Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

The place to go for debate on politics, religion, sex, and other tasty topics!
fourpawsonthefloor
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 3958
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 3:49 pm
Title: Executive Administrator

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by fourpawsonthefloor »

Originally posted by Angelique
Again, give a piece of candy to a kid throwing a tantrum, and it will teach the kid that throwing tantrums works. Caving to terrorism will not stop it either. It's like, "These guys blew up a train station, and Spain pulled out of Iraq! Hey, this blowing up train stations deal really works! Let's try it again!" Give them their way, and we'll be perpetuating more terrorism- by rewarding it.
Firstly, do not ever think that I am condoning terrorism. It is a heinous crime against all of mankind.

However, it isn't simply grown people throwing hissy fits. These are people that feel heavily persecuted themselves (sometimes with legitimate complaints - see this link for a brief peek at what I am referring to http://www.religioustolerance.org/reac_ter13.htm). These people feel that this is there last resort to make a real statement or difference in the way that their families and countrymen's lives. It is because they have different ways of looking at the world, and often feel oppressed by the US. So in that sense they aren't throwing tantrums. They are defending their rite to live in the fashion that they believe is the "right" way to live.

Imagine if another county - say China for example - started trying to dictate how Americans live, and bashing American religions (let’s say Christianity) and wanted to force change on this "nation of infidels". Say they sent some troops into the US and accidentally killed some women and children. You'd imagine that some Americans may just find that a tad offensive...eh? And it wouldn't shock me one little bit if there were some organizations that formed out of this (hyper religious or not) and decided that they had to take serious action against China to defend their way of life.

And what was with attacking Iraq??? I didn't realize that Osama was from there. Funny that nothing really happened to Afghanistan in comparison to the hell that is going on in Iraq. I don't have the answer to what to do with that whole situation either, but the absolute gall of the leaders of the US to assume that they MUST know what is best for the rest of the world is utter crap.

People (and in a lot of cases, they happen to be religious zealots) will do insane and horrible things to further there cause because they cannot comprehend that there JUST MIGHT BE another way to look at the world. They cannot comprehend it. Their way must be the only good and right way to live.

It shows how compassion, and open mindedness needs to be embarrassed more that the "my way or the highway" attitude.

Paws
Image
I'm actually quite pleasant until I'm awake.
Saint Kurt
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2151
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 3:43 am
Title: Derelict Landlord
Location: Watch out for that cow pie!

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by Saint Kurt »

Originally posted by fourpawsonthefloor

Imagine if another county - say China for example - started trying to dictate how Americans live, and bashing American religions (let’s say Christianity) and wanted to force change on this "nation of infidels". Say they sent some troops into the US and accidentally killed some women and children. You'd imagine that some Americans may just find that a tad offensive...eh? And it wouldn't shock me one little bit if there were some organizations that formed out of this (hyper religious or not) and decided that they had to take serious action against China to defend their way of life.
Good example Paws, especially because if you replace the US with Tibet you are describing something that really happened and that the whole world stood back and watched. In fact, the world continues to sit back and watch it. Over fifty years later Tibet is still not free of Chinese rule or religious oppression.

Between 1949 and 1951 an incredible number of atrocities were committed as the People's Republic of China marched in to Tibet and claimed it for the "Motherland". Ultimately the Tibetan government was forced into exile and remains so even now. The Chinese promises made in the "17 point agreement" that the Dahlai Lama was forced to sign were never upheld - it is said today that the city of Lhasa is in ruins, as are most of the monestaries.

These are atrocities that affected an entire nation in our recent history and yet only the fledgling Indian government (no longer under British Colonial rule) responded to their cries for help.

Pretty amazing isn't it?

-e
Image
Crawler
Navigator
Navigator
Posts: 1279
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 5:05 pm
Title: I'm Back, Baby!
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by Crawler »

(and it can happen to any student, but I've seen it happen more to Christians)
Maybe because you could throw a dart at random and hit a Christian? It happens more to them because there are more of them.

