring too. American Protestants are not Roman Catholics and have no connection to the pope and personally I know nothing of South America so can not respond to it.


 
Please read my posts in context.

You stated the fundamentalists I mentioned in the United States that have attacked abortion clinics were mostly Roman Catholic. I responded that they are almost always Protestant. It is Protestant Christians that are perpetrating most of the religious violence in America, not the Catholics.

Outside of America, though, that's another story.

Laterz.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 19, 2006)

I think the basic thing is that fundamentalists of any religion are a dangerous breed.  As soon as someone hits that "My religion is correct and all others are blasphemous, or devil worshipping, or such," it's followers can become very dangerous. Doesn't matter if it is Christians, Muslims or any other religion.

Religion, more then anything else, seems to have the ability to motivate people to do very violent things.  "They are sinners against God and it is our duty to punish them, or else we are as bad as them.  Any man who fights will go to heaven, those who refuse will be punished for eternity for not joining God's army."  Pretty harsh if your beliefs tell you this is fact.


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 19, 2006)

Ping989 said:
			
		

> But Christians or people who call themselves Christians are not necessarily Catholics, and though Roman Catholics are far from perfect on the whole, one need only to look at the abuse debaticle of the last few years to know that, that doesn't mean they haven't learned from their past actions when given an opportunity. I haven't seen a Roman Catholic go an blow up a Muslim mosque because of cartoon depicting Jesus in an ugly way or try to rally everyone in the faith for a religious war because the comments by a Muslim religious leader.....


 
Again, considering the wholescale ignorance most Christians (Catholic or otherwise) have concerning their own history, I have seen or heard nothing that would indicate to me they have "learned from their past actions".

Rather, yet again, it seems to me that Christianity is evolving in response to the changes of their sociocultural environment. Most of the changes in "the Christian faith" is a product of the industrialization and democratization of the West, not some introspective self-learning that Christians have taken upon themselves over the past few centuries.

Have a good one.


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 19, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> I think the basic thing is that fundamentalists of any religion are a dangerous breed. As soon as someone hits that "My religion is correct and all others are blasphemous, or devil worshipping, or such," it's followers can become very dangerous. Doesn't matter if it is Christians, Muslims or any other religion.
> 
> Religion, more then anything else, seems to have the ability to motivate people to do very violent things. "They are sinners against God and it is our duty to punish them, or else we are as bad as them. Any man who fights will go to heaven, those who refuse will be punished for eternity for not joining God's army." Pretty harsh if your beliefs tell you this is fact.


 
Once again, this is not really "religion" per se. It is human sociocentrism and ethnocentrism. The Stalinists and Maoists were saying and doing very similar things not too long ago, and they are as "secular" as it gets.

By contrast, there are a number of religious orientations that do not partake in a sociocentric ideology. Most notably the Deism of the American Founding Fathers and Unitarian-Universalism. Buddhism is also another religious movement that largely avoids this type of thinking.

Laterz.


----------



## fireman00 (Sep 19, 2006)

The 33 year old problem or "The Troubles"  in Northern Ireland were less religious in nature and more sectarian.  The pro-English rule folks were mainly Protestants  while the united Ireland folks were predominantly Roman Catholic.  It was NOT a religous war nor was it every portrayed to be over religion - it was over who would rule and how Ireland would be ruled.

It is a LONG stretch to compare the inquistion of the 1200's and today's Roman Catholic church. 

Its ironic that what the Pope said has become truth - Islam condones the use violence and threats to force the unclean into believers.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 19, 2006)

heretic888 said:


> Once again, this is not really "religion" per se. It is human sociocentrism and ethnocentrism. The Stalinists and Maoists were saying and doing very similar things not too long ago, and they are as "secular" as it gets.



True enough, same could be said for the Communist vs Capitalist.  It was a "They are evil and going to destroy our way of life" game from both sides.


