Our silence on one of the most persecuted people in the world

[Joel]

Define hugely overrepresented. In the Senate and House for example. Hugely to me would be 50-100% greater than their proportion of the population.

Current US senate is 85% Christian, compared to 78% general population. Current US Congress is 92% Christian, again compared to 78% of general population. 56% of world millionaires identify as Christian, compared to ~31.5% of people. 7 of the world's top 10 economies (USA, Germany, France, UK, Brazil, Italy, Russia) are primarily Christian countries. Between the US, France, UK, Germany, and Russia, predominantly Christian nations make up most of the world's most powerful militaries. I'd call that overrepresentation, whether or not it's "huge".

The other part of it is qualitative. Even in secular countries like Canada, France, the UK, etc. Christian holidays are observed and are recognized by government. Even though we have a separation of church and state, in western nations there's no mandated holiday for Yom Kippur or Eid festivals (1st and last day of Ramadan) but we all have Christmas, Good Friday, and Easter Monday off. Already mentioned was the 26 Church of England bishops sitting in the House of Lords.

"God keep our land, glorious and free". "Il sait porter la croix". "In God we Trust". "One nation under God". "God save the Queen". There's an underlying current of Christian history still present in the institutions of countries that are now quite secular. Laws on Sunday shopping or alcohol sales that are puritanical in nature. Vivaldi, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, da Vinci, Michaelangelo's David, Dante's Divine Comedy, the most celebrated artists and works in the west were created by Christians, with a Christian theme. We can't talk about the USA without referencing the Protestant work ethic. We don't need a Christian advocacy group to "play the victim card" because Christianity and Christian culture already underpins Western culture and still exists implicitly and in some cases overtly within our institutions.

 

[Scaff]

True, but to my knowledge Christians don't have a terrorist group in modern times like Al-Qaeda. WBC is the next-closest thing.

The Lord's Resistance Army
IRA/The Real IRA
The National Liberation Front of Tripura
Antibalaka
The Catholic Reaction Force
Protestant Action Force
The UDF
The Orange Order
Ayran Nation
The Christian Identity Movement

Pick any one of the above and you will have groups that have Christianity as a core part of the worldview with a track record of terrorist attacks, murder, bombings and for some massacres, ethnic cleansing, child slavery and rape.

The difference is that that don't have an overarching group linking them (which is what AQ is, AQ is not a single group, they effectively franchise out terror).

Please don't try and claim that Christian terrorism doesn't exist in a modern context, it does and I live in a country that has suffered as a result of it (or is living memory of a 44 year old not modern enough for you?).

 

[JMoney]

The Lord's Resistance Army
IRA/The Real IRA
The National Liberation Front of Tripura
Antibalaka
The Catholic Reaction Force
Protestant Action Force
The UDF
The Orange Order
Ayran Nation
The Christian Identity Movement

Pick any one of the above and you will have groups that have Christianity as a core part of the worldview with a track record of terrorist attacks, murder, bombings and for some massacres, ethnic cleansing, child slavery and rape.

The difference is that that don't have an overarching group linking them (which is what AQ is, AQ is not a single group, they effectively franchise out terror).

Please don't try and claim that Christian terrorism doesn't exist in a modern context, it does and I live in a country that has suffered as a result of it (or is living memory of a 44 year old not modern enough for you?).

I just took the time to look up all 11 of the groups you've listed. The only one I could find that is truly a Christian terrorist group along the lines of Al-Qaeda being a terrorist group is Anti-balaka, which has only been active since 2013, and I have not heard about it, as I did clearly say, "to my knowledge". The IRA is an Irish nationalist movement with Catholic beliefs, and is really more of a militant group than a terrorist group. The UDF is the Protestant equivalent of the IRA and again, isn't a terrorist group. The National Liberation Front of Tripura is much more of a nationalist movement than a Christian one. Neither the Catholic Reaction Force nor Protestant Action are modern. I'm talking about the 21st century. The last three groups on your list aren't even terrorists. Racists, sure, extremists, yes, but not terrorists. The LRA is only half-Christian, as it mixes African mysticism into its beliefs.

