Clockwood said:Thats the thing... Islam and Christianity are the human elements. This whole conflict has practically nothing to do with anything written in sterile ink and paper. Thousand year old words can be bent any which way to rationalize whatever the hell you choose to do. This conflict is more about living culture.
That isn't to say that Islamic culture is bad, its just struck through with cancerous elements. A running theme throughout history is that moderates are rarely in command of anything except by virtue of social inertia whenever any number of radicals are present. Moderates want only to live their lives and raise their families. Radicals are the ones that form armies and risk their lives for one cause or another. That tends to give them a certain amount of dominance.
One problem I see is that there is very little done against these elements by their own people. Terrorists cloak themselves in the image and word of Islam and by doing so make themselves effectively a sacred cow. To speak or act against them is seen in many places as un-Islamic and thus you would be siding with evil.
You obviously, don't know much about the history or truth of Christianity or Islam. The human element, what I mean by that is, no matter what the words say, humans who feel hatred will make a case for their emotion. Most muslims know Bin Laden is wrong and was nothing like Mohammed.
Mohammed was living during a time period where you had to be aggressive like that just to survive. Jesus believed in the same ideas, but Jesus was so passive that he got slaughtered, we have to remember that Mohammed came hundreds of years after Jesus and likely remembered what happened to Jesus and decided that in order to keep Islam pure, holywar was required to defend it, as self defense, a form of religious self defense.
Mohammed living during a time where it was kill or be killed, conquer or be conquered, enslave or be enslaved, so to talk about Mohammed in such a way, as if Christians did not do the same thing, whats the point? It's coming from the Pope, not some athiest. If an athiest wants to condemn organized religion as being violent and aggressive, fine, point taken, but for the Pope to say it, it's a completely different meaning. Do we really want religious leaders to start fighting?
The truth is, religion and self defense are linked, you can see this just by reading the art of war. Really, comments like what the Pope made, it does not help to moderate the debate, it will only serve to piss off Muslims who will take it very seriously. Why exactly do we want to provoke extremism?
Now, if you want the Pope to use this language, be aware that Jesus can just as easily be attacked. Mohammed was aggressive, yes, and Jesus was so passive that he refused to defend himself at all, and we all know that the average person is somewhere in the middle, passive until provoked. Why do we want to provoke the mainstream muslims and mainstream christians?
Last edited: