Secular state addressing Muslim terror

nickice

DeVlaeminck said:

I think as someone mentioned most Islamic terrorists seem not to come from conservative Islamic backgrounds at least in terms of their upbringing. That's the impression I get anyway I haven't got any facts to back that up.

They often seem to have been involved in crime and have grown up in either a nominally Islamic family - in the way that many in the UK are nominally Christian - or else they are converts to Islam.

Not making any particular point except the link between integration non-integration and terrorism isn't a simple one. If we are looking for teenagers likely to become terrorists or Islamic extremists it may be the less religious possibly more French youth perhaps with an Islamic heritage where we find them.

As I say though no facts to back that up could be talking BS - just thinking.

This is certainly true in France and Belgium but not so much in the UK.

Dorset_Boy

rick_chasey said:

Isn't evil a religious concept anyway.

Seemingly not according to rjsterry.

david37

rjsterry said:

david37 said:

rjsterry said:

I mean sure, let's ignore the Terror in Revolutionary France, the gulags and orchestrated famines of Soviet Russia, the Cultural Revolution in China, the Khmer Rouge, two world wars, the Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide...

People are pretty happy to murder each other with or without religion.

whats your point? non of those things you mentioned were acceptable.

I only ask because it appears you are not supportive of the french state asking the Muslim community to stop bombing and murdering its citizens.

Pretty obvious what my point was and which post I was responding to. I haven't looked at what the French government have done in detail but I'm pretty sure they haven't "asked the Muslim community to stop bombing French citizens".

this is exactly what theyre doing. They also recognise and have the courage of conviction that if you want to stop islamic terrorism you have to alter the viewpoints and approach of the Muslim community.

david37

rjsterry said:

Looking at the BBC article it mentions a charter of republican values and a specific acknowledgement that Islam is a religion and not a political movement. Frankly I think that is a hiding to nothing. Religions have always been political in the wider sense and are frequently have allied themselves with particular political parties. Few would suggest that atheists should stay out of politics and why should following the beliefs of a religion be treated any differently from following a particular political dogma?

So in the way that Sinn Fein and the IRA were one and the same the Muslims and terrorists should be given a free pass? Im not sure appeasement is proving to be effecive with this particular problem.

rjsterry

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Isn't evil a religious concept anyway.

Seemingly not according to rjsterry.

Eh? That's really not what I said. It's certainly true that some religions have a particular conception of what evil is.

But clearly a lack of belief in God doesn't prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes.

pblakeney

rjsterry said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Isn't evil a religious concept anyway.

Seemingly not according to rjsterry.

Eh? That's really not what I said. It's certainly true that some religions have a particular conception of what evil is.

But clearly a lack of belief in God doesn't prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes.

And there's the rub. Shouldn't a belief in god prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes? (If we accept that the Koran has been twisted to suit agendas).

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Isn't evil a religious concept anyway.

Seemingly not according to rjsterry.

Eh? That's really not what I said. It's certainly true that some religions have a particular conception of what evil is.

But clearly a lack of belief in God doesn't prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes.

And there's the rub. Shouldn't a belief in god prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes? (If we accept that the Koran has been twisted to suit agendas).

I once wrote an essay suggesting that the reason why most religions have some form of good/bad heaven/hell scenario, and something beyond our world judging you is that the power of the state and society more broadly was not strong enough to police people so it relied on persuading people to adhere to it voluntarily.

So making them believe in hell if you do bad things was a way of control.

Then you see the state replace the church as the main power in society and increase its ability to project power into peoples lives massively, and active participation in religion trends downwards.

rjsterry

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Isn't evil a religious concept anyway.

Seemingly not according to rjsterry.

Eh? That's really not what I said. It's certainly true that some religions have a particular conception of what evil is.

But clearly a lack of belief in God doesn't prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes.

And there's the rub. Shouldn't a belief in god prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes? (If we accept that the Koran has been twisted to suit agendas).

History suggests not.

pblakeney

rjsterry said:

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Isn't evil a religious concept anyway.

Seemingly not according to rjsterry.

Eh? That's really not what I said. It's certainly true that some religions have a particular conception of what evil is.

But clearly a lack of belief in God doesn't prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes.

And there's the rub. Shouldn't a belief in god prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes? (If we accept that the Koran has been twisted to suit agendas).

History suggests not.

I know is doesn't but it should. I formed the opinion that religious people were the most hypocritical very young. Easy to do when you are raised on Church Street so know who's who.

surrey_commuter

nickice said:

It is true that people will behave as barbarically as Islamic terrorists in the right circumstances. You only have to see the reports of what the Australian SAS did in Afghanistan to see that. Wartime always brings out the worst in people which is why we should think very carefully before getting involved.

I think at least some of the IRA were probably just gangsters. However, a particular cause will cause you to do particular things. The Bataclan attacks wouldn't have taken place if the perpetrators hadn't believed they were acting in the name of Islam and IRA bombings wouldn't have taken place if the perpetrators hadn't been fighting for a united Ireland.