Thus, 91% of the seemingly impressive list you've wasted my time with is utter BS, but what really amazes me is how much time you put in to attempt a dismantlement of one of my statements that wasn't even relevant to the main point of my argument. That's like writing a 5-page news article explaining how bad the cargo space of a Porsche 911 is. Isn't it exhausting to be so constantly condescending toward anyone who disagrees with you on the opinions forum?

 

[Scaff]

I just took the time to look up all 11 of the groups you've listed. The only one I could find that is truly a Christian terrorist group along the lines of Al-Qaeda being a terrorist group is Anti-balaka, which has only been active since 2013, and I have not heard about it, as I did clearly say, "to my knowledge".

So they are only allowed to be modern, but not too modern?

The IRA is an Irish nationalist movement with Catholic beliefs, and is really more of a militant group than a terrorist group. The UDF is the Protestant equivalent of the IRA and again, isn't a terrorist group.

I'm sorry the IRA and the UDF are not terrorist groups?

You are aware that they have carried out bombing campaigns against both military and civilian targets throughout Europe, that they kidnapped and executed civilians and soldiers?

To claim that they are not terrorists is to claim that the Boston bombings wasn't a terrorist attack; but what would I know I only grew up in the country that was one of the biggest targets for the IRA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droppin_Well_bombing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brighton_hotel_bombing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_Day_bombing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_British_Army_Gazelle_downing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporals_killings
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Armagh_Sniper_(1990–97)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Newry_Road
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Manchester_bombing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappeared_(Northern_Ireland)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles#Casualties

Please don't expect to be taken seriously if you don't consider the above to be a terrorist campaign motivated by a mixture of Christian Sectarianism and Nationalism. I, and many other on this site, lived through it and it was most certainly a terrorist campaign. One that was in large part (in regard to Catholic groups) openly funded by the US public and even supported by members of the US's government.

The National Liberation Front of Tripura is much more of a nationalist movement than a Christian one.

Is was founded by a Baptist church with the aim of creating an independent Christian state, how is that not a Christian group?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Liberation_Front_of_Tripura

Neither the Catholic Reaction Force nor Protestant Action are modern. I'm talking about the 21st century.

The last attack by the CRF was in 2001, which is the 21st century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Reaction_Force

Your also still to explain why this time period and why you get to define it?

The last three groups on your list aren't even terrorists. Racists, sure, extremists, yes, but not terrorists.

You best define terrorism then, because the FBI disagree with you...

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2009/september/domterror_090709
http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2012/may/extremism_052212

The LRA is only half-Christian, as it mixes African mysticism into its beliefs.

The recite Bible verses before going into battle and the Leader sees himself as a Christian Messiah figure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord's_Resistance_Army
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2011/10/2011101418364196576.html

That they mix that with elements of local religions? You might want to check Christianities track record with that kind of activity before using that to invalidate them.

Thus, 91% of the seemingly impressive list you've wasted my time with is utter BS, but what really amazes me is how much time you put in to attempt a dismantlement of one of my statements that wasn't even relevant to the main point of my argument. That's like writing a 5-page news article explaining how bad the cargo space of a Porsche 911 is. Isn't it exhausting to be so constantly condescending toward anyone who disagrees with you on the opinions forum?

Only if your definition of Terrorism differs from that of the FBI, the UK security forces and a number of other intelligence services around the globe.

So not its not BS and the Ad-homenem attacks are not needed.

 

[DK]

I wouldn't really class the main Republican or Loyalist paramilitary groups as religious (at least when it comes to their motivations), their ideologies were based more in ethnicity. I don't mind being proved wrong in this regard, though.

 

[Scaff]

I wouldn't really class the main Republican or Loyalist paramilitary groups as religious (at least when it comes to their motivations), their ideologies were based more in ethnicity. I don't mind being proved wrong in this regard, though.

I see it rather differently.

Republicans wanted a united Ireland, which would mean united with a country that outside the Vatican is one of the most Catholic influenced on the planet; while Republicans wanted to remain tied to the UK with a firm link to the Monarch (most are/were firm Monarchists) who is also the head of the Church of England.

While nationalist issues were certainly a large part of it, the religious sectarian nature of that divide was rather clear. This also extended to the support that the IRA received from the US, being almost exclusively Catholic and certainly can't be denied from the Loyalist side with a mouthpiece as intolerant to Catholics as the Rev Ian Paisley was.

