12/1/2007 11:28:59 PM

I guess they got bored of genocide.

12/1/2007 11:49:59 PM

muslims are so backward

12/1/2007 11:55:21 PM

It's nothing a nuclear weapon won't fix.


But really, why in the name of all that is holy would you ever, no matter how bad you felt for them, go to teach English in the god forsaken land of Sudan?

I ain't saying she had it coming, but she had it coming.

12/2/2007 12:43:52 AM

i dont know... maybe some people care about the plight of the refugees and victims of the genocide campaign being waged against the people of the Darfur region of Sudan by the Sudanese government-sponsored Janjaweed paramilitaries.

12/2/2007 2:10:21 AM

So, you can't name a teddy-bear Muhammed, but you CAN name a person that...

12/2/2007 2:32:58 AM

but can you name a potbellied pig Mohammed?

12/2/2007 2:45:59 AM

I'm just saying... I'd be more worried about a PERSON being made out to be a prophet than a fucking teddy bear... But that's just me. I might name a teddy bear Jesus Christ (not really, but still...), but I'd NEVER name my kid Jesus Christ...

12/2/2007 2:47:27 AM

you might if you were Latino.



I toyed with the idea of naming my kid Judas.

12/2/2007 2:50:37 AM

^ >.<

But, the just name his Jesus. Not Jesus Christe

12/2/2007 2:55:44 AM

^ >.< yourself

plenty of latinos have named their kids after the full name of Jesus Christ.

hell, for that matter plenty of white people have Christ incorporated into their first and/or last names.

there's no difference. what's your point anyhow? do you have one, or are you just trying to express to us how pious and reverent you are?

12/2/2007 3:02:53 AM

well, at least it is ChristIAN or something, and not just Christ. Definitely a difference there.

Have you seriously met a Jesus Christe? I never have, but that's just me

12/2/2007 3:04:36 AM

for one thing, it's not "Christe"

it's "Cristo" or "Christo"

the meaning of the name, literally, is "the anointed" or "the messiah"
http://www.donquijote.org/culture/babynames/search/name.asp?id=3902

of course we're familiar with spanish people named "Jesus" ( literally, "God will help" )
http://www.donquijote.org/culture/babynames/search/name.asp?id=4406

we have this in English too. you might know some of these people.

they're called "Chris" "Christophe" or "Christopher"

12/2/2007 3:27:27 AM

With the teddy bear incident, the cartoon incident some months ago, and other recent incidents in mind, can we get past this quaint notion that Christians and Muslims today are direct analogues? I mean, something is happening in a number of Islamic sects around the world that is simply not happening in Christian denominations around the world.

12/2/2007 3:50:04 AM

(1) you avoided addressing my point on language. the use of the names of central figures to each religion has long been appropriated for common, popularly use on both sides.. but thats fine. my point has been sufficiently made.

(2) your diversion, however, is misleading: Christians and Muslims are nearly analogous in many different aspects. Often uncannily so.

the largest and most important difference between them is not religious, but social/political -- Christians tend to live in secular democratic states DESPITE (or perhaps DUE to) a thousand years of oppression and opposition to secular democracy by the organized Christian Church. ... whereas Muslims currently tend to be concentrated in theocratic states where the religion IS the state and therefore Sharia Law is paramount. since there is no central "islamic authority" each state's religious leaders interprets Sharia Law as they see fit.

its nice for us living in a secular constitutional democracy where the law is based on social contract and majority consensus, but unfortunate for the Muslims whose every aspect of their lives are dictated by the learned opinions or subjective whims of bearded old guys in robes.

but the fact is, we enjoy our secular freedoms due entirely to the people who RESISTED the longstanding Christian tradition of running governments based on the opinions or whims of some old guy in a mitered hat and robes.




[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 4:23 AM. Reason : ]

12/2/2007 4:22:07 AM

^ Well, can you give me some analogies in which everyday Christians went wild in the streets over a teddy bear's name or a cartoon depiction of their god? Can you give me an analogy in which average Christians lashed and jailed a woman for being raped?

And don't give me any shit from centuries ago or whatever. Be straightforward and give me something analogous from the last, say, two years.

12/2/2007 4:35:37 AM

^ the opposition to the civil rights movement in the south a few decades ago

[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 8:28 AM. Reason : s]

12/2/2007 8:27:51 AM

^^ heres an analogy:

Robert Mapplethorpe's Piss Christ

Martin Scorcese's Last Temptation of Christ

if Christians had their way and the US was a Bible-Based theocracy, both of those men would have been crucified upside down on a tree.


^ good one there. The lynchings and murders of southern Blacks and their white supporters is a direct example of good Christian going wild in the streets for insults against their god.