Simple as that.
Speaking out against religion in general is an indirect endorsement of atheism.
"Christianity has no application in biological sciences" is not the same as "There is no God." Explain to me how you think it is.

And I notice you went from it "actively promoting" atheism or "indirectly endorsing" it.

[Edited on 3-25-2006 by Crash Tofu]
This message brought to you by the letter C.
Zack: I'm pretty sure our soul is composed of a series of toy commercials that ran from 1984-1988. When we die Hasbro does with us what they please.
User avatar
NachtcGleiskette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3173
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 6:45 am
Title: The Ragin' Cajun
Location: NY

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by NachtcGleiskette »

I don't eat at Burger King. Am I then indirectly endorsing McDonalds? OH NOES!
"If you live your life to please everyone else, you will continue to feel frustrated and powerless. This is because what others want may not be good for you. You are not being mean when you say NO to unreasonable demands or when you express your ideas, feelings, and opinions, even if they differ from those of others.â€
Crawler
Navigator
Navigator
Posts: 1279
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 5:05 pm
Title: I'm Back, Baby!
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by Crawler »

"Speaking against religion is actively promoting atheism" is more like "I don't eat at Burger King, so you can infer that I don't believe in cows."
This message brought to you by the letter C.
Zack: I'm pretty sure our soul is composed of a series of toy commercials that ran from 1984-1988. When we die Hasbro does with us what they please.
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by Angelique »

Excellent points about Tibet, Em. I think we should have stepped in there.
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
fourpawsonthefloor
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 3958
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 3:49 pm
Title: Executive Administrator

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by fourpawsonthefloor »

Originally posted by Angelique
Excellent points about Tibet, Em. I think we should have stepped in there.
:doh!

But that's not my point with the whole Iraq thing.

#1 no country came in and took over Iraq.

#2 "rescuing" other countries from another country has gone stunningly for the US of A before (*coughvietnamcough*)

#3 it is one thing to go kick out a country that is taken over another country and restore it to the original owners, but how do you propose to keep the other country out? Bomb the shit out of them?

#4 the responsibility of correcting "world wrongs" belongs with the UN if anyone. The Iraq invasion was not UN sanctioned, but because the US and a few other countries thought they knew better than the UN they went and did it anyway. I have YET to hear any signs that there were weapons of mass destruction, so I really wonder WTF they are still doing there - except to force more western values on them right now. Honestly - there comes a time where you have to realize your meddling is doing more harm than good and to back out and let them figure it out for their own. Or else you will always be "big brothering" them, and by the looks of it (with increased pockets of resistance showing up every day) they want big brother to get his nose back where it belongs.

#6 I am not saying that it is OK to sit blindly by and let atrocities happen. However, it seems pretty odd which atrocities that the US decides to involve themselves in, and which they don't.

#7 I do not believe that might makes right. You aren't going to change a nation by making war on it unless you completely cripple it. If people could somehow provide tools and resources for the persecuted (for example providing AIDS drugs to Africa) to better their own lot in life, then maybe this would happen. Blowing everything up, telling them how they should live, and then leaving isn't really nice.

#8 Do I have the answers for what to do in situations like these? Heck no. But I trust more in a bunch of countries that pool together with equal (I know hahaha) voice to make decisions for this planet, more than I do a few glorified countries that think they know what is best for everything. Western society has a whole lot of ills of their own, and it’s a bit like the saying that people with glass houses shouldn’t be throwing bricks.

It is beyond arrogant to assume that the way that you live is the only valid and moral way to live.

