Win a copy of Spring Boot in Practice this week in the Spring forum!
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other Pie Elite all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Tim Cooke
  • Ron McLeod
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Paul Clapham
Sheriffs:
  • Liutauras Vilda
  • Henry Wong
  • Devaka Cooray
Saloon Keepers:
  • Tim Moores
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Tim Holloway
  • Al Hobbs
  • Carey Brown
Bartenders:
  • Piet Souris
  • Mikalai Zaikin
  • Himai Minh

Clash of Civilizations!!

 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 264
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Jason in case you missed this out ...let me say this again
One you of said that I am supporting this Violence...because i did not say anything against it.......Seriously man get a life . I thought I would not have to criticize it explicitly to make you understand. But for your sake .....its WRONG WRONG WRONG.
 
Sheriff
Posts: 6450
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Pranav Jaidka:
Jason in case you missed this out ...let me say this again
One you of said that I am supporting this Violence...because i did not say anything against it.......Seriously man get a life . I thought I would not have to criticize it explicitly to make you understand. But for your sake .....its WRONG WRONG WRONG.


What you fail to realize is that justifying an action is the same as supporting it. So if for example you were to say... "I don't think that those missionaries should have been killed... but they were forcefully converting people"... that is providing justification for the violent actions committed against the missionaries, particularly in the minds of those who commit the violence. So while you might not support the methods, you support the cause (maybe or maybe not you specifically, but certainly some of the other posters here).
Further, myself and others have tried to explain how this kind of reaction against conversion is not rational. This reaction is the motivator for the violence.
[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]
 
Pranav Jaidka
Ranch Hand
Posts: 264
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Jason .
This was one of your best posts(Not the one immediately above....the one over it......the one above is again accusing me of supporting violence....so please see my note posted in bold)..Anyway ...i think we're making progress.
We both already agree theres no point in criticizing the others country when our own country has its own drawbacks. Youre happy with your idea of Civilization and Im happy with Mine.
Now for the extremist part......
According to me ....As I already said.......In india these problems are more political....than religious.
Now I do not blame Hinduism...for what happens in India......Neither do I blame Islam for the WTC nor do I blame it on christianity for whats been done in the past .
Often times a few individuals get it into their heads to take matters into their own hands when its not their business. In todays world if the victim is from a different religion it gives the media a lot to talk about. More Saleability to the press is good business. And different people react differently.

So according to me its nothing to do with religions .And seriously..I dont give a damn about how many Hindus are converted....If they feel they can live better not being a Hindu hes most welcome.
I also do not agree that the conversions happen in the best possible way....and I also dont agree about how people react to this. Its all about opinions . The world is not a perfect place to live in buddy.
[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Pranav Jaidka ]
 
High Plains Drifter
Posts: 7289
Netbeans IDE VI Editor
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

...justifying an action is the same as supporting it...So while you might not support the methods, you support the cause...


Y'know, it's been interesting watching people like Bill Maher and Richard Gere get booed off their soapboxes for saying something that isn't politically correct.
I get the idea, from what Jason says above, that I'm obliged to express horror and disgust for the events of 9/11, and there are rules by which I must express them. Anything other than unmitigated condemnation implies support for what happened.
That's not for me. When President Bush said "you're either with us or against us," I mentally abstained. I am for reason, understanding, and appropriate responses -- whatever word it is that connotes justice in the international scene, that's what I'm for.
I can see why al-Qaida did what it did and does what it does, but it hardly means I approve of it.
Let me explain with a domestic example: We currently have a sniper in the Washington DC area; he's randomly killed 9 or 10 people so far, in places like schoolyards, gas stations, and parking lots. We do know, in a general sense, why he's doing it: he wants to scare people and feel omnipotent in the wake of the community terror he's created.
No one has said (at least publicly), "We have to kill this son of a bitch." We all agree he has to be stopped, but domestic justice requires that we catch him, if possible, and try him for his crimes. If the guy is spotted without a rifle, lets say, is any one of us allowed to shoot on sight? Well, that's a hell of a question. Would it be legal for me, who is not a police officer, to kill the sniper if no danger was clear and imminent? No, I'm guessing. Would lots of people justify why I did it? I believe so.
Such people are not implicated by my crime, such as it is, by being glad it happened or by openly wishing they had done it themselves. And by a similar token, I may find the cheers of some Syrian yahoo on the morning 9/11 inhumane and inflammatory, but he's broken no law.
Much less, the observer who says such actions were horrible but nonetheless could see what "reasons" others used to commit is endorsing neither the methods or the cause. I think that without the willingness on our part to listen to that observer's point of view, we're only left with polarizing choices, like "anyone who thought this wasn't horrible and doesn't say so in certain, unqualified terms must be an enemy of the state." What's the follow-up to that sentiment, bringing back sedition laws?
I'd much rather hear those rationalizations to see if they lend insight to the enemy's motives. Instead of blanket rhetoric and subsequent retaliation, I'd rather see fashioned a response that shows the world what our reasons are for what we do, not indulge our impulses because we can afford to. If they still don't agree, ok, we've tried, and we do what we have to do. But we satisfied ourselves that the boundaries of reason, not fear or PC moral imperatives, have been exhausted.
If all we have to do is condemn those perspectives that aren't aligned to our own sympathies, why even consult the UN? Why not just go kick ass and then explain it to the survivors, assuming we even feel like explaining ourselves after the fact? Demanding that the UN Security Council see things our way is no bridge to a multi-lateral response, and yet that's the impression I get about the US approach, that we're relying more on rhetoric and dogma than rational, compelling persuasion to make our case.
[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Michael Ernest ]
 