[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 11:53 AM. Reason : ]

12/2/2007 11:46:52 AM

http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/jn/slides/g22.html

12/2/2007 11:57:29 AM

Quote :

" Robert Mapplethorpe's Piss Christ Martin Scorcese's Last Temptation of Christ those are different, and you know it. "

Now i'm personally of the opinion that we would all be better off without Islam or Christianity (dogmatic religions, in general), but the shit that Muslims pull on a regular basis is ridiculous. Every time a Muslim riot or protest breaks out about stupid shit like this, I do like to think if there is a corollary in the modern Christian world. There is not.

Christians in America as of late do like to "play the victim", claiming that their beliefs are being held down by secularists or the ACLU or whoever. But these "outrages" are rarely backed up with anything more than some symbolic protest or boycott of a product, or talking heads making baseless claims on TV or AM Radio. Occasionally some backwater Congressman will attempt to introduce some legislation promoting a clearly religious view, or denying/prohibiting another, but even these rarely make it anywhere.

I doubt there has been a single incident or occasion in the last 200 years (an arbitrary time, because i don't really know what happened before then) when Christians have come together in a mob scene and openly and violently called for the death of someone, especially someone who's "infraction" against their religion is as trivial as naming a teddy bear or drawing something in a newspaper. [see edit]


The more I hear about these incidents, the more conflicted I become of how to deal with "these people". I don't think more war is the answer, and I don't support mass annihilation like some here have suggested. But we in America, Europe, and large parts of Asia and continents and countries in the world are truly trying to move modern society forward, and "keep up with the times". I don't know what to do about it, but people and countries who support these barbaric actions simple do not have a place at the table in the modern world. Again, I don't know how to deal with it, but it seems like some kind severe isolation is really necessary. Of course that's not practical or very humanitarian, but honestly, it would save the rest of us a lot of trouble if we didn't have to deal with their backwards-thinking and looking, hate and violence inducing bullshit.



edit: ok, maybe the civil rights and slavery is an example. if we look at current and modern times, though, I don't know if there is an analogous situation. But especially since the entire world is so interconnected now with trade and technology, it's imperative that forward-looking countries are not bogged down and constantly threatened with violence from others fear of change and progress

[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 12:08 PM. Reason : .]


[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 12:11 PM. Reason : .]

12/2/2007 12:03:59 PM

You guys are forgetting it took over a thousand years for Christianity to water down from a harmful, deadly, barbaric, and oppressive cult. What's going on with Islam currently is less a problem with how it fundamentally deviates from Christianity and more a problem Christianity's already been through (and took a hell of a long time and brave opposition to fix).

12/2/2007 12:17:16 PM

^ while that may be true, i think the problems that Islam are going through now, which Christianity has more or less gone past, are exacerbated and are more dangerous now because of how interconnected the world is. When Christianity was going through these "growing pains", i guess is what we're implying they are, it was impossible to communicate ideas throughout the world in less than many, many months. While I don't want to downplay the significance of events like the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition, can you imagine what those events would be like if they occurred now? The world would be fucked.

That's kind of what i'm saying is that the world is changing faster than their religion will allow them to. Fortunately for Christianity (and for its opponents and the rest of the world), i guess most of its major changes happened before the current communication and technological boom. The rest world now, though, is in the unfortunately position that Islam is hitting this phase in its religious evolution at a time when it is not possible for them to inflict severe damage and harm to "unbelievers" due to communications and technological breakthroughs.

12/2/2007 12:26:45 PM

Quote :

"Robert Mapplethorpe's Piss Christ Martin Scorcese's Last Temptation of Christ those are different, and you know it."

Not at all ... Christians were LITERALLY marching in the streets en masse. the hatred and vitriol that was generated was incredible -- if we didnt have our secular protections in place, Scorsese and Mapplethorpe would have been thrown in the tower and tortured until they repented then burned at the stake. all for *images* that descreted someone's god.

yes, they're analogies. the only reason nobody died is because we've HAD our protections from religious zealots in place for 300 -400 years. or less in some aspects. muslims tend to still live in theocracies where religious law is dictated from religious leaders that vary from state to state.

for the record, Blockbuster still refuses to carry Scorsese's Academy Award winner, one of the top 100 films of all time. you can get "Cannabal Sorority Massacre VI" but not Last Temptation of Christ because Jesus is portrayed as having sex with Magdalene in a dream sequence.





[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 12:29 PM. Reason : ]

12/2/2007 12:26:58 PM

Quote :

"^ while that may be true, i think the problems that Islam are going through now, which Christianity has more or less gone past, are exacerbated and are more dangerous now because of how interconnected the world is. When Christianity was going through these "growing pains", i guess is what we're implying they are, it was impossible to communicate ideas throughout the world in less than many, many months. While I don't want to downplay the significance of events like the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition, can you imagine what those events would be like if they occurred now? The world would be fucked."