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 19, 2006)

Found this article, which concerns the use of scripture by non-Christians to show that Christianity has the same propensity toward violence as Islam, despite lagging far behind in total beheadings _this century_. I'd be interested to hear what you guys think. I'm a Pastafarian myself, so I really don't have a dog in the whole "Your god is more bloodthirsty than their god" fight. As long as we maintain the minimum requirement of pirates, the FSM is usually pretty calm - as befits a god who promises a beer volcano in heaven. 

When Atheists and Secularists Quote Scripture

And for those of you who have no idea what I was talking about at the end:

Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 19, 2006)

CoryKS said:


> Found this article, which concerns the use of scripture by non-Christians to show that Christianity has the same propensity toward violence as Islam, despite lagging far behind in total beheadings _this century_. I'd be interested to hear what you guys think.


 
I think this has exceedingly little to do with the religious traditions themselves, and more to do with their historical, social, and economic environments. Agrarian societies take religion more seriously. Industrialized societies don't.

You will notice that the vast majority of Muslims living in Western democratic nations tend to be as peaceful as anybody else. That is extremely telling.

People can cite religious scriptures all they want, but the truth of the matter is that every religious group is extremely "selective" in their appropriation of scripture. They emphasize the parts they like (i.e., that agree with their ideology) and ignore the parts they don't. As such, citing line X from book Y doesn't really "prove" anything in regards to the outlooks of conventional "believers".

Laterz.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 19, 2006)

heretic888 said:


> You will notice that the vast majority of Muslims living in Western democratic nations tend to be as peaceful as anybody else. That is extremely telling.


Yup, it's political.  But when Religion and Politics are the same, religius reasons can be used to justify political actions... like war.


----------



## ajs1976 (Sep 19, 2006)

His anyone found a transcript of the speech?  I heard that the comments that are causing the controversary where actually quotes from some emporer.  That it wasn't someing the Pope was saying about Islam, but something he was using to make a point.


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 19, 2006)

heretic888 said:


> I think this has exceedingly little to do with the religious traditions themselves, and more to do with their historical, social, and economic environments. Agrarian societies take religion more seriously. Industrialized societies don't.
> 
> You will notice that the vast majority of Muslims living in Western democratic nations tend to be as peaceful as anybody else. That is extremely telling.


 
As are the vast majority of Christians living in agrarian societies.  Which is also extremely telling.  Why are the Christians of Lebanon not erupting in violent rage over photos of Muslims burning the pope in effigy?  What keeps Thai Christians from taking to the streets in protest as did Muslims of that nation?  If religious traditions play such a little part, we should be seeing a massive backlash in the agrarian countries where the Christians share the same history and socioeconomic environment as the Muslims.


----------



## King (Sep 19, 2006)

doc clean said:


> His anyone found a transcript of the speech? I heard that the comments that are causing the controversary where actually quotes from some emporer. That it wasn't someing the Pope was saying about Islam, but something he was using to make a point.


 
Just going through it myself, here is a link: http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=46474


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 19, 2006)

CoryKS said:


> As are the vast majority of Christians living in agrarian societies. Which is also extremely telling. Why are the Christians of Lebanon not erupting in violent rage over photos of Muslims burning the pope in effigy? What keeps Thai Christians from taking to the streets in protest as did Muslims of that nation? If religious traditions play such a little part, we should be seeing a massive backlash in the agrarian countries where the Christians share the same history and socioeconomic environment as the Muslims.


 
My guess would be because they are a minority with relatively little social power in the nations in question.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 19, 2006)

CoryKS said:


> As are the vast majority of Christians living in agrarian societies. Which is also extremely telling. Why are the Christians of Lebanon not erupting in violent rage over photos of Muslims burning the pope in effigy? What keeps Thai Christians from taking to the streets in protest as did Muslims of that nation? If religious traditions play such a little part, we should be seeing a massive backlash in the agrarian countries where the Christians share the same history and socioeconomic environment as the Muslims.


 
Do you see it in ANY Christian majority nation? I dont. People in Turkey are calling for the Pope to be arrested and charged with blasphemy when he arrives there on a trip. Very tolerant.