Then you have those involved in the fighting and attacks on both sides, that one was exclusively Catholic and the other Protestant was not just down to chance, this was 'born in the community' hatred of the 'other' side in the same vein that you can see in Shia vs Sunni violence.

What I often think masks the the religious nature of it was simply that it was Christian against Christian and we hadn't had that in quite a few hundreds years.

 

[Imari]

I'm talking about the 21st century.

This is what I suspected you'd say. Your original post gave an awful lot of opportunities to move the goalposts which is why I didn't bother to spend too much time writing about the topic.

You'll believe what you want to believe, which is that Christians are somehow different from all other religions.

 

[JMoney]

This is what I suspected you'd say. Your original post gave an awful lot of opportunities to move the goalposts

I'm not moving the goalposts at all. The WBC and Al-Qaeda are both active organizations. If we are comparing other groups to them and I clearly stated "in modern times", it should go without saying that I'm looking at active organizations, or ones that have been active in the past few years.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The context is persecution, U.S. , 2015. All three groups (blacks, whites, police) are mostly Christians. It's an example of racial persecution of Christians, by Christians.

You are correct in saying that religion and race are not on the same level. Religion is a choice, it is optional.
You can't change your race.

It's not just Christians being killed or displaced. It's hard to quantify how many non religious people that looked like Christians or lived with/near Christians have been killed/displaced. As such, religion seems to be irrelevant.

In a perfect world the Jihadists would test everyone for bible skills before waging a holy war.

Persecution by a person who is Christian =/= Christian persecution. And it's not necessarily racism either, unless you can establish that the rate of blacks being pulled over for driving violations differs from their actual commission of driving violations.

I didn't say race and religion aren't on the same level. I said in the context of the OP, the slaughter and displacement of Christians in the U.S. is not on the same level. And no one said it's just Christians being killed or displaced, but that is the subject of the OP.

Current US senate is 85% Christian, compared to 78% general population. Current US Congress is 92% Christian, again compared to 78% of general population. 56% of world millionaires identify as Christian, compared to ~31.5% of people. 7 of the world's top 10 economies (USA, Germany, France, UK, Brazil, Italy, Russia) are primarily Christian countries. Between the US, France, UK, Germany, and Russia, predominantly Christian nations make up most of the world's most powerful militaries. I'd call that overrepresentation, whether or not it's "huge".

The other part of it is qualitative. Even in secular countries like Canada, France, the UK, etc. Christian holidays are observed and are recognized by government. Even though we have a separation of church and state, in western nations there's no mandated holiday for Yom Kippur or Eid festivals (1st and last day of Ramadan) but we all have Christmas, Good Friday, and Easter Monday off. Already mentioned was the 26 Church of England bishops sitting in the House of Lords.

"God keep our land, glorious and free". "Il sait porter la croix". "In God we Trust". "One nation under God". "God save the Queen". There's an underlying current of Christian history still present in the institutions of countries that are now quite secular. Laws on Sunday shopping or alcohol sales that are puritanical in nature. Vivaldi, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, da Vinci, Michaelangelo's David, Dante's Divine Comedy, the most celebrated artists and works in the west were created by Christians, with a Christian theme. We can't talk about the USA without referencing the Protestant work ethic. We don't need a Christian advocacy group to "play the victim card" because Christianity and Christian culture already underpins Western culture and still exists implicitly and in some cases overtly within our institutions.

It was Catholics, not Christians.

 

[jimipitbull]

Current US senate is 85% Christian, compared to 78% general population. Current US Congress is 92% Christian, again compared to 78% of general population.

Christianity declining at approx 1% per year, so it would currently sit around 70%

 

[Imari]

I'm not moving the goalposts at all. The WBC and Al-Qaeda are both active organizations. If we are comparing other groups to them and I clearly stated "in modern times", it should go without saying that I'm looking at active organizations, or ones that have been active in the past few years.

Or you know, you could just say what you mean and not assume that other people read "modern times" to mean what you do.

Just because you're very young and so your concept of modern only encompasses very recent and ongoing history, you should still be able to recognise that everyone doesn't look at the world the same way.

If you want to be specific, then don't use terms that are broad and vague, like "modern times".

It was Catholics, not Christians.

Are we playing the Catholics are not Christians game again?

