What’s good for the goose…
The participants in this thread best all be cardful not to be trampled in the stampede to tie this whack-job to everybody and everything that is not SDMB Liberal-approved. Yeesh, what a circle-jerk.
Right now they’re half-heartedly holding back because we don’t have any hard evidence of his motives. If he turns out not to have done this out of right-wing Christian motives, the liberal media will either drop the story entirely, or make it exclusively about gun control.
It’s a sad day for America when people who are against giving gay people special rights in the name of equal rights – the “right” to get married – something that never existed before in all of recorded history – in other words, those who are in favor of traditional morality are considered bigots and haters; yet hate-filled invective like this goes uncondemned.
These quotes show how much anti-Christian prejudice exists today. There has been absolutely no shred of evidence that this man is religious in any way, much less a Christian. And yet, simply because he has committed a violent act, he is assumed to be a Christian.
This sort of thing was mentioned 2,000 years ago. “Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you.” (I John 3:13) These attitudes will get worse and worse, until they culminate in the reign of the Antichrist, when Christians will be persecuted and even killed, simply and solely because of their beliefs.
The guy didn’t kill people with his bow & arrow. Of course it should be about gun control. That would be the responsible media, not the liberal media.
But the motivation is “stop abortions”. There’s no demand for Papal rule. No demand to enshrine the commandments in the constitution. If there was any political goal other than stopping abortions I’d be fine with calling it Christian terrorism. Maybe some of these guys have had a broader manifesto; I don’t know so feel free to correct that ignorance.
ISIS takes credit whenever someone so much as stubs their toe. It’s what they do; Take credit for everything to try to convince the west that they are more than a pathetic bunch of scum looking for power.
Sure sure. I bet it turns out he was one of those strong atheist types who are always protesting in front of Planned Parenthood. Or like all those other attacks on doctors and clinics that provide abortions… they were all done by Buddhists, right?
And on another fucking terrorist note, those three white guys who shot black protesters… they were in no waywhite supremacists, right? Jesus. Keep on denying the fucking obvious.
Apart from the single most important piece of evidence possible: his choice of target.
Yeah, it has nothing to do with his choosing to shoot up Planned Parenthood. ‘Abortion clinics’ and workers have suffered murders, attempted murders, assaults, kidnappings, bombings, arson, and property crimes for decades. Anti-abortion extremists are predominantly Christian. It’s a fair assumption that Dear was motivated by anti-abortion beliefs, which are mostly propounded by Christians.
Oh please. He is not assumed to be Christian simply because he committed a violent act. He is assumed to be Christian because he committed an attack against a known target of those who practice Christianity in the US.
Really? You argue your point with the antichrist myth and you want to be taken seriously?
Why? Do you know something none of the rest of us knows? As far as I can find out, his motives are still not clear.
Why are people so reluctant to wait for some facts before they start name-calling and bloviating?
eta: not a Christian myself, but instant attacks like this do no credit to that point of view.
He has a cross hanging on his shack in North Carolina. I’d say that constitutes a shred of evidence regarding his religion.
But that makes you just as bad as them. Wouldn’t you want to be better? This is why we get nowhere in politics…everybody is too busy trying to be just as stupid as the “other side”.
The 9/11 hijackers were not trying to enshrine Sharia law in the US constitution. Were they not “Muslim Terrorists”? In my mind, terrorism is the attempt to achieve political goals through violence against civilians. If someone’s political goals are informed by his religion, and he tries to achieve those goals through violence against civilians, then he’s a “Whatever-Religion Terrorist”.
I’ve watched those on the left almost wet themselves with glee over being able to talk about “Christian terrorists.” That is troubling in itself, not because I agree with violence against abortion clinics, but because of the implicit argument that our response to “Christian” terrorists and the worldwide battle against Islamic extremists should be the same.
I don’t think that you will find a person on these boards who agrees with shooting up abortion clinics. No one; certainly not me. Anyone who would do so could be called a number of names, and I agree that “terrorist” would be one of them. If it turns out that this guy identifies as a Christian, then he could be called a Christian terrorist and you all could be linguistically correct.
I’ll give you all of that. Now…so what? What is your point? That we have 9/11, the Paris attacks, ISIS, etc. on one hand, and crazy right wingers on the other so it cancels each other out? We should have the same policy against Syria that we do North Carolina?
Have fun basking in the name calling, but what does it mean in the end?
You are free to think such. I think it’s more useful to call it “single issue terrorism”.
So it’s OK for the Right to call Muslims religiously-motivated terrorists, but it’s not OK to call religiously-motivated Christian terrorists Christian terrorists? Even when Christians have a history of murdering people for political gains? ‘All Muslims are evil’ (and yes, I’ve seen Right-wingers say that), but when Christians kill people it’s just ‘a mentally-disturbed individual’ or ‘small groups who only identify as Christian’?
What it means to the cultural left is an excuse to minimize Islamic terrorism, so as to continue with their project of destroying our civilization.