http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2011/07/23/the-face-of-terrorism-a-blond-norwegian-christian Comments On: The face of terrorism: A blond Norwegian Christian by Max Brantley en-us Copyright 2013 Arkansas Times. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Arkansas Times readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Arkansas Times. robert@arktimes.com (Arkansas Times Webmaster) Tue, 21 May 2013 00:00:01 -0500 Tue, 21 May 2013 20:45:00 -0500 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
No, in the absence of god, I don't think might makes right, but I do think might enforces justice. Those of us who are concerned with justice have to do what's necessary to make sure that happens. Whether you get away with something doesn't determine whether it's right or wrong, just whether you personally escape punishment for it.

The Greeks and the Romans were wise to establish a society in which people cared about their reputations even after death, their good name, their legacy. Whether a Hitler or a Mengele escaped their deserved punishment, their names will live on in infamy. That's not the punishment they deserve, but it's better than nothing.

What does make right? Different people have different answers for that. My sense of right and wrong has changed over the years. Where I'm at now is that I have a regard for life in its various parts and as a whole, a sense of wonder for the totality of creation*, and a faith in people, especially as they express themselves through story and song.

I try to reason consistently from that basis. When I can't reason from it, I try to act in a manner consistent with it. In a last resort, I pick the least bad alternative.

Would you grant that I've given an answer, though it's one with which you don't agree?

*I'd like to use a different word, but using nature in this context implies things I don't believe. I'd rather say "creation" and, if necessary, explain that I don't believe in a creator. There's some poetry and some metaphor in the word "creation" that I don't want to abandon, just like I don't want to abandon "grace".
Posted by John A Arkansawyer]]> Tue, 26 Jul 2011 18:00:55 -0500 Arkansas Times
You did not answer them because an atheist like you does not have a good answer for these questions. That is why Woody Allen made the movie "Crimes and Misdemeanors" in the first place.
Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Tue, 26 Jul 2011 09:37:44 -0500 Arkansas Times
But you raise a good point with Woody Allen. He's one of the great living American artists in part because he's unafraid to raise questions to which he doesn't have easy answers. He is, so far as I know, somewhere between an atheist and an agnostic. I believe he's been quoted as saying he wishes there were a god but believes there is not.

I myself am glad there's no god. The idea that the suffering, both intentional and not, which all of us endure in some capacity during our lives, has as its root cause divine intervention, whether of the Deist hands-off creator or the Trinitarian interventionist god, would be unbearable. That it's simply a product of an undirected universe is much easier on the mind.

As to justice, that's a human creation. It exists so far as people make it exist, and as a human creation, it isn't likely to approach perfection any time soon. Some people get away with their crimes; others are punished though innocent. Perhaps that's unfortunate, or perhaps it's better that none of us receive full, unmerciful justice.

As it is, life is wonderful, despite all its troubles. I'll take grace over justice any day.
Posted by John A Arkansawyer]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 21:22:11 -0500 Arkansas Times
Let me pose you a question from Woody Allen's movie "Crimes and Misdemeanors." IF THERE IS NO GOD THEN DOES MIGHT MAKE RIGHT? Did Hitler get away with murder because there is no afterlife for him to be punished? Did Joseph Mengele (the angel of death for Hitler) get away with it since he was never caught? http://haltingarkansasliberalswithtruth.co…
Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:46:14 -0500 Arkansas Times
And Norma is always right. If you don't believe it, just ask her.

And if you don't agree with Norma, you're always wrong. If you don't believe it, just ask her.

So when Norma says something, there's no point in questioning or discussing it. If you don't believe it, just ask her.

And when Norma has spoken, there's not much point in anyone else's saying aything. If you don't believe it, just ask her.

In fact, it's possible to note that when Norma has spoken, no one else bothers to post on that thread.

IMHO
Posted by SkyPilot]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:15:33 -0500 Arkansas Times
Best to seek that golden mean.
Posted by the outlier]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:19:19 -0500 Arkansas Times http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/38…

There's one quote from it which I think has local importance to us:

"it became clear that his seeming erudition and extreme logorrhea was a cover for a particularly nasty form of European white nationalism"

Does "extreme logorrhea" sound like anyone we know?
Posted by John A Arkansawyer]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 07:34:27 -0500 Arkansas Times http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archi…

Look closely at that patch on his arm. The word most visible there is "Norway", but if you look closely, you'll also make out the words "LIBERAL HUNTING PERMIT".
Posted by John A Arkansawyer]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 07:22:27 -0500 Arkansas Times
"As examples, [Hoffer's] book often refers to Communism, Fascism, National Socialism, Christianity, Protestantism and Islam. Hoffer believes that mass movements are interchangeable, that adherents will often flip from one movement to another, and that the motivations for mass movements are interchangeable; that religious, nationalist and social movements, whether radical or reactionary, tend to attract the same type of followers, behave in the same way and use the same tactics, even when their stated goals or values different."