I agree completely. These things DID spread throughout the world once the results of the Enlightenment mixed with the remnants of Christianity (the colonial period). Imagine if it could have spread quicker than that? Awful. The results already ruined nearly half of the world.

12/2/2007 12:29:14 PM

Quote :

"Not at all ... Christians were LITERALLY marching in the streets en masse. the hatred and vitriol that was generated was incredible -- if we didnt have our secular protections in place, Scorsese and Mapplethorpe would have been thrown in the tower and tortured until they repented then burned at the stake."

ok, well maybe i have a short, or selective, memory, but i don't necessarily remember large, in-street protests. Furthermore, do you [i]really[i] think modern Christians would actually kill/torture/burn people like this?
I just can't get past images of Muslims walking through the streets carrying machettes and clubs and burning flags and dolls in effigy. This seems like a monthly event. Just the act of marching with weapons and calling for death to someone strikes me as extremely barbaric. Maybe i have my blinders on, but I just don't see these things happening in the US.

12/2/2007 12:39:43 PM

Quote :

"I do like to think if there is a corollary in the modern Christian world. There is not. "

I can think of a corollary for america. However, this one involves a certain racial group instead of a religion. Whenever certain happens negativly to someone in their religious Racial group they irrationally go crazy.

12/2/2007 2:57:58 PM

a cursory google search will show that mapplethorpe didn't do this "piss christ" thing

but, you know, like you really need to get shit right to argue about nonsense like this

[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 3:13 PM. Reason : .]

12/2/2007 3:12:56 PM

holy crap. i usually don't venture into the soap box, but i read the first four posts by McDanger and immediately remembered why i usually don't venture into the soap box.

you people

12/2/2007 3:14:11 PM

^^ goddamit.

Robert Mapplethorpe died in 1989 and his photography often involved bodily functions, causing controversy with the NEA

Andrew Serrano's Piss Christ debuted in 1989 and caused controversy with the NEA.

...

yeah, i should get the basic names correct.

12/2/2007 3:25:57 PM

do they just sit around waiting for reasons to get angry?

12/2/2007 3:32:31 PM

i know i do.

12/2/2007 4:32:53 PM

I think the comparisons between Christian and Muslim history being made here are not terribly well-founded.

Islam grew explosively fast, far faster than Christianity, and still managed to maintain a large degree of tolerance, respect for science and learning, and other progressive ideas. There's no particular reason that, left to its own devices, it would not still be largely the same today.

Christianity, however, once it had grown to be dominant in Europe, took a very long time to manage the same -- and, arguably, only managed it by becoming less and less influential. All this was true even when it was left to its own devices, as in German, England, and France, which, while never really threatened by a different religion, still managed to fight incredibly bloody religious wars amongst one another.

Ultimately, though, Islam wasn't left to its own devices, and successful meddling on the part of Christians created the clusterfuck we see today.

It has nothing to do with "growing pains." It has nothing to do with the actual tenets of either religion, these covering roughly the same interpretive range from "kill everybody" to "love everybody." It's just that white people managed to take over a lot of the brown people and not the other way around.

If you don't believe me, look at the Balkans, the one place where brown people managed to take over white people for an extended period of time. Think of what a clusterfuck that place is. Not all that dissimilar from the Muslim world, is it?

12/2/2007 6:19:52 PM

^ This is pretty dead-on actually.

12/2/2007 7:14:20 PM

Amazingly, Republicans are not universally ignorant to basic historical processes.

12/2/2007 8:33:33 PM

Quote :

"It has nothing to do with "growing pains." It has nothing to do with the actual tenets of either religion, these covering roughly the same interpretive range from "kill everybody" to "love everybody." It's just that white people managed to take over a lot of the brown people and not the other way around."

Dude, those people in the middle east have been fighting each other and the europeans since the dawn of civilization. Even before Christianity and Islam came into the picture. The religious aspect just added more fuel for conflict.

Two classic example being the wars between Persia and Classical Greece, as well as the Punic Wars w/ Rome v. Carthage (technically N. African)

[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 8:46 PM. Reason : l]

12/2/2007 8:45:51 PM

Quote :

"Dude, those people in the middle east have been fighting each other and the europeans since the dawn of civilization."

Not so much, really. Or at least, not notably so. People in proximity fight. Big fucking surprise. And really, each of your examples could also be characterized as "Europeans fighting those people in the Middle East since the dawn of civilization."

12/2/2007 8:51:32 PM

While I basically agree with you, Grumpy, you're perhaps giving early Islam too much credit. As one would expect, it didn't take Muslims long to start fighting with each other. Christians weren't much worse in that respect. Furthermore, like Christianity, Islam spread partly by conquest, and that's always bloody.

While I think European imperialism has shaped the modern Middle East, blaming all the problems of Muslim countries on Christians is a bit absurd.

