This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. Would a ban on all public religious representations and displays ease religious

User Info: GnosticBishop

GnosticBishop
1 month ago#11
kozlo100 posted...
So on top of all those other misconceptions, you don't think a ban is suppression?


Where did I write such nonsense?

Of course it is suppression, and discrimination, just as all laws are.

Regards
DL

User Info: GnosticBishop

GnosticBishop
1 month ago#12
SSj4Wingzero posted...
GnosticBishop posted...
Ancient history is interesting but we live in a whole new world.


This is not "ancient history." These were decisions made in the 20th century whose fallout still affects us today. We supported repressive secular regimes in the Middle East during the 20th century and we're dealing with the fallout of it RIGHT NOW still.

The whole notion that prohibiting religious displays will somehow prevent extremist violence is nonsense. If you actually bother to read up on the profiles of the young men who became terrorists and jihadists, you will find that the overwhelming majority of them were not religious. They had no connection to local mosques, no involvement in religious affairs, and certainly no background in religious education. Oftentimes, when these people commit acts of terror, news media tracks down their friends and associates. What's often heard? "I had no idea he was even religious, let alone part of an Islamist terror group."

For example, the ringleader of the Paris attacks was a terrorist named Abdelhamid Abaaoud. A real scumbag, of course. News media would have you think that he was radicalized because of tensions between Islam and Western society, but the thing is, he attended a Catholic school growing up. His parents were not particularly religious. For most of his life, he smoked a ton of weed and partied a hell of a lot. Limiting displays of religion wouldn't have affected him; he spent more time partying at clubs than he did at mosques. He started getting into trouble - petty thefts, assaults, that sort of stuff. All of a sudden, within the span of a year, he becomes radicalized and goes to Syria. I'm trying to look up if he was ever part of a Mosque in Belgium or France, but it doesn't appear to be the case. For the overwhelming majority of his life, this man had barely any connection to religion, and within a year he becomes a terrorist who orchestrates the deaths of hundreds of innocent people.

If you look up the bios of people who join up with terrorist groups, they're all very similar. In fact, many studies have shown that having a strong religious identity and strong ties to a local religious organization actually *prevents* you from being radicalized.


It is working in France.

To the bulk of your post ---

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

You are quick to speak of the vile individuals.

Try speaking of the female imam who opened a mosque in France that embraces unveiled women and gays.

That is a benchmark event that will break Islam's back.

Regards
DL
#13
(message deleted)

User Info: SSj4Wingzero

SSj4Wingzero
1 month ago#14
If your goal is to "break Islam's back" then your goal is misguided
Not changing this sig until the Knicks win the NBA Championship! Started...4/23/2011? Or was it 2010?

User Info: LinkFanatic

LinkFanatic
1 month ago#15
SSj4Wingzero posted...
If your goal is to "break Islam's back" then your goal is misguided
Islam is Chaos Control.

User Info: SSj4Wingzero

SSj4Wingzero
1 month ago#16
I also ask - how is it "working" in France? We haven't had an airplane-related attack in the USA since 9/11, does that mean that the TSA "works"?

GnosticBishop posted...
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

You are quick to speak of the vile individuals.


Great minds should also be smart enough to recognize that their ideas are mind-bogglingly stupid.

And why do we focus on vile individuals? Because of your stated goal! You're the one claiming that something like this would reduce religious tensions and violence! If that's the case, then doing more research on the people who commit this violence is obviously important, because they are the ones who have caused harm in our society. If your goal in implementing this policy is to make our societies a safer place, then we should look into those people who have caused said problems (i.e., terrorists) and learn more about how they came to do these terrible things. A cursory glance of their lives shows that they were not members of mosques and did not become terrorists through the Muslim community in France (more likely, they were recruited in prison), so going after religious groups doesn't seem to address the problem.

In fact, a blanket ban on public expression of religion is exactly what a group like ISIS wants. Their propaganda magazines talk all the time about how Western values and Islam do not mix. They recruit young Muslim men and women in western countries primarily by selling them a message that Muslims are not welcome in the West. They'll highlight Islamophobic speeches made by Western politicians and use that as evidence that western society rejects Muslims. All of this stuff is in their propaganda magazines. You can read it and research it if you want. In fact, if you want to make comments about policies which are designed to deter people from falling for this propaganda, you should research how people succumb to radicalization.
Not changing this sig until the Knicks win the NBA Championship! Started...4/23/2011? Or was it 2010?

User Info: GnosticBishop

GnosticBishop
1 month ago#17
SSj4Wingzero posted...
If your goal is to "break Islam's back" then your goal is misguided


Think of that as my way of saying they will finally reform, before secularism has to destroy it outright for the peace and security of their citizens.

If you are not against their present prevailing ideology, you are not a moral person.

Regards
DL
#18
(message deleted)
#19
(message deleted)

User Info: SSj4Wingzero

SSj4Wingzero
1 month ago#20
Whom do you mean by "they"? Which organization are you specifically referring to?

And if you think secularism's goal is to "destroy" a group of people, then I'm just going to say it outright: You are a horrible human being.
Not changing this sig until the Knicks win the NBA Championship! Started...4/23/2011? Or was it 2010?
(edited 1 month ago)
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. Would a ban on all public religious representations and displays ease religious