In other words, they're all the same.

Though I've no idea, other than apologetics, why you say Anders Breiviks "religion" wasn't his "primary driver" when his Christianity is important enough to him to bring it up in the first place. Why even mention it, otherwise, if it weren't important?

Of COURSE it is. It ALWAYS is.

Is that uncomfortable for you?

It's not for Eric Hoffer.

It's not for Anders Breiviks.

About that elephant . . . .




Posted by Norma Bates]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 07:18:42 -0500 Arkansas Times Telling the truth about religions’ inherent justifications as “God’s Word” for acts like Breivik’s – or Hitler’s or Stalin’s or Mao’s or Mussolini’s, et al. – is dubbed hateful, disdainful, or just plain impolite, to shoot-the-messengerists.

The popular misperception that Stalin’s and Mao’s Communism is atheist and therefore non-religious provides a handy shield against facts like the quotation I cited in an above post: that Communism is in fact a religion with “no other gods before ME (Stalin, Mao).” “Atheist” Communism and Fascism are identical in all respects to the other religions – including iconic ubiquitous worship of the Godhead figure’s image and likeness; anti-intellectualism and anti-science (if it contradicts dogma); Communist armies substituted for Christian soldiers and Islamist terrorists; global conquest through violence; forced obedience; and punishment or death for non-believers. All for the proclaimed “good” of the people and the world.

MY RESPONSE: It seems to me that you have been caught by your own words and there is no way out. However, I can think of only one exception. It should be pointed out that on March 4, 1987, U.S. District Judge W. Brevard Hand, in Smith v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County, Ala., ruled that secular humanism is a religion. The 172-page ruling defines religion and concludes, after reviewing the relevant aspects of humanism, that “For purposes of the First Amendment, secular humanism is a religious belief system, entitled to the protections of, and subject to the prohibitions of, the religious clauses.”

But there is a problem even with that. Communism and Secular Humanism both believe in a closed system. There is no personal God in a closed system. That is why your argument looks so silly and everybody knows it. Why not suck it up and admit you are wrong on this on and move on.


Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 07:13:52 -0500 Arkansas Times
In criticizing fanaticism, one is walking a fine line. One needs to be careful not to become what one hates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Beli…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Hoffer
Posted by the outlier]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 07:04:35 -0500 Arkansas Times Posted by John A Arkansawyer]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 06:29:06 -0500 Arkansas Times
Telling the truth about religions’ inherent justifications as “God’s Word” for acts like Breivik’s – or Hitler’s or Stalin’s or Mao’s or Mussolini’s, et al. – is dubbed hateful, disdainful, or just plain impolite, to shoot-the-messengerists.

The popular misperception that Stalin’s and Mao’s Communism is atheist and therefore non-religious provides a handy shield against facts like the quotation I cited in an above post: that Communism is in fact a religion with “no other gods before ME (Stalin, Mao).” “Atheist” Communism and Fascism are identical in all respects to the other religions – including iconic ubiquitous worship of the Godhead figure’s image and likeness; anti-intellectualism and anti-science (if it contradicts dogma); Communist armies substituted for Christian soldiers and Islamist terrorists; global conquest through violence; forced obedience; and punishment or death for non-believers. All for the proclaimed “good” of the people and the world.

Understandably, it’s convenient to pretend that Communism is not a religion because it substitutes actual human figures like Stalin and Mao, and books like Marx’s and Mao’s, for mythological ones like Jesus and the Bible. Calling Communism “atheist” hopefully repels enough people from looking too closely at the all-too-ugly and indistinguishable factual and historic similarities between Religions and Communism. They are exactly alike.

Again hopefully, deriding Communism as “atheist” equates the two and distracts people from looking too closely at historic and ever-present religious justification for equal horrors and atrocities around the world.

True: “Most” individuals today don’t act-out the worst tenets of their religious dogmas. But those teachings, mistranslated or not, are always there, in writing, ready and waiting for anybody who cares to use them; in the Torah, The Bible, the Koran. “Stone disobedient children to death.” Men (but not women) who make love together are “abominations worthy unto death.” Etc.

“Godless” Communism is anything but, in dogma and practice. It just doesn’t conform to the “accepted” Judeo-Christian-Islamic “Gods.” And it’s newer.

So is Scientology. Which brings one to share with one’s Razorbabies Garry Wills’ terrific review of two new books: “INSIDE SCIENTOLOGY, The Story of America’s Most Secretive Religion,” by Janet Reitman . . . and “RENDER UNTO ROME,” The Secret Life of Money in the Catholic Church,” by Jason Berry.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/books/re…

What’s the difference between The Church and Scientology?

