women get stoned to death for loving a sunni boy.

[scy12]

The Tiredness of seeing and repeating the same points again , fights with Will .

By comparing the murder of a little girl by throwing stones in her face and chest, mutilating her and making her suffer an agonizing death for fancying a boy with the war in Iraq is inadvertently excusing the actions of said murders by chalking it up to "retribution in kind", or "comparable in motive". Thus, by somehow comparing this tortuous, intentionally cruel act to the dropping of very expensive bombs (designed to absolutely minimize civilian casualties) upon supposed military targets, you equate the one barbaric act with another one which doesn't explicitly attempt to intentionally kill civilians. By default you either excuse the treatment of the little girl or condemn the war in the same passion. Both of which seem....well....preposterous.

I am thinking now, you might not be dishonest; perhaps just young, innocent, and rebellious.

The rest of your post is too incoherant for me to reply too. But, your logic is seriously flawed in this portion:



You equate the stoning with the war because of the ultimate effect: death. In this case you are right. Death also occurs by traffic accidents. The motive (cause) behind the death, and the apparent outcome perceived by the perpetrator is what is important when calling it barbaric.

Simply put, war waged to minimize in the fullest ability the civilian casualties which naturally ensue is very, very different from dragging a little girl in the street and striking her with stones to death.

If you can't understand this, there is really nothing more to exchange.

~Chris

By default you either excuse the treatment of the little girl

This was my post :

That is very disgusting to say the least. I hope that there was a God as i am losing more and more hope on Humanity (that also believes in Gods) each day.
How can a parent agree to such thing.

So the either you excuse the treatment is a conclusion that can't be a result of what i said. False accusation . I don't think you are in a position to make remarks about flawed logic or incoherent posts.



Speaking about ignoring my post. Please don't argue if you can't follow this simple rule. Either because of your arrogance that doesn't allow you to understand my "incoherent" post or by your ignorance that is fueled by your arrogance .

Simply put, war waged to minimize in the fullest ability the civilian casualties which naturally ensue is very, very different from dragging a little girl in the street and striking her with stones to death.

If you can't understand this, there is really nothing more to exchange.

So Woman gets stoned because she loves a Sunni boy can be an analogy to woman gets bombed because she was born in Iraq . One of the two act may appear more or Less barbaric than the other but i don't think it is worth to count the scale of barbarism in these cases but denounce it altogether. Because both acts are very barbaric.

Very barbaric.

You equate the stoning with the war because of the ultimate effect: death. In this case you are right. Death also occurs by traffic accidents. The motive (cause) behind the death, and the apparent outcome perceived by the perpetrator is what is important when calling it barbaric.

Comparing Traffic to War is one of the most stupid analogies i had ever been unlucky to see .

By comparing the murder of a little girl by throwing stones in her face and chest, mutilating her and making her suffer an agonizing death for fancying a boy with the war in Iraq is inadvertently excusing the actions of said murders by chalking it up to "retribution in kind", or "comparable in motive". Thus, by somehow comparing this tortuous, intentionally cruel act to the dropping of very expensive bombs (designed to absolutely minimize civilian casualties) upon supposed military targets, you equate the one barbaric act with another one which doesn't explicitly attempt to intentionally kill civilians.

(Forum's moto repeat for you shall be ignored)

Look boy, if i drop a bomb in the center of a city with my intention to Kill person A who i consider an enemy but the bomb also Kills 100 bystanders and i know it will , i am also intentionally attacking the General population . This is in a more frightening scale is war. My act may be comparably a bit or a lot less or more barbaric than throwing stones in her face and chest, mutilating her and making her suffer an agonizing death but it is again a very barbaric act. I don't think a mutilated child without a home or a family or a man that dies after agonizing pain or a woman that is raped by soldiers or by other criminals that have the opportunity now in the Chaos , will think war as not a very barbaric act.

Barbaric as it is , granted , sometimes it is the only solution for a side . Because if side A doesn't attack it would be destroyed by even more barbarism.

I don't think this was the case here and that is why i believe the worst for those that did this terrible crime or liked the idea.

If you can't understand this, there is really nothing more to exchange.

Indeed there isn't. I am not interested in "Repeat what you said because i ignore it " contest . There is indeed nothing to argue.

 

[sonorakitch]

This was my post :

Oops! Don't forget the remainder of your post; the only portion I wish to contest:

I agree . To be fair , the People that agreed to bomb Iraq (and also those that liked the idea) should also be punished and deemed as uncivilized beings.