Paws

Edited because I messed the smilee up


[Edited on 26/3/06 by fourpawsonthefloor]
Image
I'm actually quite pleasant until I'm awake.
User avatar
NachtcGleiskette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3173
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 6:45 am
Title: The Ragin' Cajun
Location: NY

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by NachtcGleiskette »

Originally posted by Angelique
Excellent points about Tibet, Em. I think we should have stepped in there.
I think (and I could be wrong) the point Em was trying to make is that this is an example of far far worse religious persecution in the world that has been happening a LONG time and we have done nothing. So, what is it about this ONE man in Afghanistan that suddenly gets us involved in religious persecution? What makes him more deserving of our intervention than Tibet?

And, Angelique, quite a few of us have asked you to clarify points (the one I pointed out about Islam, etc) and rather than taking the time to post to someone you think agrees with you, perhaps you can clarify yourself and help both the strength of you argument, as well as us in understanding?
"If you live your life to please everyone else, you will continue to feel frustrated and powerless. This is because what others want may not be good for you. You are not being mean when you say NO to unreasonable demands or when you express your ideas, feelings, and opinions, even if they differ from those of others.â€
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by Angelique »

I don't think I ever attempted to make any points about Islam. I was talking about terrorism, atheism, and religious persecution as three separate things. And somehow Tibet got in there.

But anyhow, just because we made a terrible mistake of letting one country or several get away with egregious human rights violations, it doesn't mean we should stand back and let them all do so.

And what the heck did we do before there was any UN?
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
User avatar
NachtcGleiskette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3173
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 6:45 am
Title: The Ragin' Cajun
Location: NY

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by NachtcGleiskette »

Originally posted by Angelique

And what the heck did we do before there was any UN?
OK, Lisa's going to step in with her knowledge from high school history on what she knows about the UN, its inception, and the reasons behind it.

After World War I,President Woodrow Wilson proposed that a "League of Nations" be formed to, in essense, prevent something like what happened in WW I from ever happening again. Interestingly, even though it was Woody's idea, Congress voted against the US becoming a member of the League of Nations, and as well, the League did not have its own armed force. Basically, it was a great idea that just wasn't followed through to the best it could have been....

So, come WW2, the Axis is far to powerful for the League of Nations, and war is begun. The League failed, and in it's place, the United Nations is started largely by FDR. It had a purpose much like the League, but this time the US joined. The UN was started on a much more solid base than the League was originally.....

Anyway..with all this simple backround, I have a question for you. How much foreign policy was the US involved with prior to 1919 (the formation of the League of Nations) as opposed to its involvement now?

[Edited on 26/3/06 by NachtcGleiskette]
"If you live your life to please everyone else, you will continue to feel frustrated and powerless. This is because what others want may not be good for you. You are not being mean when you say NO to unreasonable demands or when you express your ideas, feelings, and opinions, even if they differ from those of others.â€
chicory
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:50 pm

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by chicory »

I've been trying to stay far away from this thread. But, I think I can answer this one :)

The US was an eccentric, agriculture based society, with a policy of staying out of other countries wars. They knew better to involve themselves with Europe's unending battles for domination. No one wanted any part in the Napoleonic battles and the reason for 1812 wasn't to go to war (as it was in the first WW) but to defend American trade (sailors from being pressed into service) and our continued existance as a nation.

Now, domestic policy on the other hand. With Manifest Destiny and winning Texas from Mexico - Americans were busy enough at home. We didn't have the resources to wage war far from home. And I like to think with the way things were, we wouldn't have wanted to if we could have :(
For those who believe, no explanation is neccessary. For those who do not, no explanation is possible. ~Gino Dalpiaz
User avatar
NachtcGleiskette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3173
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 6:45 am
Title: The Ragin' Cajun
Location: NY

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by NachtcGleiskette »

That was my point Chic :kiss
"If you live your life to please everyone else, you will continue to feel frustrated and powerless. This is because what others want may not be good for you. You are not being mean when you say NO to unreasonable demands or when you express your ideas, feelings, and opinions, even if they differ from those of others.â€
Crawler
Navigator
Navigator
Posts: 1279
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 5:05 pm
Title: I'm Back, Baby!
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by Crawler »

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4844664.stm

Just to put the execution of one man in Afghanistan into perspective a bit.
Originally posted by Angelique
But anyhow, just because we made a terrible mistake of letting one country or several get away with egregious human rights violations, it doesn't mean we should stand back and let them all do so.
First, we're not letting them "get away" with it. The world is NOT ours and therefore is not ours to police. We do not have the right to decide what goes on with the rest of the world, only what we, ourselves, do.