Two things.

1) The Catholic Church has 2,000 years on Scientology.

2) The myth of Christ – in all details, from the Virgin Birth, the December 25th date, the crucifixion (or “crossification”) that occurs annually with the Sun in the constellation of the Southern Cross, the Twelve Disciples (twelve zodiacal signs), the “Eye of the World that All Can See” (the Sun), the “Light Bearer,” the “Bringer of Life,” even the Fish (the Piscean Age, the precession of the equinoxes) . . . all of Christianity is derived from richly accurate and detailed 6,000 year old Egyptian astronomical observations, mythologized, today dismissed as “Sun worship” in hopes the true origins of Judaism and Christianity remain forever unknown. (Including detailed ephemerides enabling ancient priests to predict eclipses, thus scaring the hell out of the populace with their "powers" to darken the sun and moon.)

Except too many millions, growing every day, know, now. That ancient coded “esoteric” astronomical knowledge, along with added stories, is contained in, among other writings, the Book of the Sun; the Sun’s Book; the “Helios Biblos”; the Holy Bible.

(Oh, for heaven’s sake, read around. Or watch “The Naked Truth” if you want a shortcut. Much more is available if you’re curious enough to search and not locked in to reflexively defending what you’ve never explored.)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8…

The myth of Xenu at the heart of Scientology, by contrast, emerged from nothing more than the fevered mind of certified paranoid-schizophrenic L. Ron Hubbard.

(Oh, Google all this, for heaven’s sake, if you don’t already know. Yes, Hubbard was a paranoid schizophrenic. See his Naval records, among others. Nuttier than a fruitcake.)

For anybody with the least interest in these things, Garry Wills review of these two new releases is itself hugely informative about these two religious organizations and how they get their money. And thus, their tactics and influence over people and politics.


Posted by Norma Bates]]> Mon, 25 Jul 2011 04:20:48 -0500 Arkansas Times
From whom on this blog, under the guise of enlightened and reasoned discourse, do we hear the most contempt and disdain for others and their thinking processes and belief(s) when they don't agree with hers/his/its?

And on another front, it takes a lot more faith to be an atheist, or to believe in the origin of the universe by chance, than it does to be a Christian, or member of any other faith group.

IMHO
Posted by SkyPilot]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 19:35:23 -0500 Arkansas Times
The fact of the matter is much different. When you get the kind of free enterprise that the Tea Party wants, then you get more personal freedom than ever before. When you get the socialist liberal Democrats in charge then you get a government take over of more of our freedoms. Mark it down, because it is true. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3N2sNnGwa4 is a great video by Milton Friedman that shows this better than any other video I have ever seen.

Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 16:03:25 -0500 Arkansas Times Posted by Sound Policy]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:45:14 -0500 Arkansas Times
If it walks like a duck . . . .
____________________________

Francis Schaeffer in the episode "The Revolutionary Age" in his film series "How should we then live?" which is available on youtube, made the point that Communism is atheistic and has NEVER EXISTED WITHOUT BRINGING REPRESSION. A few months ago a young person said to me, "I think that Marx was misunderstood and that true communism has not been really tried yet." I responded that there are a hand full of Communist countries today and they all have several similar conditions: NO FREEDOM OF PRESS, NO POLITICAL FREEDOM, NO FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND NO ECONOMIC FREEDOM. I noted that Schaeffer has rightly said that Communism is basically based on materialism and a result it must fail. It does not have a Reformation base.

I have corresponded on several occasions with the humanist Paul Kurtz. I must say that he is one of the finest gentlemen on the face of the earth. I have dinner with several other secular humanist who have signed the Humanist Manifesto II and had very civil discussions with them. None of them ever suggested that the Communist were not atheistic. They just simply thought that these particular men murdered to suit their own purposes but were not following logic which would have led them to treat others with respect. Also I am sure you know what Karl Marx said about religion.

Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:17:33 -0500 Arkansas Times
We have to be careful and reasoned in our dialectic. When anyone lets hatred become their master, we all lose and can expect more of these attacks and atrocious events in the future. (IMO contempt and disdain for others and their thinking processes and belief is just a mild form of hatred). Perhaps, we are doomed to eternally repeat these outbreaks of deadly insanity. Just like the rats in the old psychology and sociology experiment, forced to live in increasing overcrowding and limited resources maybe we are genetically hardwired to snap in murderous rage. I hope and pray not.

As a thinking human being, I believe we can substitute dialectics for our current quick exchange of barbs and diatribes and work out compromises to address our problems. I believe that our more successful leaders in the past decades led and governed in that manner. I do not believe it is impossible to make that method a habit with everyone.