Jason Menard
Sheriff
Posts: 6450
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
ME: Much less, the observer who says such actions were horrible but nonetheless could see what "reasons" others used to commit is endorsing neither the methods or the cause.
I agree with you in some respects. However, I'm not talking about understanding the reasons for which any particular action might be undertaken. Understanding what motivates somebody is fine. I am talking strictly about lending justification to those actions. Justification lends support to the perpetrator and encourages further action.
Let's take the example of 9/11. Understanding that event might be something along the lines of understanding that bin Laden and his followers felt rage that the US had troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, the Islamic Holy Land, and because of US support for Israel. Justification would be saying something along the lines of "the infidels had invaded the Holy Land and fund the Zionist oppression of the Palestinians, so they deserved what they got". Or more mildly, "Well of course killing those innocent people was bad, but the US brought it upon themselves with their foreign policy". Justification is provided in the form of excuses for murderous actions.
My point is simply don't confuse understanding something with providing justification for something. There are some acts which require only strict condemnation, not providing excuses for the perpetrators which only encourages them more.
[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]
 
Leverager of our synergies
Posts: 10065
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
Or more mildly, "Well of course killing those innocent people was bad, but the US brought it upon themselves with their foreign policy". Justification is provided in the form of excuses for murderous actions.


Jason, what do you think about this sentence:
"of course killing those innocent people was bad, but this horror doesn't make US foreign policy any more right"
- is this justification? Also, it seems that the only person who mentioned killing missioners in the first part of the sentence and the problem of conversions in the second was Pakka Desi. Other simply saying they do not like conversions. And actually, it was you who brought up this "missionaries killing" thing. So now everybody who is saying they do not want Christian missionaries in their country support murders?
If some thief were killed, does that mean nobody can speak against stealing any more?
I am not saying that missioners are about as bad as thiefs, I disagree with your approach from purely logical point of view.
[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 18944
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
5 Dalits beaten to death in Haryana
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NDTV Correspondent
Thursday, October 17, 2002 (Gurgaon):

Angry villagers battered five Dalits to death last night in Jhajjar district of Haryana suspecting them of having killed a cow.
Jhajjar's Superintendent of Police Mohammad Akil said the five were on their way from Karnal from Gurgaon last evening and purchased a cow on the way. They then allegedly started skinning the animal on the Gurgaon-Jhajjar road.
According to reports, a group of people who witnessed the act beat them up and took them to a police post near Dulina, along the Gurgaon road. As the news spread, more people gathered on the spot.
According to the Haryana police, the enraged crowd of villagers suddenly grew violent and pulled the five out of the police post and beat them to death with lathis.
The agitating crowd later blocked the Gurgaon road and set afire a vehicle used in transporting livestock skins.
According to the police, the situation is tense but under control. No arrests have been made so far. (With PTI inputs)
 
Anonymous
Ranch Hand
Posts: 18944
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Don't forget that some 'high tech' software parks are just few miles away from this point of incidence.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
HI all
Happy Dashera !!
was busy in festival .. will be back..
just read some good responses and will take time to reply
 