Were stats kept on how many members of IRA/SF were Protestant?

rjsterry

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Isn't evil a religious concept anyway.

Seemingly not according to rjsterry.

Eh? That's really not what I said. It's certainly true that some religions have a particular conception of what evil is.

But clearly a lack of belief in God doesn't prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes.

And there's the rub. Shouldn't a belief in god prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes? (If we accept that the Koran has been twisted to suit agendas).

History suggests not.

I know is doesn't but it should. I formed the opinion that religious people were the most hypocritical very young. Easy to do when you are raised on Church Street so know who's who.

I think hypocrisy is pretty universal. It's just easier to hide it if you claim you don't believe in anything.

pblakeney

rjsterry said:

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Isn't evil a religious concept anyway.

Seemingly not according to rjsterry.

Eh? That's really not what I said. It's certainly true that some religions have a particular conception of what evil is.

But clearly a lack of belief in God doesn't prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes.

And there's the rub. Shouldn't a belief in god prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes? (If we accept that the Koran has been twisted to suit agendas).

History suggests not.

I know is doesn't but it should. I formed the opinion that religious people were the most hypocritical very young. Easy to do when you are raised on Church Street so know who's who.

I think hypocrisy is pretty universal. It's just easier to hide it if you claim you don't believe in anything.

Read the 10 commandments. Watch church goers break them. Hypocrites. It’s not hypocritical if you don’t claim to believe in the first place.

orraloon

.... edit... ah xxxx it.

rjsterry

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Isn't evil a religious concept anyway.

Seemingly not according to rjsterry.

Eh? That's really not what I said. It's certainly true that some religions have a particular conception of what evil is.

But clearly a lack of belief in God doesn't prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes.

And there's the rub. Shouldn't a belief in god prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes? (If we accept that the Koran has been twisted to suit agendas).

History suggests not.

I know is doesn't but it should. I formed the opinion that religious people were the most hypocritical very young. Easy to do when you are raised on Church Street so know who's who.

I think hypocrisy is pretty universal. It's just easier to hide it if you claim you don't believe in anything.

Read the 10 commandments. Watch church goers break them. Hypocrites. It’s not hypocritical if you don’t claim to believe in the first place.

You're claiming you believe in nothing?

shirley_basso

That's what what he said in the quote you put.

He said he doesn't believe in the 10 commandments,

rjsterry

shirley_basso said:

That's what what he said in the quote you put.

He said he doesn't believe in the 10 commandments,

Sure. Firstly, 3 of the ten (murder theft and perjury) are illegal, and another 4 are generally frowned upon regardless of whether one is Christian or not. So I'm not sure "I'm not religious" is quite the get-out-of-jail card PB claims. Secondly there are plenty of secular values which people claim to hold dear, but act against when it suits them.

pblakeney

rjsterry said:

shirley_basso said:

That's what what he said in the quote you put.

He said he doesn't believe in the 10 commandments,

Sure. Firstly, 3 of the ten (murder theft and perjury) are illegal, and another 4 are generally frowned upon regardless of whether one is Christian or not. So I'm not sure "I'm not religious" is quite the get-out-of-jail card PB claims. Secondly there are plenty of secular values which people claim to hold dear, but act against when it suits them.

Since you are pushing this. True story.
Being berated for playing football on the sabbath by someone poking their neighbour. Just one example of hypocrisy experienced on a regular basis.
In a small town everyone knows who the bad 'uns are. They also know who attends church. The Venn diagram is almost circular.
No point in pursuing this as neither of us will change our opinions.

kingstongraham

"I never said I wasn't an arsehole" isn't the greatest defence against being an arsehole. IMO.

rjsterry

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

shirley_basso said:

That's what what he said in the quote you put.

He said he doesn't believe in the 10 commandments,

Sure. Firstly, 3 of the ten (murder theft and perjury) are illegal, and another 4 are generally frowned upon regardless of whether one is Christian or not. So I'm not sure "I'm not religious" is quite the get-out-of-jail card PB claims. Secondly there are plenty of secular values which people claim to hold dear, but act against when it suits them.

Since you are pushing this. True story.
Being berated for playing football on the sabbath by someone poking their neighbour. Just one example of hypocrisy experienced on a regular basis.
In a small town everyone knows who the bad 'uns are. They also know who attends church. The Venn diagram is almost circular.
No point in pursuing this as neither of us will change our opinions.

I'm not suggesting people who go to church aren't occasionally hypocrites - just that not going to church doesn't prevent you from being a hypocrite.

pblakeney

There is no point going to a building one day spouting goodwill to all men, then spouting hatred the other six days. Anyway...

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

There is no point going to a building one day spouting goodwill to all men, then spouting hatred the other six days. Anyway...

As per previous post, point of religion was different pre the development of the modern state.

nickice

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

pblakeney said:

rjsterry said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Isn't evil a religious concept anyway.

