Speakeasy forum


Nice world.

From a June article on aeon, a web magazine.

"June 6, 2018
Dignity is delicate
The popular Austrian tabloid Heute has a tradition of publishing pictures of the first babies born around the country in the new year. Vienna’s 2018 baby was a girl named Asel. She was born of Muslim parents. And she was received with hate. ‘Next terrorist born.’ ‘Deport the scum.' ..."

Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Nice world.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Nice world.
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Not to fret

In reply to: Nice world.

A thousand people could say "Congratulations" and one person use such rude words. Guess which of the 1001 would be quoted in news media.

Collapse -
(NT) Right. Hatred not a problem.

In reply to: Not to fret

Collapse -
Muslim Is Not Terrorist

In reply to: Nice world.

We should not give hatred to the newly born little angel. terrorism in the name of religion is a cowardly individual hiding behind religion. Every religion teaches coolness and wisdom, all of that goes back to every individual not a religion. thanks

Collapse -
Religions have two ways of teaching,

In reply to: Muslim Is Not Terrorist

by word and by action. Very often these teachings contradict each other.

Example: Christianity claims to follow a "Prince of peace", yet has formed armies for centuries to kill its opponents. Sometimes it finds these in its own people; Presbyterians compelled to destroy Catholic churches.

Example: Islam claims to follow a God who is in absolute control of his own creation, yet Muslims have formed armies for centuries to kill their opponents, not trusting him to do so. Sometimes they find these in their own people; Shi'ites compelled to destroy Sunni mosques.

Example: Many see Buddhism as a 'peaceful' religion; Muslims in Myanmar disagree.

That's the record of history. What do you think is the answer?

Collapse -
Underneath all of this is something I suspect

In reply to: Religions have two ways of teaching,

relates to survival. The church and state conflicts we learn about in European history are survival. As populations grow, they need to move, find food, etc. When found, these things require protection from other populations seeking the same. Enter politics and the need for absolute loyalty to royalty. Enter, religion and its affect on the common people whom the kings need to keep under control so as to be able to raise armies to defend against invaders who are also seeking survival. These kings don't get instant alerts on their phones about brewing troubles as religion creates divisions in loyalty. They either make war against their own people or adopt their religion and seek to control it by becoming its protector as well. That relationship doesn't always work well either. The lack of smart phones makes it difficult and frustrating to facilitate damage control. Was Jesus killed because of religion or because of local politics and the need for loyalty? I wasn't there so all I can do is conjecture.

Collapse -
Crusades, Thirty Years War. ISIS. Myanmar.

In reply to: Underneath all of this is something I suspect

Are these examples of looking to 'protect and serve' the people?
Pope Urban's speech in France was 90% religious. Or so the written histories tell us.
And, I'm still waiting for Shi'a or Sunni to explain why it's OK to demolish the other's mosque with a copy of "Holy Qur'an" inside.
Mt 7:17,18.

Collapse -
Rhetorical question...not expecting an answer here

In reply to: Crusades, Thirty Years War. ISIS. Myanmar.

As I understand it, your church/organization permits you to defend yourself (even by the use of deadly force) in some circumstances. Does the same hold for defense of family and friends...or must you stand by and watch them die as they are being attacked?

Collapse -
A rhetorical question usually has a presupposed answer.

In reply to: Rhetorical question...not expecting an answer here

You said you had only conjecture. In any case, why worry about what a church says? What does your Bible say?

At Mt 5:38,39 Jesus said, "You have heard how it was said: Eye for eye and tooth for tooth. But I say this to you: offer no resistance to the wicked. On the contrary, if anyone hits* you on the right cheek, offer him the other as well."
There's one answer: No action.
That of course is considered cowardly, like the man at Isa 53:7,8. Never mind that now.
We can also take his words as caution against retaliation, so common today. This also usually leads to escalation, an unchristian act. We're peacemakers. The apostles understood this. Rom 12:17-21; 1Pet 3:9. A slap on the cheek isn't a serious blow, but it is insulting. A footnote at 5:39 says "The Gospel does not forbid reasonable defense against unjust aggression", and then cites Jesus' own behavior at Jn 18:22 et seq.

As to your scenario, we have answered such attacks by running away, although that often proves impossible. As in the case of Catholic mobs who assaulted us in Quebec back in DuPlessis' regime. In that case, we take a beating.

The standard for taking a life belongs to Jehovah only. In the past he occasionally delegated that to his own people [cf. Jos 6], but not always [cf. 2 Kings 19:35].
This is a principle, not merely a rule or a law. Rev 4:11 says, "You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honour and power, for you made the whole universe ..." Cf. Gen 2:7. Remember Cosby's line about his Dad?

So, we don't have permission for defense "(even by the use of deadly force) in some circumstances." I might pick up a 2x4 in defense of an attack, but if my blow kills, I'm in trouble with Jehovah. Especially since he went to some trouble these last 30 years to teach me that he will take care of everything at its time [Rev 16:16], and that only his government can do that [Mt 6:9,10]. Yours cannot. Better to run. Our history is full of examples of these scriptural behaviors.

And, if we die? That's what resurrection is for.

* The Gk for "hit" is the same as that at Jn 18:22, where the NJB has "slap". "Strike" and "give a blow" are also used.

Collapse -
Forgot the cite.

In reply to: A rhetorical question usually has a presupposed answer.

All quotes of scripture and footnotes are from the New Jerusalem Bible.

Popular Forums

Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
Laptops 21,181 discussions
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
Phones 17,137 discussions
Security 31,287 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
Windows 10 2,657 discussions


Sublime suburban chariot

High on style and technology, the 2019 Volvo XC90 is an incredibly satisfying everyday crossover.