I also will point out that the current confrontational politics and loud diatribes feeding unthinking ideologically driven mass groups has not always been prevalent. Ask yourself when did this change occur, when was the 'fairness doctrine' and 'equal time' shredded and who or what groups fomented the changes and why?

I'm a Christian (RSOF, if that makes a difference), an old hopeful member of the hippy generation who marched against Vietnam, the invasion of Cambodia, for civil rights and environmental responsibility, a Vietnam veteran (ironic, huh), a recovering alcoholic and many, many other tags and experiences.

I have changed, I continue to change and when I stop, I will be dead. But in all those times and changes, I hold fast to hope and knowledge that people can and will change. Get them to stop screaming platitudes and catchy phrases and start thinking and they can and do change. IMO you do that with a dialectic not exchanges of barbs and diatribe. The latter hardens positions and attitudes, the former allows more for change. I too, find myself easily seduced by the quick barb and cut and when I do I am ensuring my target will probably not change.

I believe in the concepts behind Pete Seeger's old folksong from the late fifties and early sixties when large changes were grudgingly and reluctantly made.

One man's hands can't tear a prison down
Two men's hands can't tear a prison down
But if two and two and fifty make a million
We'll see that day come round
We'll see that day come round.

One man's eyes can't see the way ahead
Two men's hands can't see the way ahead
But if two and two and fifty make a million
We'll see that day come round
We'll see that day come round.

One man's voice can't shout to make them hear
Two men's hands can't shout to make them hear
But if two and two and fifty make a million
We'll see that day come round
We'll see that day come round.

I believe that day will come round and I may not be here to see it, but it won't come round by indulging in hatred or contempt for those you're attempting to change. If you don't, you're entitled to your belief, actions and opinions, everyone is. I just wanted you two to have a better understanding of my opinion and where it comes from than I saw in reading your posts.

I hope we all succeed and see these types of events and attacks become dim and unreal memories of the far distant past.
Posted by dottholliday]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 11:31:33 -0500 Arkansas Times Posted by I_AM_THE_NRA]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:08:33 -0500 Arkansas Times
CHRISTIANS ARE SAVED BY FAITH ALONE. WE ARE ALL SINNERS. HIS FAITH IS WHAT WILL EARN HIM SALVATION.

YOU SHOULD FEEL SORRY FOR THE ATHEIST CHILDREN HE KILLED, WHO ARE IN HELL RIGHT NOW.
Posted by I_AM_THE_NRA]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:06:52 -0500 Arkansas Times Posted by John A Arkansawyer]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:57:58 -0500 Arkansas Times Posted by November]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:25:39 -0500 Arkansas Times
And I understood that point. But I don't think you're understanding mine.

We're not talking about just ANY belief or religion here.

We're talking about Islam and Christianity. And the fact that, when the news of these shootings broke, right-wing, gun-toting, anti-Islamist and anti-immigrant Christians in our own nation began beating their war drums against Muslims, claiming that Muslims were responsible for the attacks.

As it turns out, these attacks were perpetrated by a right-wing, gun-toting, anti-Islamist and anti-immigrant Christian. In other words, by a man who looks and acts a whole lot like many of US in our "Christian" nation.

And so as a Christian living in that "Christian" nation, I'm not primarily concerned with the well-known propensity for violence in almost all belief systems and religions in the world. I'm concerned with the propensity for violence right in my own back yard, where I can do something about it.

And that calls for commitment, for taking sides, for naming names, and telling the truth. Not for fence-sitting, vapid, liberal analysis that tries to avoid taking sides, naming names, and telling the truth by pretending these situations are everywhere, that everyone is equally guilty, etc.

I think I had my fill of that vapid liberal analysis, to be honest, growing up during the Civil Rights movement here in Arkansas, and hearing it over and over in the "best" white churches--the ones that didn't overtly promote racial discrimination.

And then down the road, I have gotten (and keep getting) another dose of the vapid liberal analysis from those same churches--you know the ones: they have open doors, open minds, and open hearts--who have transferred the same fence-sitting, never-take-sides attitude to the movement for gay and lesbian rights. And so they're proving to be the taillights for an important social justice movement now, just as they were the taillights and not the headlights during the Civil Rights movement.

Issues of human rights demand that we take sides. Here and now. Right in our own societies. Not in some imaginary society someplace else.

And though taking sides and telling the truth often makes Christians uncomfortable, it's the price we have to pay if we expect to be taken seriously and to have any credibility as we talk on and on about justice and peace and love and all those other good things.
Posted by William D. Lindsey]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 08:14:42 -0500 Arkansas Times Posted by the outlier]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 07:12:17 -0500 Arkansas Times Posted by Cassia]]> Sun, 24 Jul 2011 06:57:53 -0500 Arkansas Times