I'll buy the equivalence when Salman Rushdie can walk the world as
freely as Christopher Hitchens, and when Christian hordes take to the
streets, demanding the beheading of the next guy who submerges a
crucifix in a jar of piss in the name of art, let alone draw an
editorial cartoon of him.
-- Walt
On 10/25/2010 1:35 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: paul stenquist
On Oct 24, 2010, at 8:13 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: DagT
As an agnostic he forgot me, but I think he hates me too .-)
That kind of madmen are always there. At least they don?t
have any law on their side anymore. I?m just hope people are
not hating religious people in general because of people like
him.
I don't hate people of religion. I just hold them responsible for
not curbing the extremist excesses of their coreligionists.
If all muslims are responsible for al qaeda, then all christians
are responsible for Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, James Kopp,
Scott Roeder, Paul Jennings Hill ... and every pederast priest
that ever molested an alter boy.
That's a stretch. al qaeda acts in the name of allah and their
version of muslim law. McVeigh, for example, had no close connection
to christianity and was just a U.S. government hater. Your analogy is
faulty. Paul
While religion may not have been McVeigh's primary motivation, it WAS
part of his rationale. He chose the date specifically to coincide with
the anniversary of the Branch Davidian's Waco siege.
But leave McVeigh out of it ...
You still miss the point.
It is JUST AS REASONABLE to hold all christians responsible for the
depredations of their corelitionists as it is to hold all Muslims
responsible for 9/11.
If all muslims are evil, so are all christians ... and so is any other
religion that claims to be the only one true way.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.