And second, commiting like violations in the guise of stopping them, IMO, is worse than not stepping in. Killing one man to save another is still killing.
I don't think I ever attempted to make any points about Islam.
Whether or not we should be in the position of nation building is one thing. But even if we did know how to build an Islamic nation- it doesn't mean we should. Recall that a lot of the tension now is around what kind of Islam the nation should be built.
Originally posted by NachtcGleiskette
So, what kind of nation should we build then? We can't very well go in and destroy who's in power now and leave the people with nothing. I'm not trying to be snarky, but what kind of nation do we help them build?
Just attempting to ring bells.

[Edited on 3-26-2006 by Crash Tofu]
This message brought to you by the letter C.
Zack: I'm pretty sure our soul is composed of a series of toy commercials that ran from 1984-1988. When we die Hasbro does with us what they please.
HoodedMan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2335
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 11:39 pm
Title: Lord Sarcasmo von Snarkypants

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by HoodedMan »

Originally posted by Angelique
Excellent points about Tibet, Em. I think we should have stepped in there.
Oh. My. God. Why is it when people just pointed out that your argument was sheer retarded bunk you just ignored them entirely? Out of curiosity, have you ever been wrong, Angelique? Because, just reading by your posts, you're a God.
Originally posted by Angelique
Outside those classes, it was another matter. I had a philosophy professor hand out a paper he wrote about why the whole Bible is bunk, and he openly espoused his own brand of nonspecific deism. (He also wasn't very nice to atheists, either, but he came down particularly hard on Christianity and Judaism.) A sociology professor I had earned himself a reputation for lecturing almost exclusively about two topics- drug legalization and how everyone in their right mind should be atheist.
Don't whine to us, you should have whined to the president of your university. Too late now, isn't it?
Originally posted by Angelique
And what the heck did we do before there was any UN?
Oh my God, don't even get me started. In many ways, we were a hell of a lot better off.

Edit: Haha, I love how I missed a whole row of keys and typed my entire first paragraph in garbage.

[Edited on 26/3/2006 by HoodedMan]
ACHTUNG! Alles touristen und non-technischen looken peepers! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen. Das rubbernecken sichtseeren keepen das cotten-pickenen hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das blinkenlichten.
The Drastic Spastic
Swashbuckler
Swashbuckler
Posts: 1846
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 3:01 am
Location: ROK

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by The Drastic Spastic »

There's no use complaining about it, godlessness is a prerequisite for becoming a professor of philosophy. I don't know if being opposed to religion causes people to explore philosophy or if it's the other way around, but either way, yeah, anyone who's qualified to teach the class is going to have very specific well-considered views on how organized religion is a Bad Thing.

Professors in general tend towards this idea. Maybe after spending years and years learning about the world, they know something you don't.
Und die Sonne spricht zu mir
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by Angelique »

Northstar and Spaz, ad hominem attacks, no matter how well-worded, still do not contribute to civil debate.

As for the sociology prof in question, lots of students complained. But for a number of reasons probably having to do with his tenured position, nothing was done.

And really clever about my philosophy prof, but it doesn't take any expert in logic to know that the generalization isn't sound.

All it takes is one exception to prove it wrong.