 

[Scaff]

I'm not moving the goalposts at all. The WBC and Al-Qaeda are both active organizations. If we are comparing other groups to them and I clearly stated "in modern times", it should go without saying that I'm looking at active organizations, or ones that have been active in the past few years.

Now just to double check what you originally said....

"True, but to my knowledge Christians don't have a terrorist group in modern times like Al-Qaeda. WBC is the next-closest thing."


....no mention of active and modern times is open to a great deal of interpretation, but every one of the groups I cited has either been active within the last twenty years (the majority less than that) or are still active. That to me, as a 44 year old, is modern. Something I clearly asked as well in my reply, something you then ignored in favour of ad-homenem attack.

Now if I were being cynical I would say that you deliberately set the terms wide so as to be able to shift the goalposts if you got an answer you didn't like (and lets not be coy here, you moved the goalposts).

However I'm not being cynical and I honestly think that you were unaware of the scale and nature of Christian based terrorism that has been carried out in modern/recent times. Not a surprise, its hard to come to terms with people who use the same beliefs you do as a justification for violence, murder, kidnap, rape and slavery.

As such its natural to try and find any reason why you can avoid acknowledging them as real; its not Christian (yes it is), its not really terrorism (yes it is and to claim that the IRA were not terrorists is quite a shocking example of ignoring clear evidence to protect your belief structure).

Let me ask you about one group I didn't include, Christian pro-life groups who carry out bombings and attacks? They have after all committed acts of violence, intimidation, property damage via bombings and murder and used the Bible as justification. They have done so repeatedly and continue to do so and are supported by many in the mainstream.

Terrorists or not?

Please don't just answer yes or no, provide justification for your reasoning.

 

[afbarnes]

True, but to my knowledge Christians don't have a terrorist group in modern times like Al-Qaeda. WBC is the next-closest thing.

What about the Klu Klux Klan?? They are an extreme group of christianity are they not, which is in-fact still very "modern" in terms of presence, and is actually older then Al-Qaeda, by over 160 years.

 

[Joel]

It was Catholics, not Christians.

I mean Christians, made a mistake. With going to Catholic school and most of my family being at least "officially" Catholic, I sometimes conflate the two in my head if I'm not really thinking about it.

 

[jimipitbull]

I mean Christians, made a mistake. With going to Catholic school and most of my family being at least "officially" Catholic, I sometimes conflate the two in my head.

They worship the same God, read from the same book and wear the same cross.

If it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck... it probably is a duck.

 

[FoRiZon]

It's a common assumption or at least it's often implied, that in the absence of religion, everything would have been relatively the same, only better. Fact is, all the greatest atrocities ever committed including those by Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, WW1, had nothing to do with religion, so man is perfectly capable of killing literally hundreds of millions of people simply out of greed, ambition, hate and other base human emotions. It could also easily be argued that any of the great atrocities committed in the name of religion, including the current lunatics, ISIS, El Queda, Taliban etc. are really nothing more than hate fueled desires for power and geographical domination that might have occurred anyway, just on some other basis.

A hundred and million this.

 

[Joel]

They worship the same God, read from the same book and wear the same cross.

If it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck... it probably is a duck.

Christianity encompasses a large variety of faiths, the big ones being Catholicism, different Protestant groups, and Eastern Orthodox faiths. The faiths themselves at their core might not be hugely different, but they acted as a proxy for cultural and political conflicts. Catholic/Eastern Orthodox is a Latin/Greek and later West/East split. Catholic/Protestant is Italy/Spain/France and Germany/UK. Consider the difference between how German immigrants to the (Protestant) US were treated with how Italian or Irish immigrants were treated. There's more to it than the differences in specific practices.

We also can't reasonably consider Catholicism or the Church of England to be the same thing as southern Baptist evangelicals, or wackier stuff like Mormonism or Jehovah's Witnesses.

 

[HKS racer]

What about the Klu Klux Klan?? They are an extreme group of christianity are they not, which is in-fact still very "modern" in terms of presence, and is actually older then Al-Qaeda, by over 160 years.

KKK killed some people mostly because of racism, not because of religion. Although killing people is ALWAYS wrong you need to realize KKK is/was a small isolated group of racists condemned by the vast majority of poeple. ISIS instead are exploiting a religion to gain more and more power every day.

