The Paris Attack Debate Thread

[Admiral Yi]

and quakers don't come from a broken world

Neither, for that matter, did the 9/11 terrorists, Osama bin Laden, or any of the European-born terrorists.

[Admiral Yi]

but that sounds awfully strategic and based on something that isn't purely religion

I am sure your point will be self-evident as soon as you tell me what it is.

[LaCroix]

Neither, for that matter, did the 9/11 terrorists, Osama bin Laden, or any of the European-born terrorists.

i made this point in the other thread awhile back. the individuals might not, but the extremist groups are located there. that's what causes these attacks, not because some guy in isolation attended church and decided to commit a massacre.

I am sure your point will be self-evident as soon as you tell me what it is.

i suggested this attack was based on a human factor. you suggested it was based on a religious factor. i didn't bother replying because it would have just been, "i disagree," but grallon's post gave me an idea to suggest an extreme hypothetical to test whether the basis was human or religious.

[Admiral Yi]

i made this point in the other thread awhile back. the individuals might not, but the extremist groups are located there. that's what causes these attacks, not because some guy in isolation attended church and decided to commit a massacre.

Plenty of guys in the West have watched a few jihadist videos online and decided to commit a massacre.

i suggested this attack was based on a human factor. you suggested it was based on a religious factor. i didn't bother replying because it would have just been, "i disagree," but grallon's post gave me an idea to suggest an extreme hypothetical to test whether the basis was human or religious.

Don't really see it proves or disproves anything.

[Martinus]

Seems to be a lot of people trying to belittle this attack. Going on about the incident in beirut and the university attack from months ago in Kenya. 

The "you should feel bad about feeling bad about this attack, because you didn't feel bad enough about previous ones" crowd is getting on my tits.

It is outrageous and offensive that you are not outraged enough about this incident to satisfy Tyr, and it is belittling to the most recent victims to even remember that there were previous victims.

You must stand ready, however, to forget this attack ever happened, should there be another attack somewhere else.  If you aren't fast enough in forgetting this attack  at that point, Tyr will be frustrated and mad at you for belittling the new victims.

What the fuck are you harping on about? Your posts have been almost impossible to understand lately - you are always making some obscure point (usually based on nitcpiking on minuatiae) that has absolutely zero relevance to the discussion at hand.

[LaCroix]

Plenty of guys in the West have watched a few jihadist videos online and decided to commit a massacre.

that's exactly my point. it's not where these people are from, it's where the groups that inspire these attacks come from.

Don't really see it proves or disproves anything.

it shows, from a very basic angle, that people act because they're human. they don't just act like religious robots or something, which i think is sometimes lost on people. islam didn't do this attack, just like christianity or any other religion isn't responsible for the crimes committed by worshipers.

[Berkut]

Oh, thanks for pointing out that people act because they are human. That totally refutes my point that religion does in fact influence human behavior. Thanks.

[Martinus]

I am always baffled by the idea that the content of religious beliefs is immaterial to the behavior of those holding the beliefs.

If religion A has one tenet "Do no harm to others" and religion B has one tenet "Kill the infidels", it doesn't take any really sophisticated logic to understand that people genuinely holding those beliefs are going to behave differently.

because "positive" religions aren't any better.

I may be one of the most anti-religious and anti-Christian people here, but this is a load of bullshit.

[LaCroix]

Oh, thanks for pointing out that people act because they are human. That totally refutes my point that religion does in fact influence human behavior. Thanks.

i haven't responded to you in this thread.. well, except now. (edit)  and the post on the previous page

[LaCroix]

I may be one of the most anti-religious and anti-Christian people here, but this is a load of bullshit.

read a little further, marti

[Martinus]

People like LaCroix are the reason why people like grallon will win on this.

Because if these are the only two options (and this seems to be more and more the case, between the loony right and the loony left), ordinary voters will go "well, fuck it, grallon may be a racist genocidal fuck, but at least we have a chance to survive with this guy."

[LaCroix]

People like LaCroix are the reason why people like grallon will win on this.

Because if these are the only two options (and this seems to be more and more the case, between the loony right and the loony left), ordinary voters will go "well, fuck it, grallon may be a racist genocidal fuck, but at least we have a chance to survive with this guy."

i got a marti rant 

i wouldn't consider myself a leftist, though. i just don't think religion matters much, so why spend so much time hating on it? hate on what matters more: extremist groups. otherwise, this is just classifying whole groups of people based on the actions of a few.

[Berkut]

People like LaCroix are the reason why people like grallon will win on this.

Because if these are the only two options (and this seems to be more and more the case, between the loony right and the loony left), ordinary voters will go "well, fuck it, grallon may be a racist genocidal fuck, but at least we have a chance to survive with this guy."

i got a marti rant 

i wouldn't consider myself a leftist, though. i just don't think religion matters much, so why spend so much time hating on it? hate on what matters more: extremist groups. otherwise, this is just classifying whole groups of people based on the actions of a few.

Saying that religion motivates the actions of the few is not saying anything about "classification" of "entire groups of people", other than the group of people who use violence to advance their religious agenda.

[LaCroix]

Saying that religion motivates the actions of the few is not saying anything about "classification" of "entire groups of people", other than the group of people who use violence to advance their religious agenda.

you know, it's poor form to use my comments to support past arguments when my comments, in this thread, are based on a new discussion. in the last thread, i think (after a rocky start) i ended up explaining my position decently well. you seem fixated on something that i didn't really mean to argue against in the first place, which i brought up in the last thread.

[Berkut]

I am not arguing about the last thread, but this one.

I think it is poor form to construct strawmen, myself.