Jason Menard
Sheriff
Posts: 6450
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Jason, what do you think about this sentence:
"of course killing those innocent people was bad, but this horror doesn't make US foreign policy any more right"


I guess my question would be why would you link the two actions like that? Notice the "but ...". This is the tell tale sign for me. The but clause seems to give an excuse, or justification (same thing), for the preceeding statement. The point is that the acts described in the first part of the statement cannot be mitigated by the second part of the statement (the but clause), The acts in the first part of the statement are so horrific so that there can be no justification, excuse, or mitigation, which is what you get any time you add that but clause. The way I read it in your example though, even the opening "of course" hints to us that there may be some excuse forthcoming.
What I'm trying to say is that there are some acts for which there can be no excuse, justification, or mitigation. "Killing those innocent people was bad"... period. There is absolutely nothing which can justify, mitigate, or excuse such actions. However that is exactly what people do when they say things like "I don't support violence, but those missionaries shouldn't have been there in the first place", or anything similar.
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

The poorly supported arguments and demonization of others are the same in every case.

What could be a strong supported argument for you.
I have studied in a christian school upto 8th.
I know a guy who has converted in to christian. And now I know how much money he got from no where. And I knew him when he was nothing. And as per him, he got lotta of US $. And now he is runing a school for poor children and what he is doing is worst then making child pronography.
And this is not rare case. This is truth.
Again if you dont know anything then its better to keep your mouth shut then preaching the things for which no one is against.
No one has talked any thing abt money.
Castesim in India is almost out. People travel in same bogie of train else there was time people will not travel in train OR they will book whole bogie OR buy a train.
Now its fight Poor Vs Rich.
If still you cant understand, and want to cry over positive side of convertion. Please go ahead.
But what is happening in India in the name of conversion is NOT what you think is conversion.
I thought a lot to write but everything has been already by said by someone else.
Final shot:
To all who think , the conversion,going in India is the way conversion should be then please I am inviting all of you. Frankly I would love to see you all too.
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

ME: Really? What if "your religion" thinks you suck.........

RK: Any answre, why ther are given so much money after conversion ??
And what picture you have of religion, more of it happens in US.
Hindu is society. For having anything as custom there is reason. For example castsism, if I relate it with the face of Mr Lodge(Veronica's father) whenever Archie comes to his home, I wont be aggregating it.
Its about rich & poor and nothing else.
I wont give you lecture on Hindism as you wont understand it.
ME: Maybe they just want to share it. It's called proselytizing and is an accepted part of many religions, not just Christianity.
So ... what do you want to say .....
if 100 people say a lie, it should consider truth...
I see these prophets as manipulater of their time.(Please forgive me if anyone is hurt. I am ready to go to HELL)
Heavier forms of persuasion occur in the US as well as elsewhere, by the way, and I for one find it obnoxious, but not a threat to my culture. It's *part* of my culture, just not a part I like or pay much attention to.

It could be part of your cultue...
But we dont have anything like conversion.
US culture, as you know, only americans love it.

But still I dont know why one should convert??
You are talking like Microsoft guys, our product is good but you have to have Windows installed on your m/c.
My religion is good but to show your faith you have to have convert yourself
Anyway, If you all out there think that conversion is happening because of FAITH, then I feel pity on all of you as you dont there is no faith involve in it. Its just about MONEY.

ME: Grab a Bible and read what he says for yourself. Go ahead, it won't hurt you...
Dont worry, I have read Bible in Hindi and English also.
But I am not christian because however good is your Mom, I wont excahge with mine. My Mom is best.
Just ask yourself, why you are christian? Just becasue your parents where christian.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1871
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator


ME
I imagine it does not. The religious practice I was raised in does, or did. I don't need to look to the problems of Hinduism to find problems with religious practice; the culture I was raised in has plenty of its own, as far as I'm concerned. I would also guess what's written in the Gita says nothing about treating some people like s***, but such practices are kept in the name of Hinduism, anyway, aren't they? It hardly matters what the specifics are.


This is what the most of the people believe , we all were born independent with no religion no limitation and slowly we make a shell around us in which we live until death, we make a shell of culture, religion, region and of many other things we limit ourselves to country, community and dont even bother to think of another culture another society because we all beleive that whatever we are, we are the best. I does not matter how much educated you are because no body have the guts to open that shell to explore new horizons.


