Do you have a cite that this happened in the last 300 years?
The inquisition ended in 1835, I knew it tempered down near the end, so I was assuming that a hundred years before was safe.
[
How many of those burned at the stake were burned because of what they did to the bible? I’m just curious.
Upon further reflection, my bad. I totally missed the point of your post for some reason. Ignore my reply.
Like hell it is. Insane, evil, jackasses acted like subhuman garbage. They alone choose their actions.
Maybe the solution it keep burning Korans to till the dark age retards get the idea. It’s not a slap in the face of a billion Muslims. It’s a slap in the face of only the ones who want to force their religion on us.
I was pro-desecration there too. You bring up a good point through. Fuck the Koran, let’s desecrate common sacred objects of all kinds. Holy water, American flags, Piss Christ reenactments, pictures of Chairman Mao, Korans, anything.
Let’s show the proper contempt for all censorship desires.
The longer this story develops, the more it sounds like there was a nonviolent protest of Jones’ burning that was infiltrated by a small number of violent Taliban-type lunatics who wanted to rampage and kill people. If you think Jones has any responsibility, that would seem to reduce it by a great deal.
Oh I hate censorship too. But if a force out of your control will kill random people when you do X, and doing X actually increases the power and scope of the force, you shouldn’t do X.
You have a lot of rights. But you need to intelligently decide when to use them.
The fact remains that those rotting corpses in Afghanistan would still be breathing if Jones didn’t burn his Koran. He decided to make a statement that would get innocent people killed. People who had nothing to do with him. And he knew it was likely to happen.
Capitulating? What would you have had “us” do?
Okay, 300 years. Might as well be 2,000.
Yes, I am aware of it. But these are clearly exceptional instances, wouldn’t you agree? Wouldn’t you also agree that the vast majority of Christians throughout the world would view that behavior as ignorant, uncivilized and unacceptable?
I wish I could ascribe it to shitty-primitive-countriness. But you are aware that a good many of Islamic terrorists are well educated and come from good families, right? You are aware, I assume, that even some Muslims in the U.S. have insisted in bringing their throwback thinking into modern civilizations. Honor killings, for instance, among well-educated Muslims.
But it’s really not ignorance and poverty. Or, at least, not ignorance and poverty alone. Again, many terrorists and those who support them are very well educated and are not poor. Bin Laden, for example. And while there are plenty of poor people in the world, not many groups go around blowing up innocent women and children and beheading journalists. Though Mexico seems intent is trying to prove me wrong.
I’d say he shouldn’t have done it merely because it’s “tacky”, or more to the point, because polite people don’t desecrate others religious symbols, or, more generally, act in ways intended to give offense. It’s the same argument in that thread earlier about the guy who hammered a nail through a Catholic communion wafer. It’s just not a very respectful thing to do.
But his actions didn’t cause the death of those 12 people. The murders are independent moral actors. They aren’t automatons. They chose how they were going to respond to the action, and the way they chose to respond was to get murdery. They could have done other things…they could have written nasty letters, they could have peacefully protested, they could have burned a Christian bible in response. Those were all choices they could have made, and they chose not to. So the deaths of those 12 people are on their heads.
But the group of angry, murdery people are out there. They exist. And are waiting to be offended. Knowing that they exist and inciting them is a dangerous thing to do.
Pretend they are wolves. And Jones is hanging sheep carcasses near the kindergarten playground. Did Jones carry a child off and feast on its tender, juicy meat? No. Does he have the right to hang sheep carcasses… well, I’m not sure about that one, but for our purposes assume yes. Is he somewhat responsible? I’d say yes.
That’s the problem. They’re waiting to be offended. At some point someone will offend them. What if it had been South Park, or drawing of Mohammad? How about the Wikipedia. Should it be censored lest they kill someone over a Mohammad pic?
Just how many egg shells must be walked on?
None. We shouldn’t do a single thing different. But why would a person who cared about innocent people getting killed go out of his way to ensure that the angeratti would murder them?
I would think the rabid monkeys doing the violence would be the logical target.
I think the fact that you have to compare people to wolves is telling in itself.
Some people are wolves. Some Christians are wolves, some Muslims and even some of those shifty Shintoists.
The fact that subsect of Muslims exist that will kill when they are insulted is something that needs to be dealt with. And you aren’t going to weaken that subset of people by burning holy books.
I’m not saying the killers aren’t to blame. I’m saying that they will rise to the occasion and Jones is simply getting innocent people killed so he can paint all Muslims as a kind with the killers.
All my actions have consequences. Including words and symbolic acts. I accept that. I impose that responsibility on others. Mr. Jones, a dangerous religious fanatic, deliberately incited other dangerous religious fanatics to murder. They all bear full moral responsibility, jointly and severally. Mr. Jones deliberately took acts that led to the deaths of these people. He is not morally absolved in any way by the foreseeable criminal activity of others that actually commit the murders.
And yes, by this logic, anti-abortionists who share this logic would find me morally responsible for supporting abortion rights in general.
Just because you are filming jackass and can legally kick someone in the balls doesn’t make it right to do so.
If these were wolves, I’d agree with you. But they’re not wolves, they’re men. And men make choices. That’s what makes them men. When a wolf attacks a sheep carcass, it can’t help itself, but these people can. They make a choice.
Why shouldn’t we do anything different? If you’re theory is correct, and Jones is morally responsible for making these people kill, then if they kill because there’s a picture of Muhammed in Wikipedia or South Park, then whoever put that picture in Wikipedia or South Park is responsible. If that’s the standard you want to use, then where’s the distinction?
But from the perspective of Jones they might as well be wolves. He can’t control them and he knows they’re a danger.
More than one person can be responsible for something. It isn’t a zero sum.
Jones, the Imams, the killers and the men that didn’t stop it all have a hand in it. The most blame goes to the killers themselves. But Jones’ cowardly actions (when other people would get killed for it) deserve a share of the blame.
Yes, and Pastor Jones chose *his actions, for which he bears responsibility. He made it more likely that someone or something else would lead (in a more direct fashion) to violent deaths. * To the degree that he knowingly made the deaths more likely, he is responsible and/or culpable. I don’t get to go around making up stories to wife-beaters about their spouses cheating on them and then say, “Hey, all I’m guilty of is telling a lie – I’m not at all responsible for the savage beatings.”
“Those fucking bees over by that tree keep stinging anyone who goes near them. That’s bullshit! I’m going to go over there and throw rocks at their beehive until they stop.”
“What? No! Bees don’t learn that way! All you’re going to do is…”
“Yep, rocks!”
I’m still curious to see a response to post #23’s hypothetical – how exactly does one absolve the guy who provokes the gang-raping bandits into gang-rape?
One should ask where were all the peaceful demonstrators when a small number of violent members went nuts?