You wish to equate the war in Iraq and its supporters with the murderers of this little girl in Northern Iraq. This is what I have a problem with.

Comparing Traffic to War is one of the most stupid analogies i had ever been unlucky to see .

Some idiot drives home drunk and kills a family. He kills, but certainly it wasn't intentional despite his life choice to place said family in danger. Is he as bad as a person who rapes and kills a little girl?

A person aims his gun and fires at an armed villain marching through a school on a rampage and hits some innocents in the process, killing them. Is he as bad as a person who rapes and kills a little girl?

These are the analogies you should be considering when you equate the precision bombing of Iraq and stoning little girls in public. These are the analogies that could provide you with a way out of your comment.

~Chris

 

[boarder]

Some people are worse then animals.

 

[Lotus49]

No story that comes from the Middle East would surprise me. There, the devestating failings of the human intracranial space are evident, en masse.

 

[Fairy]

Religion should neverbe that powerful.

 

[scy12]

Oops! Don't forget the remainder of your post; the only portion I wish to contest:



You wish to equate the war in Iraq and its supporters with the murderers of this little girl in Northern Iraq. This is what I have a problem with.



Some idiot drives home drunk and kills a family. He kills, but certainly it wasn't intentional despite his life choice to place said family in danger. Is he as bad as a person who rapes and kills a little girl?

A person aims his gun and fires at an armed villain marching through a school on a rampage and hits some innocents in the process, killing them. Is he as bad as a person who rapes and kills a little girl?

These are the analogies you should be considering when you equate the precision bombing of Iraq and stoning little girls in public. These are the analogies that could provide you with a way out of your comment.

~Chris

You wish to equate the war in Iraq and its supporters with the murderers of this little girl in Northern Iraq. This is what I have a problem with.

No i do not equate any two different events .

One of the two act may appear more or Less barbaric than the other but i don't think it is worth to count the scale of barbarism in these cases but denounce it altogether. Because both acts are very barbaric. This is 1

Do you think that War in Iraq isn't very barbaric ? Why ?
The human pain caused by that War is hard to imagine.

And While i do not equate those two acts i denounce both as barbaric , it isn't so hard to understand. In this way yes i equate all very barbaric actions and i do it while knowing that barbaric as it is , granted , sometimes it is the only solution for a side . Because if side A doesn't attack it would be destroyed by even more barbarism.

I don't think this was the case here and that is why i believe the worst for those that did this terrible crime or liked the idea.

Simple. There is nothing here to disagree so i don't understand your outrage . The outcome is we shall agree to disagree because we have a different opinion on this specific war .

Some idiot drives home drunk and kills a family. He kills, but certainly it wasn't intentional despite his life choice to place said family in danger. Is he as bad as a person who rapes and kills a little girl?

A person aims his gun and fires at an armed villain marching through a school on a rampage and hits some innocents in the process, killing them. Is he as bad as a person who rapes and kills a little girl?

These are the analogies you should be considering when you equate the precision bombing of Iraq and stoning little girls in public. These are the analogies that could provide you with a way out of your comment.

These are quite bad analogies...

Some idiot drives home drunk and kills a family. He kills, but certainly it wasn't intentional despite his life choice to place said family in danger. Is he as bad as a person who rapes and kills a little girl?

In all my posts i never equated one event that i believed irresponsible and barbaric (War) with the other ( the disgusting events that lead to the death of the girl.) (argument 1) . So again i will denounce this man as an irresponsible idiot and also denounce the Killing of the girl. As both are irresponsible and tragic .

Now , imagine this analogy . While i am watching a news channel and
the event B (the girl) comes up , person B makes a comment regarding the behavior of those that took part in it. Seconds Later the news about the Irresponsible driver are shown . I make comment on how this behavior is also unacceptable. Now person C who was once a drunk driver claims that i am trying to equate those two events. It is obviously a false accusation.

There is nothing else to discuss . (Repeats) If you think that War is not barbaric , doesn't always target innocent people as a result , be my guest . Live in a fairyland .


Granted , sometimes it is the only solution for a side . Because if side A doesn't attack it would be destroyed by even more barbarism.

I don't think this was the case here and that is why i believe the worst for those that did this terrible crime or liked the idea.

A person aims his gun and fires at an armed villain marching through a school on a rampage and hits some innocents in the process, killing them. Is he as bad as a person who rapes and kills a little girl?