And the prof I talked about took so many Bible verses out of literary and historical context it rather hurt his credibility as an expert on how "bad" Judaism and Christianity are.
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
Crawler
Navigator
Navigator
Posts: 1279
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 5:05 pm
Title: I'm Back, Baby!
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by Crawler »

And the prof I talked about took so many Bible verses out of literary and historical context it rather hurt his credibility as an expert on how "bad" Judaism and Christianity are.
And so many people take those verses out of historical context and believe them that it's equally hard to claim that they are good, as was claimed a few pages ago in the wake of the "child sacrifice" story.

Oh, and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem .

Northstar's post, at least, does not fit that description.

However, your subtle grouping of everyone into "believers" and "non-believers" (often falsely, I might add) DOES fit the description of an ad hominem attack.

What you're doing is a trick that people being interviewed by multiple people at once often use. You skip any question of substance to attack back at anyone attacking you. IMO, it makes the person doing that look petty in the "he started it!" kinda way or scared of answer the question presented, but that may just be me.

So get BACK ON TOPIC. 3 posts of attacks in a row makes the thread walk toward the airport.

[Edited on 3-27-2006 by Crash Tofu]
This message brought to you by the letter C.
Zack: I'm pretty sure our soul is composed of a series of toy commercials that ran from 1984-1988. When we die Hasbro does with us what they please.
User avatar
NachtcGleiskette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3173
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 6:45 am
Title: The Ragin' Cajun
Location: NY

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by NachtcGleiskette »

I STILL am waiting to hear what kind of nation Angelique proposes we build in the middle east.

And a good debator knows how to sidestep the people who are attacking them to answer the questions that really matter. Like the question I have asked you three times about nation building in the middle east, the question about the US involvement in foreign affairs before the UN's inception, for example....

But those are only the questions I've asked. Others have asked you to clarify other vague statements quite a few times. And rather than answer our questions, you applaud those you think agree with your point or you attack those who you think are attacking you. You're not helping the validity of your point. And you're just drawing out things that don't matter, rather than ignoring them and focusing on what does matter. THAT is what a good debator does. THAT is what someone who knows alot about what they're debating does. What you're doing just tells us that perhaps you are not as knowledgable on the subject matter as you present yourself to be...

Please, prove us wrong.



[Edited on 27/3/06 by NachtcGleiskette]
"If you live your life to please everyone else, you will continue to feel frustrated and powerless. This is because what others want may not be good for you. You are not being mean when you say NO to unreasonable demands or when you express your ideas, feelings, and opinions, even if they differ from those of others.â€
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

Religion, Government, and Foreign Policy

Post by Angelique »

Any government in which each group gets a fair say (and is not allowed to assume that just because they don't hold complete sway that they're not getting a fair say) is find by me. Of course, tolerance for different points of view has not been a part of the cultural hegemony there for decades at least, so, unlike our President, I never subscribed to any illusion that instituting any kind of democratic system there would be easy and bloodless.

Oh, and did I say anything about killing people over this one Christian? Because I don't recall even suggesting that. Nobody clarified what it means to "meddle" in other countries affairs. A letter writing campaign by Amnesty International could qualify as "meddling."

I also noticed that there doesn't seem to be any law on the books in Afghanistan prohibiting religions other than Islam. At any rate, Hamid Karzai and the Cabinet there seem to want Abdul Rahman to go free. No law on the books there, even the law saying that no law shall contradict Islam, specifically calls for death to non-Muslim Afghans. The Afghan consitution calls for liberty for all people.

And even the Qu'ran seems opposed to the idea of executing non-Muslims.

From http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004805.htm

Surah 2:256 – “There is no compulsion in religion…”
Surah 16:82 – “Then, if they turn away, your duty (O Muhammad) is only to convey (the Message) in a clear way.”
Surah 42:48 – “But if they turn away (from Islam). We have not sent you as a Hafiz (watcher, protector) over them (to take care of their deeds and to recompense them). Your duty is to convey (the Message)…”
Surah 88:21-22 – “And so, (O Prophet!) exhort them, your task is only to exhort; you cannot compel them to believe.”
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
Post Reply