On 12 January 2015 at 14:48, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 1/11/2015 4:22 PM, LizR wrote: > >> Also on the subject >> >> http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/27987- >> these-terrorist-attacks-are-not-about-religion >> > > They say it's about their religion when they do it. They cite religious > reasons for doing it. Of course almost any action has multiple causes; but > why should we believe the apologists analysis of a co-religionist? Maybe > it's not his sect of the religion, but he doesn't get to define other > people's religion for them. > > I agree that they should be pursued and prosecuted as criminals. One can't > prosecute a religion. But one can oppose the ideas of a religion and > criticize its tenets. Being rational and liberal doesn't mean believing > that every culture is of equal value. >
I hate to violate Godwin's rule but the Nazis cited scientific reasons for what they did, at least some of the time. Should we therefore persecute science, because the "apologists" say it wasn't real science? All he's saying is that these people aren't practicing the same religion as the vast majority of Muslims. It's a valid point. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
