the CIA torture report is sickening

Hawk said:
I think it may be a bit of a stretch to assert that an atheist can commiserate on the same emotional level as an individual with strong messianic beliefs when it comes to an issue like genocidal persecution.

Belief persecution? Absolutely.
Click to expand...

(a) That " an atheist can commiserate on the same emotional level" wasn't your original claim; there's a wide gulf between that qualification and some level of "practical importance" substantially greater than "little".

(b) If one holds human life to be especially dear—to an extent transcending tribal concerns, like whether the hundreds of thousands of murdered individuals possess "strong messianic beliefs" (or exhibit significantly darker complexion, or happen to be The Chosen People)—I don't think it's too much of a stretch to think an atheist, an agnostic, or an otherwise irreligious individual can at least commiserate in the same ballpark as a believer (and likewise a person of one ethnicity to that of another, or a goy to a member of Judah's tribe). Sure, it may not have quite the same level of imagined personal immediacy, but I don't think they're necessarily world's apart, either.
 
BedellBrave said:
I think you are working from a different definition of "scolding" than I am.

I do appreciate though your above thoughts to the previous, "abortion is just like a knee replacement," calloused reasoning. That sort of talk just doesn't square with being concerned (rightfully so) with these reports of torture. Imho, it lessens the weight of your indignation.
Click to expand...

Maybe it is time for you and Garmel to go home and sleep it off .

An abortion is a medical procedure.
This brand of torture is a political statement.

I am disappointed you don't recognize the difference
 
57Brave said:
Maybe it is time for you and Garmel to go home and sleep it off .

An abortion is a medical procedure.
This brand of torture is a political statement.

I am disappointed you don't recognize the difference
Click to expand...

It is a medical procedure that ends a human life. I am disappointed that you equated it with knee replacement while self-righteously critiquing Garmel.
 
Seems that you refuse to adequately compare the horrific act of mutilating and killing a human life in the womb with the horrific act of torturing a human being outside of the womb.

To think that sleep deprivation torture (a bad thing) is worse than having your body cut up and your head crushed or having your entire body burned in a saline solution is....well...to put it kindly, sad.
 
Been busy today so only read a little bit.

But all I can really say tonight is that this country should be about upholding, at the very least, a basic decency, and we failed on all levels here.

So, yeah. I'm ashamed.
 
I don't believe torturing your enemies is really about gaining information, even though that's always the stated reason. It's more from frustration and not having the patience or intelligence to find any other solution. Same goes for the gross rise in police violence. When violence is basically your answer for everything, how can a little torture be a surprise?
 
jpx7 said:
(a) That " an atheist can commiserate on the same emotional level" wasn't your original claim; there's a wide gulf between that qualification and some level of "practical importance" substantially greater than "little".

(b) If one holds human life to be especially dear—to an extent transcending tribal concerns, like whether the hundreds of thousands of murdered individuals possess "strong messianic beliefs" (or exhibit significantly darker complexion, or happen to be The Chosen People)—I don't think it's too much of a stretch to think an atheist, an agnostic, or an otherwise irreligious individual can at least commiserate in the same ballpark as a believer (and likewise a person of one ethnicity to that of another, or a goy to a member of Judah's tribe). Sure, it may not have quite the same level of imagined personal immediacy, but I don't think they're necessarily world's apart, either.
Click to expand...

The core tenet of the atheistic belief system eschews deism, so, to me, it follows that a proclaimed atheist who is operating from a genuine position of actual faith-based conviction would not truly relate to the practical application(s) of religious genocide. I refocused my comments in light of the humanistic angle you posited, which is perfectly valid, but also more subjective in nature.

A bona-fide atheist, that is to say one who is excluded from the modern American orthodoxy by virtue of the inherent taint of our national religious 'genesis' and subsequent generational forays into broader acceptance/inclusion of messianic faiths, is more likely to reach for their understanding of mass-murder borne from theological difference lacking one of the fundamental components of deism. I'm speaking of faith in a God.

So, yeah, an atheist might recoil in horror at religious genocide, and be able to grasp the importance of the event sociopolitically, but I think they practically lack the ability to truly relate to the magnitude of an event which shakes the very foundations of a concept they disbelieve.
 
Garmel said:
100,000 Christians a year are put to death by most estimates, mostly in the Middle East.
Click to expand...

I found this number staggering, so I had to look it up. Thank God, it is completely bogus. You can read the full analysis here:

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24864587

Its researchers started by estimating the number of Christians who died as martyrs between 2000 and 2010 - about one million by their reckoning - and divided that number by 10 to get an annual number, 100,000.

But how do they reach that figure of one million?

When you dig down, you see that the majority died in the civil war in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

More than four million are estimated to have been killed in that war between 2000 and 2010, and CSGC counts 900,000 of them - or 20% - as martyrs.

Over 10 years, that averages out at 90,000 per year.

So when you hear that 100,000 Christians are dying for their faith, you need to keep in mind that the vast majority - 90,000 - are people who were killed in DR Congo.

This means we can say right away that the internet rumours of Muslims being behind the killing of 100,000 Christian martyrs are nonsense. The DRC is a Christian country. In the civil war, Christians were killing Christians.
Click to expand...

The violence in Congo is of course still a tragedy. But I am at least glad things aren't quite so dire for Middle East Christians (though clearly there is still peril there).
 
Metaphysicist said:
I found this number staggering, so I had to look it up. Thank God, it is completely bogus. You can read the full analysis here:

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24864587

The violence in Congo is of course still a tragedy. But I am at least glad things aren't quite so dire for Middle East Christians (though clearly there is still peril there).
Click to expand...

www.christianpost.com/news/shocking-figures-reveal-105000-christians-martyred-each-year-50976/ This site is saying 105,000 and isn't including any civil wars. However, they don't show any math.
 
BedellBrave said:
And you (57) would be wrong - biologically and theologically....
Click to expand...

Seeing the bodies exhibit can give a good example of the fetus at certain stages not being a human obviously

Somehow we are talking abortion in this thread instead of torture. Good job garmell
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top