All this situation should not be underestimated and can eventually excale in a World War III scenario. West countries should stop talking crap on TV and actually do something since they have the military and economic resurces to do that. Because the more they wait the harder will be to stop them.

 

[Scaff]

It's a common assumption or at least it's often implied, that in the absence of religion, everything would have been relatively the same, only better. Fact is, all the greatest atrocities ever committed including those by Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, WW1, had nothing to do with religion, so man is perfectly capable of killing literally hundreds of millions of people simply out of greed, ambition, hate and other base human emotions. It could also easily be argued that any of the great atrocities committed in the name of religion, including the current lunatics, ISIS, El Queda, Taliban etc. are really nothing more than hate fueled desires for power and geographical domination that might have occurred anyway, just on some other basis.

A hundred and million this.

I disagree that its that simple (it would be nice if it were).

To try and remove religion as a motivating factor in many of these cases is simply an oversimplification, every single on of the people you have mentioned by name had a religious background (a worrying number had a very religious background). As such a large factor in setting the moral compass of these individuals was religion, for example to try and exclude Hitlers catholic upbringing as a factor in his anti-sematism is just plain absurd. He repeatedly acknowledged it himself and dedicated his struggle against Jews and his final solution to his creator.

I've heard the argument that he either did it just to gain favour from the church (big problem with that is he would have pick the Protestants not the Catholics in that case, German Protestants disliked Jews just as much and Catholics had long been persecuted in Germany following the reformation - they had significantly less influence that Protestants - Hitler helped Catholicism in Germany, hence the formal agreements between him and the Vatican) and/or that he turned his back on the Church in the end. Now the last point is very debatable and also a red herring, given that would do nothing to chance the original driving factor.

 

[Liquid]

KKK killed some people mostly because of racism, not because of religion.

You know those crosses the second Klan would burn as an act of imtimidation? As well as their white hooded cloaks?

Take a wild guess what that represents.

Spoiler

That's right, their Christian origins.

 

[JMoney]

Let me ask you about one group I didn't include, Christian pro-life groups who carry out bombings and attacks? They have after all committed acts of violence, intimidation, property damage via bombings and murder and used the Bible as justification. They have done so repeatedly and continue to do so and are supported by many in the mainstream.

Terrorists or not?

Yes, according to the generally accepted definition of terrorism, being anyone who attacks or intimidates non-combatants to instill fear for a ideological purpose. However, these terrorists are isolated in nature and aren't organized the way Al-Qaeda or other groups are. Thus, they aren't a terrorist organization.

Also, who is the "mainstream"?

What about the Klu Klux Klan?? They are an extreme group of christianity are they not, which is in-fact still very "modern" in terms of presence, and is actually older then Al-Qaeda, by over 160 years.

@HKS racer beat me to it.

 

[Scaff]

KKK killed some people mostly because of racism, not because of religion. Although killing people is ALWAYS wrong you need to realize KKK is/was a small isolated group of racists condemned by the vast majority of poeple. ISIS instead are exploiting a religion to gain more and more power every day.

All this situation should not be underestimated and can eventually excale in a World War III scenario. West countries should stop talking crap on TV and actually do something since they have the military and economic resurces to do that. Because the more they wait the harder will be to stop them.

Justified by religion.

The burning crosses and the costumes modeled after those used by the inquisition are not a coincidence.

Oh and the KKK were anything but small, the 'second' klan of the early 20th Century numbered in the millions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan

 

[afbarnes]

KKK killed some people mostly because of racism, not because of religion. Although killing people is ALWAYS wrong you need to realize KKK is/was a small isolated group of racists condemned by the vast majority of poeple. ISIS instead are exploiting a religion to gain more and more power every day.

All this situation should not be underestimated and can eventually excale in a World War III scenario. West countries should stop talking crap on TV and actually do something since they have the military and economic resurces to do that. Because the more they wait the harder will be to stop them.

I agree, the UN should gather the militaries of the members and send them all in until they are "removed" in just one operation, a few thousand vs a few hundred thousand which has more advanced and powerful equipment.

Unfortunatly, if there isn't any war then companies won't make any money, didn't the US government sign a HUGE deal with Lockheed Martin for F-35 Lightning ii fighters recently costing many billions??