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 19, 2006)

Blotan Hunka said:


> Do you see it in ANY Christian majority nation? I dont. People in Turkey are calling for the Pope to be arrested and charged with blasphemy when he arrives there on a trip. Very tolerant.


 
It should be pointed out that "Christian majority nation" is something of a misnomer, as all such nations are secular democratic countries that hold decidedly modern and humanistic values (such as the Separation of Church and State). This, of course, is a product of their history and socioeconomic environment.

Laterz.


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 19, 2006)

heretic888 said:


> My guess would be because they are a minority with relatively little social power in the nations in question.


 
Mostly accurate, for the nations I mentioned. Lebanon is 40% Christian vs. 55% Muslim (sects combined), according to Wikipedia. So, a sizable minority but still a minority. Not without power, however. Their constitution requires that the president must be a Maronite Catholic, the PM a Sunni, and the Speaker of the Parliament a Shiite. Also, they have half the Parliament seats. So, a more-or-less equal partner - at least on paper. 

Thailand is (again, according to Wiki) 94.6% Buddhist, 5% - 15% Muslim (there is dispute over this number), and 0.75% Christian, with a smattering of Hindus and Sikhs. So again, the Christians are indeed a very small minority. On the other hand, so are the Muslims. In fact, even assuming the highest estimated number, they are a smaller minority than those Christians in Lebanon. And yet on any given week we can read accounts of Muslims in Thailand rioting, protesting, beheading schoolchildren and teachers, and calling for the adoption of Sharia law. Their minority status does not seem to be a limiting factor.

I don't disagree with your statement about historical and socioeconomics traditions, but feel that religion is a large part of both. Religion is a way of encapsulating certain cultural beliefs and placing them beyond reproach. It is the ultimate appeal to authority - an authority that cannot be debated with. Want to ensure that your people don't engage in a certain practice? Put it in the book and tell 'em God said so. End of argument. That said, it matters a great deal what is being put in the book, and when. All religions are not the same.


----------



## Martial Tucker (Sep 19, 2006)

Put Jesus, the Buddha, and Mohammed in a room together, and they would
embrace and love each other.

Put many of their professed followers in the same room, and they will try to kill each other.

How ironic......


It's all about the Ego.....My (fill in the blank) is better/holier/whatever than yours, and I would rather fight than admit otherwise, because to admit otherwise somehow makes me feel inferior.

When will we figure out that we're all identical drops of water in the same ocean, and there IS no superior/inferior?


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 20, 2006)

Here's an interesting article on the topic:

Jihad Enablers


----------



## Bigshadow (Sep 20, 2006)

mrhnau said:


> I just read this, regarding the recent comments from the pope.
> 
> I find it a bit ironic... The pope quoted implicated that Islam has tended to be irrational and violent. Islamic leaders around the world have gone bananas over the quote. One might even say that they are acting irrationally and some groups are encouraging the assassination of the pope, which sure is violent. Are they in fact proving that the pope is correct? They seem more concerned over _words_ than _murder_ by the radical fundamentalists.
> 
> This reminds me of the Danish cartoons portraying Mohhamed (sp) with a bomb in his turban. Papers in Saudi Arabia portraying Jesus in a bad manor would go simply unnoticed. No uproar from the catholic church or the US. Just seems a bit two-faced...



I chuckled to myself when no sooner than the news anchor finished explaining how upset the islamic people were with the pope for his quoting someone else about the violence, they immediately start running video of little kids with their toy guns pointing them at the camera and an effigy of the pope in protest of what he said.  Oh, the irony...


----------



## Bigshadow (Sep 27, 2006)

After thinking more about what the Pope said, isn't this a case of "The pot calling the Kettle black"?  Christians have certainly doled out their fair share of death and destruction through out history in the name of Christ.  I am sure this will spark some flames, but so be it.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 27, 2006)

True, but who is doing it NOW?


----------



## Bigshadow (Sep 27, 2006)

Blotan Hunka said:


> True, but who is doing it NOW?