Pakka
These communities have taken the Hindu tolerance for granted. We want them to just LEAVE US ALONE.


If you think that leaving or seggregating the people of different community solve all the problem then you are completely wrong, we have to share each others problem and have to find a common solution change your vision, you just make a generalization about muslims/christians that if one muslim/christian is wrong then whole community is wrong.
If I find a hindu fundamentalist like you then I will not make a generalization about Hindu community that all the hindus are fundamentalist.


pakka
They can easily verify my claims, just the way I did it for myself. I have lived in 5 states in India, from New Delhi to Tamilnadu and I have the first hand information about this.


You are person who projects that if you are wrong then everone else is wrong, you have been to five states but you were not able to see those places where hindu muslim live peacefully they share their happiness and sorrow, many of them protect each other during riots.


Pranav
The violence in India you see nowadays is not religious .Its more political and I think everyone in India including the victims know that.


Absolutely right and I hope people like pakka should understand this.


pakka
do you not agree that Muslims have had a long history of destroying Hindu temples and building their Mosques there? Well, they are unable to do that now but there basic tendency is the same. Their mullahs preach that Hindus are kafirs.


Why you always see the darker side, you have to also agree that after 1000 years of muslim domination in India there is still Hindu majority not muslim.


Jason
I also don't see how pointing out faults in one country leads to a solution to a problem in another country.


Intelligent people are those who learn from their own experience and brilliant people always learn from the experience of others.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 86
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
No one cared to answer the question that I posted yesterday in reply to Jason's post. I wonder why?
Are the missionaries tolerant to the religion the rich and needy already follow?
 
Greenhorn
Posts: 16
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
"Jesus is coming back !" .... (Written by missionaries in walls ...)
One True (?) hindu's reply ....
"To join in Hindu religion" ...
...
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator


For one, you might be truly worried about the welfare of the poor. Government actions against NGOs, constant dismissal of the poor as being unable to look after their own interests as if they are but children, and the comments such as those made here that urge the missionaries to leave the country and take their aid with them (particularly disturbing since the people saying this get no benefit from the aid), show that this is not the case. So since there is no legitimate concern for the welfare of the poor, this concern is invalid.


I think I have read this sentence lot of times (or I read the same post again and again)
Then I have straight answer, let there be war inside India, but dont poke your(missionaries) nose.
Now a straight answer:
Yes, we dont believe in freedom of speech or conversion. Yes, we believe in castism.
And all bullshit you can think of to support convesion.
BUT I am against forced conversion and will be.
I dont need to agree you on this point. You can live your in goverment for which terrorism has diffrent meaning for different conutry and still feel proud of it. and wont accept it even if showed truth.
ABC: can you see XYZ in this?
XYZ: No, its not XYZ ?
ABC: but its a mirror.

I can say, why you are worrying abt missionary or castesim. First see your society where a black person does not get taxi in night.
want prove .. search google.
You dont want to believe in forced conversion. I cant make you to beleive.
And yes as you have said, "Failure to agree with you does not mean I am not able to see your side of things."
I dont know but still how should one know that other person is seeing other side also when he is repeating same thing again again.
When there are lot of Indians are saying that there is forced conversion then why dont you believe this.
I could not offer the trip, but there are people who are even ready to offer the trip. I am ready for your lodging and fooding. Its free trip to India. Why dont you come, man. And as always it is said, you will see only what you want to see.
You are telling just simple theories written in some book that in Catholic church this is not allowed or some other thing.
You are impossible (I am appreciating you )
WHY NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT forced conversion ??
[ October 17, 2002: Message edited by: Ravish Kumar ]
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Pakka Desi:

I never said there are no other problems. We definitely have to work on them and we are.


And we/I will add, dont help us, we are strong enough to support ourself and take care of our problem. You stop worrying about others.
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator


Blah blah blah.........
Because really you people are coming off sounding very similar to Nazis, Muslim extremists, and other supremacist movements.


I have same view for you too, who cannot see beyond what he wants to see.
And believes in words like "who is not with us is against us"
Does not it sound like dictatorship ??
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

So show us some evidence to back up your claims of these wide scale and systemic activities that are supposedly taking place in the name of Christianity.


A free trip to India, whatelse you want
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
Sounds like the guy has a nice little scam going on. So why does this bother you?