 

[Scaff]

Yes, according to the generally accepted definition of terrorism, being anyone who attacks or intimidates non-combatants to instill fear for a ideological purpose. However, these terrorists are isolated in nature and aren't organized the way Al-Qaeda or other groups are. Thus, they aren't a terrorist organization.

I didn't ask if there were a terrorist organization (they are, a regional one ratrher than a global one) I asked if they were terrorists.

Those goalposts...................................moving again.

@HKS racer beat me to it.

Lets see how he explains the burning crosses and religious garb.

You can go for how Catholics and Jews (both targets of the KKK) are an ethnic group?

 

[HKS racer]

Justified by religion.

The burning crosses and the costumes modeled after those used by the inquisition are not a coincidence.

Oh and the KKK were anything but small, the 'second' klan of the early 20th Century numbered in the millions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan

Scaff are you really trying to say they can be compared to ISIS? And even if they do, how they have been defeated? Can the same tactic be used with nowdays ISIS and African terrorists?

I agree, the UN should gather the militaries of the members and send them all in until they are "removed" in just one operation, a few thousand vs a few hundred thousand which has more advanced and powerful equipment.

Unfortunatly, if there isn't any war then companies won't make any money, didn't the US government sign a HUGE deal with Lockheed Martin for F-35 Lightning ii fighters recently costing many billions??

We can blame military industry over and over again but if you give away for cheap old equipment to small groups in the hope they fight each other instead of re-selling this equipment to bigger more organized group like ISIS you are going nowhere anyway.

Lets see how he explains the burning crosses and religious garb.

You can go for how Catholics and Jews (both targets of the KKK) are an ethnic group?

There's nothing to explain. They did evil stuff and evil stuff is always bad.
The thing is how dangerous they are for the World now, how many people died from them recently?
Do these numbers get near to what ISIS and African extremists has done in the last 2 years?

 

[Scaff]

Scaff are you really trying to say they can be compared to ISIS? And even if they do, how they have been defeated? Can the same tactic be used with nowdays ISIS and African terrorists?

Did I say they could be compared to any other group in terms of scale and nature of attack?

No.

What I said is that they are a Christian Terrorist organisation. The FBI class them as domestic terrorists and they are a Christian organisation (a point they maintain to this day)

There's nothing to explain. They did evil stuff and evil stuff is always bad.

Well yes their is, you stated they are not a Christian organisation, they are (and freely acknowledge that and always have done).

The thing is how dangerous they are for the World now, how many people died from them recently?
Do these numbers get near to what ISIS and African extremists has done in the last 2 years?

Could you point out when I said they did?

I do note that the question regarding the use of Christian imagery (burning crosses), garb and targeting of non-ethnic groups (Jews and Catholics) have been ignored and you are now trying to focus on scale of attacks.

Problem with that is its a straw man.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I disagree that its that simple (it would be nice if it were).

To try and remove religion as a motivating factor in many of these cases is simply an oversimplification, every single on of the people you have mentioned by name had a religious background (a worrying number had a very religious background). As such a large factor in setting the moral compass of these individuals was religion, for example to try and exclude Hitlers catholic upbringing as a factor in his anti-sematism is just plain absurd. He repeatedly acknowledged it himself and dedicated his struggle against Jews and his final solution to his creator.

I've heard the argument that he either did it just to gain favour from the church (big problem with that is he would have pick the Protestants not the Catholics in that case, German Protestants disliked Jews just as much and Catholics had long been persecuted in Germany following the reformation - they had significantly less influence that Protestants - Hitler helped Catholicism in Germany, hence the formal agreements between him and the Vatican) and/or that he turned his back on the Church in the end. Now the last point is very debatable and also a red herring, given that would do nothing to chance the original driving factor.

The Holocaust Museum is unclear on the origins of the final solution. It also seems pretty clear to me that into and during the war Hitler rejected all forms of religion, and specifically mentioned getting rid of Christianity altogether. It could easily be argued that Hitler's "faith" was simply something he paid lip service to for political expediency to achieve his evil ends.

You know those crosses the second Klan would burn as an act of imtimidation? As well as their white hooded cloaks?

Take a wild guess what that represents.

Spoiler

That's right, their Christian origins.

Justified by religion.

The burning crosses and the costumes modeled after those used by the inquisition are not a coincidence.