[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 9:14 PM. Reason : d]

12/2/2007 9:13:36 PM

another thing is that the western world succeeded in killing off most of the moderate and highly respected/educated muslim scholars throughout the last 150-200 years, leaving a huge theological vacuum and erasing vast amounts of institutional memory and tradition.

its almost like we (the british primarily and the cia later) rebooted the muslim faith back to before their enlightenment

12/2/2007 9:22:30 PM

well, we need to format c:\

12/2/2007 9:27:21 PM

haha use dban

[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 9:29 PM. Reason : d]

12/2/2007 9:28:33 PM

Quote :

"scholars throughout the last 150-200 years, "

??

I thought the Ottoman empire ruled over most of the middle east until after WW1.

Really though not until the 1970's and 1980's did the radical islam furor of the pan-Islamism really take off. Prior to this the Pan-Arabism movement was dominant as evidenced by the current gov't of Syria , the ousted gov't of Iraq, and Egypt. Thus fundamental tidbit of middle eastern politics firmly debunks the whole 9/11 Bin Laden link with Saddam Hussein that Bush & Co. used as propaganda to garner support for the unjust war in Iraq.

[Edited on December 2, 2007 at 9:54 PM. Reason : l]

12/2/2007 9:43:09 PM

Quote :

"Furthermore, like Christianity, Islam spread partly by conquest, and that's always bloody. "

I would go so far as to say that Islam spread almost exclusively by conquest, given the rapidity of its expansion, but that's not my immediate concern.

Quote :

"While I think European imperialism has shaped the modern Middle East, blaming all the problems of Muslim countries on Christians is a bit absurd."

I'm not blaming all of any group's problems on any one factor. Other things came into play in big ways: resources, location, political structure, take your pick. But often these were, if anything, merely factors into how Europe interacted with the region. And, especially in the last fifty years, politics -- albeit, politics mingled heavily with religion == were the main factor.

But overall, you can trace the lion's share of the Middle East's problems (and those of Africa, much of Asia, etc) to outside conquest and exploitation.

I'm amazed that I'm having to argue this point to you, of all people.

12/2/2007 10:17:01 PM

Quote :

"Amazingly, Republicans are not universally ignorant to basic historical processes. "

At least half of the people here couldn't have said what you said without being called left-wing moonbats or getting accuesed of "blame America first", or something like that. I'm kind of surprised no one has said that yet actually.

12/2/2007 10:21:23 PM

Quote :

"I'm amazed that I'm having to argue this point to you, of all people."

I'm not sure we really disagree. I just think people often have an overly positive view of Islam's Golden Age.

It depends exactly one what time period you're talking about. You can't effectively blame the West for the 13th-century stagnation of science and culture in Islamic countries.

On the other hand, you can blame the West for most of the more recent problems.

12/2/2007 10:32:35 PM

^ According to this thing here, it was a combination of the Mongols, some Western expansion, as well as some infighting between some different sects of Islam.

http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/islam/learning/conclusion.html

12/2/2007 10:36:47 PM

Quote :

"You can't effectively blame the West for the 13th-century stagnation of science and culture in Islamic countries. "

Peaks and valleys are going to be there no matter what culture you look at.

12/2/2007 10:38:00 PM

Quote :

"Be straightforward and give me something analogous from the last, say, two years."

hooksaw

Just as I thought--not one of you could produce a direct analog committed by rank-and-file Christians to the recent incidents committed by Muslims. And concerning Piss Christ, anyone who analogizes the nonviolent objections by many Christians to the representation of their deity and one of their most important religious symbols, the cross, being immersed in urine to imprisonment, floggings, and calls for executions against the likes of a cartoonist, an English teacher, and a rape victim is a fucking buffoon.

And art critic Sister Wendy Beckett actually approved of Piss Christ. So your analogy is actually a nonstarter.

Quote :

"You guys are forgetting it took over a thousand years for Christianity to water down from a harmful, deadly, barbaric, and oppressive cult."

McDanger

So what is Christianity now, Captain Logic?

12/3/2007 1:27:30 AM

Quote :

"Just as I thought--not one of you could produce a direct analog committed by rank-and-file Christians to the recent incidents committed by Muslims."

In what country? Because I can look at the Balkans, at Russia, and at parts of Africa to find Christians committing barbaric crimes at least partly in the name of their religion.

Take a look at Athanase Seromba.

12/3/2007 1:32:29 AM

^ You lose, that's not from the last 2 years.

Quote :

"Just as I thought--not one of you could produce a direct analog committed by rank-and-file Christians to the recent incidents committed by Muslims"

What do you mean by "rank and file" Christians, and what makes you think these muslims are "rank and file" muslims?

[Edited on December 3, 2007 at 1:37 AM. Reason : ]

12/3/2007 1:35:55 AM

The Balkans and Russia shit is still happening today. Seromba, I guess not.

12/3/2007 1:41:27 AM