That is not really the point I was trying to make.  I am not making a case for either side.  Just stating a fact.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 27, 2006)

I dont subscribe to the idea that as a Christian I am responsible for the crusades, inquisition etc. I wasnt alive then and the faith isnt the same as it was then and the "well Christians tortured people in the dark ages so you are no better" point is evading the issue. While by and large Islam isnt preaching "death to the infidels", there are plenty of places and people who ARE. And while it may just be the medias fault, I dont see the larger Muslim world rising up to condem or deal with these Terrorist groups who are justifying murder in the name of their religion. While I dont hold the entire faith to blame, there does seem to be a groundswell of tacit support, if not for the method, at least for the concept.


----------



## Bigshadow (Sep 27, 2006)

Blotan Hunka said:


> I dont subscribe to the idea that as a Christian I am responsible for the crusades, inquisition etc. I wasnt alive then and the faith isnt the same as it was then and the "well Christians tortured people in the dark ages so you are no better" point is evading the issue. While by and large Islam isnt preaching "death to the infidels", there are plenty of places and people who ARE. And while it may just be the medias fault, I dont see the larger Muslim world rising up to condem or deal with these Terrorist groups who are justifying murder in the name of their religion. While I dont hold the entire faith to blame, the does seem to be tacit support if not for the method at least for the concept.



No you weren't responsible and no Christians aren't currently being violent.  I was just pointing out that it has had a rather violent history of it's own.  I don't see anything wrong with what the Pope said, either.

So maybe now it isn't "the pot calling the kettle black" as that was the question.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 27, 2006)

What I find disappointing is the Popes "backing down". If he has a position he should stand by it. Im not clear what he "believes" about the issue at this point.


----------



## Bigshadow (Sep 28, 2006)

Blotan Hunka said:


> What I find disappointing is the Popes "backing down". If he has a position he should stand by it. Im not clear what he "believes" about the issue at this point.



I can see that becoming a confidence issue with his followers!


----------



## Kreth (Sep 28, 2006)

Bigshadow said:


> ...and no Christians aren't currently being violent.


Except for the extremists shooting abortion doctors...


----------



## Bigshadow (Sep 28, 2006)

Kreth said:


> Except for the extremists shooting abortion doctors...



yeah, I know... but it hasn't happened in a while.... 

However, it is my opinion there is a certain amount of volatility to many christian groups and it probably wouldn't take much to push them into that sort of violence.  Just my opinion though.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 28, 2006)

Kreth said:


> Except for the extremists shooting abortion doctors...


 
Individual wackos running off with their own agendas (and they are loudly denounced by the church) dont even compare to Islamic extremism in size, scope and organization.


----------



## OUMoose (Sep 28, 2006)

Blotan Hunka said:


> Individual wackos running off with their own agendas (and they are loudly denounced by the church) dont even compare to Islamic extremism in size, scope and organization.


It's interesting to think that when its your own people, there are just a few "individual wackos", but when its the other guy, it's a mass of organzied militant fanatics.  

Life is all about perspective I guess.  :idunno:


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 28, 2006)

Know of any Christian madrasses preaching armed violence?


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 28, 2006)

Although I do find this survey pretty interesting.
http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=248

Although the US seems to be catching the brunt of the "Islamophobic" labeling. It appears that we are fairly low in that category.












I wonder why the Turks are most prone to associate Christianity with violence? I admit ignorance of Turkish politics and if there are some sort of "Christian terrorist" problems there.


----------



## exile (Sep 28, 2006)

Blotan Hunka said:


> I wonder why the Turks are most prone to associate Christianity with violence? I admit ignorance of Turkish politics and if there are some sort of "Christian terrorist" problems there.



Maybe they object to the violent tenor of the Christian resistance the Battle of Vienna in 1683, the last great incursion of Islamic armies into Europe... which began, interestingly enough, on September 11 of that year. I mean, the armies of the (for once) united central European kingdoms were only around half the size of Grand Vizier Kara Mustapha's forces... so they must have fought especially fiercely to give the Ottoman Turkish army the trouncing that drove them out of Europe. No fair!


----------