Oh and the KKK were anything but small, the 'second' klan of the early 20th Century numbered in the millions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan

So then you'd have to agree that atrocities of ISIS, El Queda, the Taliban, the evil regimes of Hussein, Assad and many others are also due in large part to their affiliation with Islam.

They worship the same God, read from the same book and wear the same cross.

If it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck... it probably is a duck.

Except he specifically said Catholics. Accuracy is important, you can't just paint everything with a wide, sweeping and inaccurate brush like you do and expect to have a decent discussion.

If you want to be specific, then don't use terms that are broad and vague, like "modern times".

Are we playing the Catholics are not Christians game again?

You answered your own question with the bolded part.

 

[Dotini]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...he-worlds-most-persecuted-people-9630774.html

With the latest anti-Christian atrocity by Islamists, one must start to wonder why the world is so silent on this ongoing persecution where "the number of Christians who have died for their faith has doubled in recent years, according to the Open Doors charity..."

Is the silence because of a desire for secularism? Is secularism even a realistic goal for many countries anymore?

Yes, Christians are highly persecuted in parts of Africa and Asia today. And yes, Christianity is something of an anachronistic embarrassment to liberal secularists today.

But it wasn't always thus. The Christian establishment has excelled in the past at persecuting its own minorities just as thoroughly as any barbarians. Gnostics and Cathars were exterminated in the Old World; Mormons fought for their very existence in the New.

The "true believer" in any doctrine, including secularism, probably has the capacity for injustice and violence. The western liberal believes actions are justified by their good, progressive and enlightened motives, and are not vitiated by their outcomes, which may be very much otherwise. This is merely a sanctimonious way of saying the ends justify the means.

On the other hand, I grew up in the Old South before the civil rights movement came to fruition in the 60's. I have seen women, blacks, hispanics, gays, transgendered, atheists and non-conformists of all kinds persecuted to various degrees. I can assure you that things are much better than this today in the US.

In conclusion, I think secularism is a reasonable goal for many prosperous and advanced countries, because I have seen improvements for minorities. But IMO this is possible only if the majority are ready to endorse it.

 

[Scaff]

The Holocaust Museum is unclear on the origins of the final solution. It also seems pretty clear to me that into and during the war Hitler rejected all forms of religion, and specifically mentioned getting rid of Christianity altogether. It could easily be argued that Hitler's "faith" was simply something he paid lip service to for political expediency to achieve his evil ends.

The origins of his dislike of the Jews are not unclear, they are rather clearly written in his own words (what is unclear is did the Nazi's take small steps to a final solution being implemented or was it a single event). Not just in Mein Kampf, but also in a number of speeches he gave. That he may have altered his view of faith towards the end doesn't alter those origins and certainly didn't give him pause.

You also seem to have totally and utterly ignored the fact that I have addressed the problem with the claim of "lip service to for political expediency to achieve his evil ends".

So then you'd have to agree that atrocities of ISIS, El Queda, the Taliban, the evil regimes of Hussein, Assad and many others are also due in large part to their affiliation with Islam.

Have I ever said otherwise?

No, so I'm not quite sure what point you are making?

However just as I don't blame my wife and her family (who are Catholic) for the actions of the IRA, I don't hold every Muslim/Jew/Buddist/Christian responsible for the actions of Terror organisations that are motivated by religion.

 

[HKS racer]

Did I say they could be compared to any other group in terms of scale and nature of attack?

No.

What I said is that they are a Christian Terrorist organisation. The FBI class them as domestic terrorists and they are a Christian organisation (a point they maintain to this day)




Well yes their is, you stated they are not a Christian organisation, they are (and freely acknowledge that and always have done).



Could you point out when I said they did?

I do note that the question regarding the use of Christian imagery (burning crosses), garb and targeting of non-ethnic groups (Jews and Catholics) have been ignored and you are now trying to focus on scale of attacks.

Problem with that is its a straw man.

A "Christian" organization that targeted black people more than anyone else sounds like a group of racists trying to find a reason to kill black people only because they are black. That was their main goal and KKK is USA stuff you can't find them somewhere else. ISIS is worldwide and it's spreading as we speak.

So if moderated Islam is really moderated by the numbers of declared moderated muslims ISIS wouldn't stand a chance, but is this what's really happening? Why they find new followers everyday?