<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Mirco Romanato wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4C6724F5.40603@libero.it" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Il 13/08/2010 19.13, Sen Yamamoto ha scritto:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">But my point is, people go to war for reasons other than religion.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Often.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Why can't these people want to attack and THEN justify it through
their religion?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Surely. But the justification is real or invented?
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I think that this happens a lot.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Usually justifications can be invented.
Even with a "Just war" theory, I can claim the there is a "Clear and
present danger" of this or that.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
A claim of clear and present danger does not in any way justify the
initiation of force. There is a clear and present danger that many
people I know will invent something quite dangerous that will get
lose. Does that mean they should be locked up, shot, or otherwise
forcibly prevented just on the chance? No. Any other entity with
enough power to do you damage is in principle a clear and present
danger. <br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4C6724F5.40603@libero.it" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Intelligent people usually look at the justifications and make their
mind if they are believable or not, founded on facts or not.
Strangely, even here, where intelligent people abound, some react with a
knee-jerk reflex and not with reason and facts.
If a woman fire to and kill a man and claim self-defense, because he was
trying to rape her, one could look at the facts at hand to decide if
believe her or not:
1) the man was shot 20 m away, in the back, he was full dressed and the
women is without a mark or an hair out of order
2) the man was shot in front, point blank, was naked and the woman is
wounded and bleeding
</pre>
</blockquote>
After I am wounded and bleeding is rather late to shoot an assailant.
The idea of a gun is that you shoot them before they get close enough
to do such bodily harm. Most rapist do not get fully naked as all
they need to do is unzip their fly. And if someone closes on me with
obvious to me intent to harm or rape me I will pull the gun and tell
him to back off or die IF he is far enough away. Note that a young guy
in good shape can close 20 ft or so distance in not much more than my
reaction time. So there may not be much point in warning if the
assailant is much closer than that. <br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4C6724F5.40603@libero.it" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Both could have invented the rape to justify the killing.
But what is more coherent with the facts at hand?
The first scenario or the second?
Or it don't matter, as women kill men for reasons other than self defense?
Islam (or Islamic Law - they are one and the same) is full of
justification to kill, make war, enslave, rob, torture and so on against
not Muslims.
</pre>
</blockquote>
So is Christianity. Check out the first 5 books of the Old Testament. <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4C6724F5.40603@libero.it" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">It is not difficult to find a justification.
For example, Islamic Law call for sparing the life of the conquered
people, apart for a few exception. Then, if you look at the exceptions,
there are so many and so large, that the Muslims could kill anyone in
the conquered land with an excuse or another. And, even some Muslim
killed a Kuffar without an excuse, they are barren from punishing him
for this.
Do you ever tried to talk with some Muslim is a forum about these
topics? Every time you will try to nail them to obtain a clear answer,
they avoid to reply, change topics or ask for time to ask some "expert".
Try to go to a forum for Muslism, where they talk between them in
English, and read what they say to each other. It is enlightening.
</pre>
</blockquote>
It is not just Muslims or just religious people. In general most
people all too easily justify initiating force against individuals and
entire groups of people. Whipping oneself up into worry about Muslims
is one such danger signal. What you really should be worried about is
what your own government does to your and yours every single day and in
broad daylight.<br>
<br>
- samantha<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>