 

[aelf]

Not very truth from what i see thou. almost every major country is getting more and more religious. Including USA, Singapore and even secular China.

Singapore is a major country?

And why is it more religious when I hear about people fornicating everywhere? Not that I have a problem with that...

The lack of religion in China did not prevent it from falling into extremism, as you can see from the Cultural Revolution.

Religion itself is not a problem. People are. If people stopped following religions one day, they might just stone/shoot/kill individuals for believing that boxers are better than underwear. You can make an extremist out of anything.

 

[Ramius75]

Singapore is a major country?

And why is it more religious when I hear about people fornicating everywhere? Not that I have a problem with that...

The lack of religion in China did not prevent it from falling into extremism, as you can see from the Cultural Revolution.

Religion itself is not a problem. People are. If people stopped following religions one day, they might just stone/shoot/kill individuals for believing that boxers are better than underwear. You can make an extremist out of anything.

Its a major city.

well, i dont see fornication everywhere. But its true, many older generation are still as religious as ever and if ur a singaporean then u should have heard of this Church called City harvest. Its one of the fastest growing church in singapre converting many teenagers and young professionals.

Not a good trend IMHO.

People are problematic enough, religion is just an easy solution to all of humans psychological problems. Its easier to tell someone lies to tell him the truth.

 

[aelf]

Its a major city.

Fair enough, but by no means even one of the many larger ones.

well, i dont see fornication everywhere. But its true, many older generation are still as religious as ever and if ur a singaporean then u should have heard of this Church called City harvest. Its one of the fastest growing church in singapre converting many teenagers and young professionals.

Not a good trend IMHO.

Not all people who go to church are really religious. I know.

People are problematic enough, religion is just an easy solution to all of humans psychological problems. Its easier to tell someone lies to tell him the truth.

They did the same thing under the banner of Communism and Nazism. You just need people to buy an idea and believe strongly in it.

 

[aneeshm]

The religion of peace.

Its proponents claim it gives rights to women.

That's absolutely correct.

Where did they get four witnesses, I wonder?

Oh, I forgot, the ulema have their own tradition.

But the religion is blamless. Of course. It has to be. It not being would contradict our deeply-held, revered, and sacred pseudo-liberal dogma, wouldn't it? So we say again,

The religion of peace.

Which gave women rights.

They never had before.

Right.

If we say it enough times, it'll become true.

Right.

 

[Comraddict]

I saw 7 videos of the act, and they are highly violent and disturbing.

 

[LucyDuke]

The religion of peace. ... Right.

Wow. This computer is crap and wouldn't let me scroll down for a second, and before I got to read your whole post, I was wanting to go on attack. Bad.

But yeah. Damn right. "Keep telling yourself that, guys."

 

[.Shane.]

I saw 7 videos of the act, and they are highly violent and disturbing.

Good thing you felt the need to watch it 7 times....

The people who propagate and support this by watching these videos are only a cut below those who made them.

 

[Abaddon]

I saddens me greatly humans can do this.

 

[Kozmos]

She is a woman in the ME, what did she expect NOT to get stoned to death?

 

[LucyDuke]

The people who propagate and support this by watching these videos are only a cut below those who made them.

I have the same emotional response, that it's disgusting that people validate this at all. But morbid curiosity, the motivation for lots of views, doesn't make someone a bad person.

 

[Abaddon]

Would you rather we paid no attention at all?

 

[.Shane.]

But morbid curiosity, the motivation for lots of views, doesn't make someone a bad person.

It tells me they have no will power. They just cave into their instincts even when they should know better.

You're also forgetting that the person I replied to said he watched SEVEN different videos. That's beyond a 1-time instant-gratification-twitch-instinct.

Regardless, I choose to be human.

 

[useless]

what else would we expect?

 

[Left]

The religion of peace.

Its proponents claim it gives rights to women.

That's absolutely correct.

Where did they get four witnesses, I wonder?

Oh, I forgot, the ulema have their own tradition.

But the religion is blamless. Of course. It has to be. It not being would contradict our deeply-held, revered, and sacred pseudo-liberal dogma, wouldn't it? So we say again,

The religion of peace.

Which gave women rights.

They never had before.

Right.

If we say it enough times, it'll become true.

Right.

Yezidi is a "pre-Islamic Middle Eastern religion with ancient origins".

So if your talking about Islam this isn't the thread.