Oh oh, here we go...
Crukster, you had me convinced that not all muslims are extremists.
Pleeeeassse don't tell me you think it's right to kill humans for burning a book...
I'd say it'd be fine if they kicked his ass real good. But human life vs. some stuff that comes out of a friggin printer.
It's in the end just a book mate. There's loads of copies. It's nothing more than a book.

[QUOTE=Plum;1030394]I'm not neccessarily saying that it was right of them to take lives cos of it, but there definitely has to be some sort of a reaction against it.

Thou shalt not Kill, you can consider that a basic guideline; baseline - if no-one wanted to Kill, there'd be no reason to.

But if someone puts a knife at your throat, well Thou Shalt not Kill won't do you much good then - it's you or them. If someone comes into my house and threatens my family, rule of defense, I'll kill em. Burning the Qu'ran is a metaphorical knife to the throat of Muslims everywhere - arguably of Humans everywhere if you respect the right to freedom of Religion. There are ideas that are more important than one life, because they form the foundation of ALL lives. How long till they take to burning Muslims houses? Burning Muslims? Burning children? Because we're not up to their "standard" of living.

But I don't condone what they did, there was no LITERAL actual knife to anyone's throat, it was simply a challenge and furthermore a defilement of Islam. They shouldn't have killed them for burning it, but I understand why they did. There's a better way. They should have started a reading OF the Qu'ran directly adjacent to the burning, imo that would have been the best thing to do. That would have answered the challenge and undone the defilin. Killing them makes them as bad as the one's burning it. They should have led by example, not by counter.



I wouldn't begrudge them for trying, I don't live my life in fear of anyone man.

If you thought I was attacking, then you misunderstood me. Firstly, I was not attacking, if I wanted to attack what would be the point in using words and discussing, I would have just outright insulted you and said I think you're a ****ing idiot and atheism is bull****, and stop typing there. If I wanna write that I'd write that, but I didn't do that because thats not what I wanna say, I was trying to make a platform for discussion. Secondly, if the non-religious are actually non-religious, how is there even anything for me to disrespect, I dont understand. I apologise if I'm wrong man but you seem like a textbook "atheist". When it suits you it's a belief, but when the weight is on, it's nothing, just a loosely affiliated group of non-believers. It's a smoke screen.

But I wasn't talking about killing anyway, I was talking about defending.

I also think it says something, the way you interpreted that. The point I was making was that they have no right to burn it in the first place.

They "defended" the burning of the Koran by killing people.
When you say they have the right to defend, it sort of seems like you're saying it's reasonable people are being killed because someone (not even the one that got killed!) burned the Koran.
So... that's not what you meant?

Dude, you scare me again...

No, not all I was saying this

My point is the people who were killing, were killing because they thought that was the best way to defend. In the end, that's all extremism is - flaw, stupidity, and an incomplete idea. If they'd had stronger leadership, they could have answered that burning in a freakin awesome way. Answer it with Islam. These people who were acting extremely, were answering it for Islam. It should be WITH, not for.

I'm saying I understand why they reacted so harshly, but I dont condone the killing, they should have used that energy in a different way.


I know that man, but they're not burning the paper it's printed on, they're burning the words and everything it stands for. Along with flag burning, it's one of the most disrespectful things you can do to any group of people imo.

Looks like you missed my point once again. For starters, the way you talked about it could definitely be viewed as an attack. Which is fine, you have a right to your opinions just like I have a right to mine. The point is that people don't have a right to defend their beliefs with physical violence.

I'm confused as to why you think that religious people have a monopoly on having beliefs. There are beliefs in this world that are non-religious in nature.

And I think I'm very consistent in how I view atheism actually. The problem here is that you're hanging on so tight to your misperceptions of it that you can't understand when someone explains it to you.

I'm glad you clarified that. You do understand, though, that when you come into a conversation about people killing over religious beliefs and announce that people have a right to defend their beliefs, that it sounds a lot like you're justifying the killing, right?

Well in a society that values free speech he actually does have a right to burn it. He's still an asshole for doing so though.

It still scares me that you have any understanding for the killing itself, but allright.
I mean, I understand they would WANT to kill them. But I don't understand they actually do it.

They can burn my country's flag as many times as they want.
I think pride is something to be afraid of, every now and then. You can be proud of what you achieve, proud of what your loved ones achieve, but when you become proud of something that really isn't there (like 'faith' or 'a country') it's sort of scary if you ask me. I know this is not something most people think. But I think that way. For me it's just one tiny earth that we shouldn't want to divide... But apparently that's a strange thing to say.

Yeahup. It's just a shitty thing. Sometimes it can make people have bake sales and start charities, but then there's an innumerable amount of horrible things that come out of it. Like perhaps the killing of 7 people over a religious book.

well, they shouldn't burn the Quran, anyway - I may not believe in any of it, but it contains some of the most beautiful poetry ever written - to me, it's like burning Rimbaud or Wordsworth

then again, you can burn the Bible all you want, nobody's gonna give too much of a fuss, I have so many Bibles sometimes I want to tear out their pages to roll my cigarettes and weed in

on the other hand, if you want to uphold every letter of the law, Christians should go on a killing spree of all people having extra-marital affairs - "Thou shall not commit adultery" - it should void "Thou shall not kill" as they're equal commandments - i should think it follows Asimov's 3 laws of robotics:-

Three Laws of Robotics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ergo, thou shall not kill unless you kill those who commit adultery

This anger isn't directed at you,

but holy ****, it's just a stupid ****ing book, it's ****ing ridiculous that some crazies halfway across the ****ing world will KILL PEOPLE because some crazies in the United States think their stupid ****ing book wants them to antagonize all the other crazies who don't conform to their stupid ****ing religion. I guess it's a hate crime, sure, but imagine the worst hate crime that someone could possibly commit against you without actually harming you in any way. Would you kill random, unrelated people in retaliation? It's ****ing insane! And any form of sympathy for these Muslims just pisses me off to no end.

Don't get me wrong, the Christians are just as bad, but hey, at least they aren't KILLING people.

Obama's a Christian and he's responsible for murdering Libyan civilians and continuing two other wars where American weapons are used to murder people. In fact, the American military is mostly Christian, and, like, they kill people.