Individuals vs Group

[Jack]

Having said that, I believe that the leaders in question do everything they can to fight extremism in their congregations.

What makes you believe that, outside of public statements to the media?

[RageBeoulve]

I'm not following, I must admit. Are we talking about the same thing?

It's hard to tell when the subject changes. Seemed to be talking about state sanctioned murder led by government and enacted by the church, and possibly if lower ranking leaders should have taking a stand against higher ranking leaders of their own church. Though the question did seem to possibly be as simple as, should one take a stand against another taking a stand. Either way, my answer is sufficient as, sure why not.

A more fitting analogy in this case is the shepherd slaughtering someone else's sheep.

Appears to be more like sheep killing sheep of a different herd.

Know how many veterans of Vietnam and other wars died, even after they came home "safetly"?

A lot.

[Jack]

Not sure what that means.

[RageBeoulve]

Not sure what that means.

I mean, its sheep of our own herd alright. We say its all in the sense of freedom and American ideals but that narrative is collapsing. Has been for quite a long time. The irrational belief that the state can provide rights and security is melting away a bit more each year.

[Jack]

Not sure what that means.

I mean, its sheep of our own herd alright. We say its all in the sense of freedom and American ideals but that narrative is collapsing. Has been for quite a long time. The irrational belief that the state can provide rights and security is melting away a bit more each year.

Okay, got it, that's right, and this topic could be about a number of things. Murder in the name of what? War? God? The law? It doesn't matter; some people are going to react when people around them are being killed. Could easily take the OP of this thread and make it about that killing and subsequent riot in Missouri, and people would think me mad if I said those black folks there need to have more respect for the law, just isolated cases of blacks being killed by cops after all. It's easy to sit back with my nose in the air and look down on both sides of it all, and think that's what most people with no involvement at all generally do.

[RageBeoulve]

Not sure what that means.

I mean, its sheep of our own herd alright. We say its all in the sense of freedom and American ideals but that narrative is collapsing. Has been for quite a long time. The irrational belief that the state can provide rights and security is melting away a bit more each year.

Okay, got it, that's right, and this topic could be about a number of things. Murder in the name of what? War? God? The law? It doesn't matter; some people are going to react when people around them are being killed. Could easily take the OP of this thread and make it about that killing and subsequent riot in Missouri, and people would think me mad if I said those black folks there need to have more respect for the law, just isolated cases of blacks being killed by cops after all. It's easy to sit back with my nose in the air and look down on both sides of it all, but when asked what's worse, can't help but to look to see who drew first blood.

It doesn't really matter in the long run who drew blood first. Such events can and always will be used to expand the power of the state. As it grows, it becomes more and more ineffectual and useless. You're an American, aren't you Jack? You've been at ground zero of the rapid growth of the largest and most powerful state in human history, so I'm sure you can see my point. The government already fucks up even the smallest and most menial tasks and spends incredible amounts of resources during that failure.

Imagine how bad things will get if it grows any larger.

[Jack]

Not really disagreeing with that, just won't sit stunned and wondering why when churches start burning. Also wont be surprised if the people of France with no interest in being vigilantes simply vote for extremist leaders of their own to address the church. 

[RageBeoulve]

Not really disagreeing with that, just won't sit stunned and wondering why when churches start burning. Also wont be surprised if the people of France with no interest in being vigilantes simply vote for extremist leaders of their own to address the church.

Ah yes of course. Its no mystery why fascist elements are gaining control. It has happened in the past and is happening now. People tend to put up with one evil for a long time then choose a worse evil to get rid of it.

[Jack]

When it comes to murder, not certain there's a worse evil, if based on who is doing the killing.

[RageBeoulve]

When it comes to murder, not certain there's a worse evil, if based on who is doing the killing.

People more willing to commit murder.

[Jack]

When it comes to murder, not certain there's a worse evil, if based on who is doing the killing.

People more willing to commit murder.

More willing doesn't make it a greater evil, and if anything it's not a matter of more willing but more authorized. People who support ideals which sanction murder don't generally feel personally accountable when people are killed.

[RageBeoulve]

When it comes to murder, not certain there's a worse evil, if based on who is doing the killing.

People more willing to commit murder.

More willing doesn't make it a greater evil, and if anything it's not a matter of more willing but more authorized. People who support ideals which sanction murder don't generally feel personally accountable when people are killed.

They feel even less accountable when it is the norm, like under fascist systems.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

When it comes to murder, not certain there's a worse evil, if based on who is doing the killing.

People more willing to commit murder.

More willing doesn't make it a greater evil, and if anything it's not a matter of more willing but more authorized. People who support ideals which sanction murder don't generally feel personally accountable when people are killed.

They feel even less accountable when it is the norm, like under fascist systems.

There's a term for what you're describing, it's called "the banality of evil"

[odeon]

I can not imagine a single group that will have no absurd and violent members.

Certainly not, but if groups actually want to be disassociated from their own vigilante terrorists, then the leaders of those groups have to do something about it, other than simply saying, we do not support... because that's seldom easy to believe.

And who are the leaders, in this case?

The 'organizations' making official public statements, in your original post.

So, following your logic, if this had been the good ole middle ages, the local priests in Sweden and England should have done something about the Spanish Inquisition?

Given the state of communications and travel in that time period I would say that is not a very good example
Also the human rights aspect was not even though of yet back then to any extent.  Comparing different time periods in this way is almost  always flawed by the differences in culture between them 

The point is not as much what was, or is, possible, but rather if it's reasonable to blame one isolated group for the actions of another where their only common denominator is an admission of faith.

Having said that, I believe that the leaders in question do everything they can to fight extremism in their congregations. I also believe that they know perfectly well that they have to be rather vocal about it since, regardless of actual blame, the actions of those few affect them and their religion.

I see leaders, and Muslim individuals stand up against extremism. Just like there are also more going for the extremist pov. Would not be surprised if the aggression will shift more towards average Muslims not wanting to agree with extremism. It is important to get the average Muslim as integrated as can be, and safe.
The split between extremist and average is not only happening for Muslims.

I'm not that optimistic about the near future.

The aggression from the extremists or the aggression from the bigots who think every Muslim is an extremist?

There is already quite a lot of the former happening in some countries, notably Syria.

[odeon]

Yes, it's been disturbing to read about things like a part of China recently cracking down on people wearing burqas. France actually has similar rules in places like schools. Why? Why would an otherwise freedom-loving nation do something like that? (France, not China. I would expect that behavior from China, sadly, and it may distract terrorist attention from the rest of the world to focus on conflicts there.) That's the kind of thing I mean by having respect for religion. Of all the things you could target, you pick something that's an important symbol to a religious minority and matters far more to them than it does to you?

France has a lot of similar rules in place. It's complete madness. I listened to the radio yesterday and happened across an interview with a French Jew who was considering leaving his country, in light of the recent terrorism acts but also the fact that he no longer felt he could say what he wanted there. He said that he no longer identified with his country.