Because his son wont be knowing that his father has sold his soul.
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
To piggy back on what Thomas said, we also have people who go door-to-door looking for converts, or walk the streets (or airports) looking to convince people to give their particular brand of religion a try. I've seen this behaivor in Europe and Japan as well. Do we feel offended or threatened? No, we simply politely tell them we're not interested and have a nice day, or take them up on their offer to read their literature or attend their Church. It's simple really.


But here their target is poor only.
you can again cry for those poor's free will and freedom of chosing religion.
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Pranav Jaidka:
Rufus : India being a screwed up country ???
Is that the reason its one of 7 nuclear capable nations and only one of 3-4 nations with their own sattellites around the Earth ..and only the 3rd(Im not sure about that) nation which I assume will put a man on the moon in the next few years.
Give credit where its due. I as an Indian accept the faults where they are .


And to add, the first country to do underground nuclear test.
BTW may I know when did your country got freedom?
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Axel Janssen:

O.k. missionaires are like salespeople. They think in selling their thing. But maybe it helps some of the poor to have better living. New perspectives through religion change.
If you want an open culture, why don't you just accept it?


Why one needs to convert in to catholic to leave alcohol.
Doesnt catholic drinks ??
Why dont they tell this also while they try to convert someone that you can still drink as lot of catholic do drink.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 177
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I read a news article some where that said there were lot of civilian (Iraqi, of course) casualities in the gulf war. Is that justifiable? Jason? As per your logic, Not at all.
Hower, is that not what US is doing? Justifying that because US *thinks* that Iraq is builing a N-Bomb? In fact, US is not just justifying, it applied the same logic for Afghanistan and it is going to apply the same logic again for Iraq no matter what the civilan casualities are. And as the opinion polls say, Bush has full support for the war from the US public.
As I explained before, in India, there is an inhibition amongst the general population to speak against conversions and the things that Muslim and Christian clerics are doing, may be due to years of repression or whatever. People do hesitate to come out in the open and say that this is wrong and we don't want it in our country. I am calling them to speak their mind. There is no shame in saying that I want fraud missionaries out. There is no shame is saying that I want to close down the madarasas. Not just the madaras, even the varsities and colleges like Aligarh Muslim University which have become the recruiting grounds of the ISI.
Every year, Indian government spends ton of foreign exchange to sponcer Haz travels of Muslims in India. I ask, why the hell??? Even after doing that Muslims are not happy. Which developed country does that??? Tomorrow, they'll start sponcering Vatican travel for Christians!!!And what do they do for Hindus? NOTHING. They started providing security to Amarnath travel (which is in India itself, BTW) only after the terrorist menace.
BJP is all from bringing Uniform Civil Code. Why is there a resistance from Muslims and Christians for the UCC? Why should be there a different law for hindus, muslims and chirstians. This is one country and there has to be one law.
When muslims living in US can say "In God we trust" in schools and other places, why the hell Muslims and Christians have a problem in saying "Vande Mataram"?
 
Anonymous
Ranch Hand
Posts: 18944
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I think *but* indicates the reason/personal opinion/justification for *most* of the actions. I don't think we can ignore *but*. Adding *but* clause doesn't mean that we support each and every action. It could be just identifying the cause.
For example :
US - Iraq war might kill thousands of innocent poeple in Iraq. But Iraq is be building N-bomb and we can not take risk.
Read the above statement with and w/o *but* clause. It will make lot of difference.
 
Sameer Jamal
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1871
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator


When muslims living in US can say "In God we trust" in schools and other places, why the hell Muslims and Christians have a problem in saying "Vande Mataram"?


I am Indian first then muslim and I've no problem in saying "Vande Matram " I say it from my heart but when a person like u and Bal Thakrey say that you have to say "Vande Matram" if you want to live in this country then I will say nobody can force me(like forced conversion).
 
Sameer Jamal
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1871
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator


Every year, Indian government spends ton of foreign exchange to sponcer Haz travels of Muslims in India. I ask, why the hell??? Even after doing that Muslims are not happy. Which developed country does that??? Tomorrow, they'll start sponcering Vatican travel for Christians!!!And what do they do for Hindus? NOTHING. They started providing security to Amarnath travel (which is in India itself, BTW) only after the terrorist menace.


Then why r u blaming muslim or christian why not the policies of govt of India ?
 