Seemingly not according to rjsterry.

Eh? That's really not what I said. It's certainly true that some religions have a particular conception of what evil is.

But clearly a lack of belief in God doesn't prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes.

And there's the rub. Shouldn't a belief in god prevent you from committing unspeakable crimes? (If we accept that the Koran has been twisted to suit agendas).

History suggests not.

I know is doesn't but it should. I formed the opinion that religious people were the most hypocritical very young. Easy to do when you are raised on Church Street so know who's who.

I think hypocrisy is pretty universal. It's just easier to hide it if you claim you don't believe in anything.

Read the 10 commandments. Watch church goers break them. Hypocrites. It’s not hypocritical if you don’t claim to believe in the first place.

That isn't what Christianity is about. I think most Christians would admit they all sin but it's an ideal to aim for.

rjsterry

pblakeney said:

There is no point going to a building one day spouting goodwill to all men, then spouting hatred the other six days. Anyway...

Agreed, although that hardly seems typical from my experience. Equally spouting hatred the other six days but not going to church doesn't make you a better person than the churchgoer.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

There is no point going to a building one day spouting goodwill to all men, then spouting hatred the other six days. Anyway...

As per previous post, point of religion was different pre the development of the modern state.

Yeah, I wasn't around then. 😉 The state can have commonality with religious preaching but should be separate IMO. That's the trouble with having a head of state who is also head of the church, just IMO.

nickice

surrey_commuter said:

nickice said:

It is true that people will behave as barbarically as Islamic terrorists in the right circumstances. You only have to see the reports of what the Australian SAS did in Afghanistan to see that. Wartime always brings out the worst in people which is why we should think very carefully before getting involved.

I think at least some of the IRA were probably just gangsters. However, a particular cause will cause you to do particular things. The Bataclan attacks wouldn't have taken place if the perpetrators hadn't believed they were acting in the name of Islam and IRA bombings wouldn't have taken place if the perpetrators hadn't been fighting for a united Ireland.

Were stats kept on how many members of IRA/SF were Protestant?

There were protestant nationalist and protestant IRA members (though that was rare). It was/is largely a nationalist struggle. Otherwise, you'd probably see other Catholics (who weren't of Irish ancestry) supporting them. Generally, nationalists happen to be Catholic because of history. I suppose you could argue that Iraqi Sunni ISIS members were not really joining because of religion but you'd struggle to make that case for foreign fighters.

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

There is no point going to a building one day spouting goodwill to all men, then spouting hatred the other six days. Anyway...

As per previous post, point of religion was different pre the development of the modern state.

Yeah, I wasn't around then. 😉 The state can have commonality with religious preaching but should be separate IMO. That's the trouble with having a head of state who is also head of the church, just IMO.

That's not what I'm saying but anyway.

A lot of what religion has put in place was put in place way before the modern state so they had different aims.

That the development of the modern state has made a lot of those obsolete explains why they often seem superfluous or even contradictory to how we live our modern life.

Think before 1700 the police as we would understand them today didn't really exist. So how are you expected to police people's behaviour?

You tell them there's a higher being that will punish you, if not in this life than when you're gone!

wWWhile you're at it and you have their attention you can also say that it's a good thing to be good at each other. Just makes things run better.

DeVlaeminck

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

There is no point going to a building one day spouting goodwill to all men, then spouting hatred the other six days. Anyway...

As per previous post, point of religion was different pre the development of the modern state.

That's a kind of Functionalist view of religion isn't it ? Religion as a mechanism for social cohesion - or I suppose control depending on whether you want to put a less positive spin on it.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

While you're at it and you have their attention you can also say that it's a good thing to be good at each other. Just makes things run better.

You could go further back with pagans having codes of conduct, but we digress. 😉

rick_chasey

DeVlaeminck said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

There is no point going to a building one day spouting goodwill to all men, then spouting hatred the other six days. Anyway...

As per previous post, point of religion was different pre the development of the modern state.

That's a kind of Functionalist view of religion isn't it ? Religion as a mechanism for social cohesion - or I suppose control depending on whether you want to put a less positive spin on it.

Yes absolutely. In that essay I wrote (no longer to hand unfortunately) I went through all the developments of catholic doctrine from 1215 onwards and what it was about how society was being run and behaving that made them go through those developments.

My favourite that always sticks in my mind is they made incest illegal, not for any genetic reasons, but because the church was going through various issues that meant they wanted the wealth in families to be shared out more - at the time it was common to keep it all in the family to keep the hold of the wealth.

Religious doctrine and machinations were much more overtly political in the pre-state era, for obvious reasons - they were where real power lay.

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

While you're at it and you have their attention you can also say that it's a good thing to be good at each other. Just makes things run better.

You could go further back with pagans having codes of conduct, but we digress. 😉

Sure that's the point right? As religion got more organised it got better at projecting power onto societies.

Honestly, what do you think the rationale was for confessions?