I just read a grusome report from Iraq-some Shi’ite Muslims broke into a mosques, and douses 6 Sunnis with kerosene…and set them on fire! I can’t understand this-doesn’tthis religion (Islam) teach tolerance and compassion?
And why have these two sects decided that its OK to slaughter eachother? What doe the Imams say about such acts? 
I’m not all that religous, but doesn’t Christianity do the same? And we kill like crazy.
It does.
Some people, however, are completely and irrevocably–if you’ll pardon me–fucked up. And some people among these will use religion’s name to do terrible, atrocious things.
In short, humanity’s a funny kind of beast.
People are assholes, and burning people alive has long been a popular mode of expressing dissatisfaction with theological interpretations that differ from your own. For more examples, see the history of europe.
Holy Shi’ite! Here come the Sunnis!
I think it all started with a dispute over whether the carboard hats were red, or blue.
From Wiki:
So it seems as if the issue is over interpretation of some laws.
The main issue isn’t really religious. It’s tribal. People tend to identify with a group, and are uncomfortable with those outside the group. At best, outsiders are viewed with suspicion; at worst they are hated.
The two tribes of Sunnis and Shi’ites have been contending with each other in a resource poor territory for centuries. Each has loyalty to their own group, and see the others as dangerous enemies. The religious differences are just a way to determine which group is which.
The religious leaders are also tribal leaders and their tribal beliefs – especially beliefs about who their enemies are – color their interpretation of their religion.
“Ima-aaam! Shi’head’s burning me again!”
“Shi’ite Douglas Extremist! Stop burning your fraternal Muslim brother this instant! Sunni, stop calling Shi’ite names.”
“Tattletale.” “Shi’male!” “Jerkwad…”
[del]I rofl’d[/del] That was terrible and you are both going to hell, you horrible people.
Sorry to inject something like information into this thread, but I think the initial problem was a disagreement as to who was the rightful successor to Muhammed, the first four caliphs in a generic way (any bloodline), or in particular blood relatives on his daughter’s side via the fourth caliph, Ali-- this idea that the caliphs must come from that bloodline. The trouble goes back to the 7th c. For cross reference, see Northern Ireland.
ralph124c seems shocked by some aspect of Islam almost every week! I don’t know if I could stand being so surprised all the time.
I am not trying to justify the actions of those who maim and kill in the name of religion. However…
Imagine if I walked into your house and called your wife a whore. Naturally, the best I could hope for in such a situation is to leave your house with a bloody nose.
Well, in my mind, that’s the type of thing that is going on WRT people killing and maiming each other in the name of religion.
If my religion is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING in my life, and you belong to another religion, then what you’re saying is that my religion is invalid. To say my religion is invalid is to insult me and all that is dear to me. To insult me and all that is dear to me is to ask for retribution.
At least, that’s how I see the “thought” process that motivates such things.
Though clearly part of it. If this were the main cause then both Shi’ite and Sunni would be more violent and agressive towards Christains, Hindus etc. than to each other. Though they do seem to have a special hatred for Jewish faith, the Sunni and Shi’ite act more agressively towards each other in these areas than they do towards other more different religions.
Yeah, but our typical killing is for money, anger, jealousy, etc. Not because last month in that village, some Sunnis set five Shi’ia on fire. Or the month before that, some Shi’ia set four Sunnis on fire. Or the month before that when some Sunnis set three Shi’ia on fire. Or the month before that some Shi’ia set two Sunnis on fire. Or the month before that when some Sunnis set a Shi’ia on fire, because he dared say “Hell, nice day to you” to one of the unwed women of the Sunni.
:smack:
Sorry, I just essentially described about six months of gang violence in any major U.S. metro.
IMO, there is nothing that the Sunnis and Shi’ites are doing that Christian fundamenalists wouldn’t do if they didn’t have the pesky repercussions of the law to deal with.
There are people of lots of different religions who would do something like this given the chance. Christians have burned people alive for being non-Christians, or for having the wrong take on Christian theology. If we can believe that the death penalties mentioned in the Bible were actually carried out at some time (for the times we know of, they were rarely if ever carried out), Jews burned certain women alive for being prostitutes, and men for sleeping with a woman and her mother. There are violent strains of all religions, unfortunately, and of many if not all non-religious philosophies.
Of course, there have always been individual crazies of all religions (and of no religion) who take advantage of an environment without effective law enforcement to do terrible things for all kinds of different reasons. I think that’s at least part of what we’re seeing here. If law and order were to break down in the US like it has in Iraq, violent religious types like the abortion clinic bombers or non-religious violent types like the violent animal rights activists or radical environmentalists would probably take advantage of the situation to wreak some havoc. That, of course, wouldn’t mean that all pro-lifers or pro-animal-rights people or environmentalists were in favor of violence, or that those ideologies were inherently violent.
That’s bullshit. Support the idea that Christians would commit genocide against each other for slightly differing beliefs or withdraw the comment.
God but I’m tired of your drive-by nonsense.
Airman Doors, you’ve heard of “Inquisitions”, "St Valentine’s Day Massacre, “Munster Anabaptists in 1548”, “Northern Ireland” and “Most-of-Sixteenth and Seventeenth centuries” and things like that, perhaps? Are you saying historically Christians are in the clear regarding sectarian violence?
The abortion clinic bombers would, if not commit genocide, commit acts of violence in which people might be killed. Most of them claim to be acting in the name of Christianity.
Christians did commit genocide (or at least ethnic cleansing) against others for slightly differing beliefs in the Albigensian Crusade, the Spanish expulsion of Jews and Muslims, the Spanish Inquisition, the French Wars of Religion, the Thirty Years War, and the Russian pogroms, just to name a few. I doubt human nature has changed so much since then that no Christian would want to do something like that these days, if they could.
I think you mean St Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, not St Valentine’s Day Massacre (although many gangsters were very observant of the rituals of religion, while of course ignoring the ethical and moral teachings).
No, I’m saying that history is exactly that, history. He was specifically referencing the future. Your objection, while historically accurate, is no more valid than saying that given the opportunity the Germans would like to commit genocide against the Jews because they did so once before. It’s nonsense.
One other thing: Yeah, yeah, Godwin, blah blah blah. :rolleyes:
Some Germans would like to do something like that. Not all of them would, but not all Shiite Muslims are killing Sunnis in Iraq (or vice versa) either.