Pakka Desi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 177
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Sameer Jamal:

I am Indian first then muslim and I've no problem in saying "Vande Matram " I say it from my heart but when a person like u and Bal Thakrey say that you have to say "Vande Matram" if you want to live in this country then I will say nobody can force me(like forced conversion).


You are right. This should not be forced and I am not for forcing it either. And as you said, it should come from the heart. I honestly appreciate you doing so but unfortunately, not many muslims think so.
 
Pakka Desi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 177
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Sameer Jamal:

Then why r u blaming muslim or christian why not the policies of govt of India ?


Sameer, there is not just one thing I am against. It's the whole set of things that have happened in the past and are happening. I am definitely against the appeasment policy of any religion.
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
"Vande Matram "...
Here I dont support RSS/VHP .....
AW Pakka you are distracting the topic...
AW it is dead now.
We can feel it cause we see it but who has not seen it, it will be conversion not forced conversion.
Even its not their fault. For them, who wants to convert someone stands at airport give pamphlets, does not give money to poor.
 
Michael Ernest
High Plains Drifter
Posts: 7289
Netbeans IDE VI Editor
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Ravish Kumar:
[b]
Just ask yourself, why you are christian? Just becasue your parents where christian.


Well, to be blunt, my parents were raised as Catholics, and to a far lesser degree so was I. My older sister maintains the faith, kinda sorta. My younger sister isn't even baptized; neither are my children.
I'm not a Christian other than by baptismal record, Ravish. I've read the Bible -- several times -- and the Quran and a few other texts. They strike me as records of faith and religion, but none of them are sacred to me. I think you would have got that by now.
Geez, all this time I've been talking, I get the idea you aren't listening at all, but simply waiting for some statement you can go off on.
[ October 17, 2002: Message edited by: Michael Ernest ]
 
Sameer Jamal
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1871
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Pakka I know most of the muslim will deny when u ask them to say "Vande Matram" the reson behind this is muslim beleives nobody is above god and he is the only who can be worshiped, and the meaning of "Vande Matram" is worshipping mother land which muslims cannot accept. But when you explain it to a common muslim that it is actually a respect of mother land then he will accept it from heart but that it what dirty polticians does not want do they just create difference. People like you and me can bring people of India together not the people like Bal thakrey or Imam Bukhary but first we have to clear our differences.
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5397
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Michael Ernest:

I'm not a Christian other than by baptismal record, Ravish.
.........
Geez, all this time I've been talking, I get the idea you aren't listening at all, but simply waiting for some statement you can go off on.


I am not Hindu as I do eat Beef and I cant be Muslim as I eat pork even worse I cant be Chritian coz I dont believe in Prophets (Jesus/Mohammad)
But as my parents are Hindu, I am hindu.
The same way I think the whole world goes.
99% of the time child follows the religion of his parents.
Dont take me wrong. I said this because the converted persons child will simply follow christian, let be the for the sake of baptismal record.
Frankly I dont believe in any religion.
If you have read my earlier post then you must have notice it.
Even I dont like discussing religion at all as all are same.
But when it come to FORCED conversion, I am against.
As everyone is agree here that if its on free will of a person then even I will support conversion.
but for FORCED conversion. I AM AGAINST IT.
anyway for me this thread is dead.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 126
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
i dont think that people of minorities are any less or more patriotic than the majority. Even though it sounds dramatic but it is in the human nature to love the land in which he was born. For example, even decades after moving to foreign countries and settling down there immigrants keep alive ties to the country of their birth. Even if they may have hated 1000 things about the country they left but they can never give up on it.
So those in hindus in india who question the patriotism of muslims are wrong. I feel it is a crime to do so.
 
Pakka Desi
Ranch Hand
Posts: 177
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Amitabh Sharma:
i dont think that people of minorities are any less or more patriotic than the majority. Even though it sounds dramatic but it is in the human nature to love the land in which he was born. For example, even decades after moving to foreign countries and settling down there immigrants keep alive ties to the country of their birth. Even if they may have hated 1000 things about the country they left but they can never give up on it.
So those in hindus in india who question the patriotism of muslims are wrong. I feel it is a crime to do so.


I am not questioning the patriotism of Muslims or anybody. What I am saying is there has to be an openness among the people of these religions to respect the local beliefs and get mixed into the local culture. Otherwise, our country will always remain divided. Just like Sameer said, he would say Vande Mataram by heart. Nobody is going to ask him to actualy do an Aarti of the soil. It's just the attitude that matters.
 
