Report: Ohio teacher burned cross on kids' arms

[Cold Warrior]

Didn't Joan of Arc get burned at the stake?

Yes, at a time when Christianity was as old as Islam is today.

[FlaGator]

I'd LOVE to hear what the defense for this could possibly be. Where's Jinx?

If the story is accurate then there is no defense. The man was insane. Insanity, however, is not solely a issue among christians. The Virginia Tech shooter wasn't religious at all from what I can tell and I think that he cold be classified as insane.

[Cold Warrior]

If the story is accurate then there is no defense. The man was insane. Insanity, however, is not solely a issue among christians. The Virginia Tech shooter wasn't religious at all from what I can tell and I think that he cold be classified as insane.

Hi FlaGator! I agree that there is no defense for such actions, but your comparison with the VT shooter is slightly disingenous as he had no religious motive (that I know of, at least) for his actions. Herein, this guy clearly does. That is NOT to say that he is representative of Christianity.

[FlaGator]

I don't think you'll find many atheists who say those dictators act in their worldview. And it really depends on what Christian you are talking too.. when souls are at stake, anything is justifiable for some people.

It is interesting that when Atheists have been in power in the 20th century, they are responsible for more deaths than all the Christian leaders through out history combined. Stalin has about 25 to 30 million. Projections for Mao top 60 million. Pol Pot only wacked about 3 to 4 millioin but it was around 1/3 of the people of Cambodia. I would try to work in the 20 or so million by Hilter but he was not technically an atheist. He viewed himself as divine. This is not to say that atheism breeds murderers. Like anything else it can be used to justify tyrannical behavior but the naturalist world view that many atheist adhere to does tend to make the killing easier to justify. The atheists that are basically humanist tend to have a value system that doesn't allow them to exploit others. Unfortunately most of the humanists aren't interested in the type of power that the naturalist dictators seem to crave.

[AlmostThere]

I don't understand what was so funny about that clip.

Personally, I liked Rummsfeld, so it wasn't intended as a shot at him by me. I've always wondered if he was being serious or screwing with the White House reporters during that briefing. At any rate, it's a fairly good representation of Doublespeak in my opinion. A poster here had made an argument that made as much sense as "unknown unknowns: There are things we don't know that we do not know". Actually I understand unknown unknowns. That's scary. :eek:

[Shannon]

Yes, at a time when Christianity was as old as Islam is today.

I'm just going to reply with a couple .

[FlaGator]

Then this would be true of every atheist, which it obviously is not.

Furthermore, I have no doubt that if bin Laden could, he would wipe out several major cities. Do you deny this?

Atheists follow one or combinations of several world views (I'll try not to make too many generalizations). Those that follow the naturalist worldview tend to be able to justify immoral behavior. They have a tendency to be nihilists. Then you have the secular humanists and they tend find beneficial ways to assist society. Their moral outlook makes them sympathetic to the human condition and desire to see it improved. Existential atheists are more self oriented but exhibit what theist would consider secular moral behavior. They are somewhere between the humanists and the naturalist.

Bin Laden's and the radical Muslims are theists who view Allah as the ultimate reality and Allah tells them it is ok to convert via conquest. The God of Christianity does not condone conversion by conquest. God tells us to share the gospel and then leave the rest up to Him. Any actions outside of that behavior are not Christian behaviors regardless of what the person claims. Bin Laden is acting within the scope of the world view of Islamic beliefs. The teacher in question is not acting within the acceptable norms of Christianity.

[LogansPapa]

Bin Laden's and the radical Muslims are theists who view Allah as the ultimate reality and Allah tells them it is ok to convert via conquest. The God of Christianity does not condone conversion by conquest. God tells us to share the gospel and then leave the rest up to Him. Any actions outside of that behavior are not Christian behaviors regardless of what the person claims. Bin Laden is acting within the scope of the world view of Islamic beliefs. The teacher in question is not acting within the acceptable norms of Christianity.

outstanding.

[FlaGator]

Hi FlaGator! I agree that there is no defense for such actions, but your comparison with the VT shooter is slightly disingenous as he had no religious motive (that I know of, at least) for his actions. Herein, this guy clearly does. That is NOT to say that he is representative of Christianity.

That was my point. Insanity is not inherent to the religious. Anyone can loose it and behave irrationally. It is disingenerous to single this behavior out because the perpetrator believes he is religious when he could just have easily have done it for secular reasons. How are his motivations different if he painted swastika's on a synagogue or burned a cross in someone's front yard or drowned two children in a car because her boy friend didn't want children. The behavior is not acceptable regardless of his reasons.

[Goldwater]

Sonnabend and CW are correct. That is all.