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Posts: 10065
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
A lot of good stuff.


When will I learn how to communicate clearly?
My point was that the first part of this kind of sentences and the second are orthogonal -- it is possible to dislike Christian missionaries and/or what they are doing, and yet be strictly against killing them. I agree, that the sentences formulated as "Well of course killing those innocent people was bad, but the US brought it upon themselves with their foreign policy" do provide justification of such actions (at least, partly).
What I'm trying to say is that there are some acts for which there can be no excuse, justification, or mitigation. "Killing those innocent people was bad"... period. There is absolutely nothing which can justify, mitigate, or excuse such actions. However that is exactly what people do when they say things like "I don't support violence, but those missionaries shouldn't have been there in the first place", or anything similar.
I suppose in most cases this is nothing more than unfortunate figure of speech -- if people could put it better, they would. When you ask them for clarification, they confirm that they have absolutely no justification for killing people. What they are oppose to, is your apparent attemps to prevent anybody from expressing their dislike of Christian missionaries activities on the ground that this means justification of acts of
violence against missionaries.
I hope I did not create more confusion. :roll:
 
Michael Ernest
High Plains Drifter
Posts: 7289
Netbeans IDE VI Editor
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I don't know if Mahatma Gandhi ever actually said this, but this quote got a lot of play in the US movie about him:
"There are causes for which I am willing to die; there is no cause for which I am willing to kill."
Without being so all-fired dramatic, I think in this sentiment for each of us to look at and ask what is it we're willing to give our lives for. Good object-oriented design? A file system with AI decision support for data buffering? The ultimate sourdough starter? Preventing people I've never met from converting from a religion I personally don't subscribe to myself? What is that thing that is worth more than my life?
If there's one thing I encounter is religion with skepticism, it is that I can be taught what is worth living and dying for. This to me is a human goal and a spiritual goal, not one that should be prescribed by doctrine. Of course, there are other constraints that come into play (defense of one's country, family, Joe Montana rookie card, etc.), but on the whole I'm uncomfortable with the idea of subverting to power of faith into religion, and using that power to tell people what their values are or should be.
But this is the stuff people get into when they foist their scriptural interpretations texts on others and demand that they act. (I would love to say on this level that I therefore find bin Laden no more or less repugnant than Jerry Falwell, but it turns out Mr. Falwell knows how to apologize for his verbal inhumanities, so I can't.) All they need are some idiots who can be convinced that inflicting misery or terror on others somehow advances a greater good, and there you have it: bombed abortion clinics, cars exploding at checkpoints, grenades as a school gets out, whatever.
What wire is it in the human brain that allows us to think that killing another person randomly will benefit some greater cause? I'm clueless to that.
 
Jason Menard
Sheriff
Posts: 6450
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
My point was that the first part of this kind of sentences and the second are orthogonal


But placing them together creates the appearance of a dependancy. Why would they be in the same sentence otherwise if there was no effort to establish linkage between the two parts? This is what I object to. It's not that one might independantly hold the two beliefs expressed in part A and part B of the sentence, it's when one creates the image of a dependancy by linking them together in the same sentence. Okay now I'm probably getting even more confusing. Plus we are also probably getting too much into semantics.
Maybe people are only subconsciously giving justification when they say these things, I don't know. But often the only way we have of knowing any person's position on something is through their statements.

it is possible to dislike Christian missionaries and/or what they are doing, and yet be strictly against killing them.


Yep, I agree. No arguments here.

What they are oppose to, is your apparent attemps to prevent anybody from expressing their dislike of Christian missionaries activities on the ground that this means justification of acts of
violence against missionaries.


While it may sound like that, that is not the point I'm trying to make. Disagree with what they are doing all you want, just be careful not to provide justification/excuses/mitigation for horrible acts, and don't support those criminals who commit those acts.
Of course it's kind of hard to imagine that someone doesn't justify such actions when they proudly proclaim that they support the perpetrators of these actions "100%". This is the person I was primarily directing my comments at in the first place.

I hope I did not create more confusion. :roll:


Nope, not at all.
 
"The Hood"
Posts: 8521
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I have a feeling that what the missionaries consider "helping the poor" of their congregation is what is being presented as FORCED conversions :roll: .
 
Anonymous
Ranch Hand
Posts: 18944
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Sitting in front of computer in AC room and reading some links doesn't the reveal the truch.
 
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic