'Why we hate you': ISIS reveal 6 reasons why they despise Westerners

[PCXV]

They believed they should rid the world of religion.

Or does that ideology give a pass to mass murder?

Does genocide no longer become genocide because it is anti-religion rather than pro?

If you had answered my last two questions you would have your answer.

What atheist or communist doctrines told Stalin to kill?

Thats the difference, there is no reference to God in justification of his actions, no organization behind them tacitly condoning their actions, and no doctrine (or interpretation) that justifies killing in the name of God.

 

[PCXV]

They way they view it does not mean it says to do it.

There is no doctrine calling for Christians to kill.

What is an atheist/Communist doctrine ?

Your two questions answered with the information in them supplied.

There are many examples of when the text of the Bible or the Koran call for killing in the name of God. In this thread and outside of it you can easily find them. It is arguable that those texts are being twisted, but the point remains that the text is a jumping off point, it is the foundation of justification. Religious killers have the doctrine, a vengeful god, and the organization (followers) behind them.

You say Stalin killed in the name of atheism/communism, show me where a doctrine of either says to kill.

The only justification Stalin has is his own desire, he cant shed the blame in the name of atheism or communism. Compare to religious killers that arent killing to advance themselves inherently, they claim to be doing the work of god and accept the consequences.

 

[PCXV]

Stalin killed for power, ISIS kills for power claiming religious reasons. You can show that simply by recognizing that All Muslim don`t murder and ISIS kills fellow Muslim too. Pretty easy stuff guy.

They view the muslims they kill as fake muslims, and they use the word of the Koran to justify that position. ISIS is using religion to justify their actions, Stalin isnt, you just said so.

Thats the point we are trying to make. Without that religious doctrine they would be fueled by only personal desire/political advancement.

 

[The-Budster]

If you had answered my last two questions you would have your answer.

What atheist or communist doctrines told Stalin to kill?

You seriously don't know this one?

There was a huge push by the USSR to kill all religion.

They made and preached their own doctrine.

You should look up their anti-religion campaign. It started around 1921.

Christian persecution alone lead to millions of deaths.

Stalin fulfilled his political parties doctrine.

 

[The-Budster]

They view the muslims they kill as fake muslims, and they use the word of the Koran to justify that position. ISIS is using religion to justify their actions, Stalin isnt, you just said so.

Thats the point we are trying to make. Without that religious doctrine they would be fueled by only personal desire/political advancement.

So whats your answer to all this then?

Kill them all like Stalin?

Your points nonsense thats what it is, sorry but its plain ridiculous and meaningless. Religion existed so theres no sense in a theoretical example. The communist ideology is based off the dismantlement of religion.

Karl marx
“Communism begins where atheism begins.”

By saying that you are basically saying that those religious people that were killed caused it themself and they are to blame.

Do you not think those people had the right to believe in their faith????
Or were they deserving of their death?

Stalin never had the right to kill those people!!!

It sounds like you are justifying his actions as necessity?

 

[oswizzle]

ISIS lol boogie man is gonna come get u

 

[OddBall1st]

They view the muslims they kill as fake muslims, and they use the word of the Koran to justify that position. ISIS is using religion to justify their actions, Stalin isnt, you just said so.

Thats the point we are trying to make. Without that religious doctrine they would be fueled by only personal desire/political advancement.

The religious doctrines are a shield to hide the real truth of the killing. Power.

All of the killing in the bible is done in the Old Testament. Nowhere in the New Testament does Jesus say to kill. He speaks of forgiveness when one kills by defending themselves but does not instruct to kill.

Also to add, you don`t need a doctrine to kill, just motivation or will.


There is no acceptable reason to kill in the name of a God to me. Others may not share that view.

Try looking at fake Muslim killing real Muslim calling them fake. There are more Muslim scattered over the Globe, only those that seek power are killing, Syria/Iraq, Nigeria/Boko Harem, Somalia, Yemen, all seek the power or they would not be overthrowing the Governments.

Killing in the name of a God is unacceptable, and nothing more than an excuse to justify.

 

[PCXV]

You seriously don't know this one?

There was a huge push by the USSR to kill all religion.

They made and preached their own doctrine.

You should look up their anti-religion campaign. It started around 1921.

Christian persecution alone lead to millions of deaths.

Stalin fulfilled his political parties doctrine.

I will fact check the history. But really you must see how you are proving my real point; the doctrine is also to blame, and religion is arguably worse as it threatens eternak damnation to disbelievers and non-conformists.

 

[The-Budster]

I will fact check the history. But really you must see how you are proving my real point; the doctrine is also to blame, and religion is arguably worse as it threatens eternak damnation to disbelievers and non-conformists.

Great. If you don't want to believe it then you are free to do so bud.

The religious doctrine is open to interpretations though. Some "think" killing is justified when the majority don't.

Stalin's doctrine for example was not open to interpretation it was the cold belief if destroying religious people and their faith.

I understand that many have stated their religion has led them to kill HOWEVER those murderers that used this faith to justify murder haven't read their Bible right.

 

[PCXV]

So whats your answer to all this then?

Kill them all like Stalin?

Your points nonsense thats what it is, sorry but its plain ridiculous and meaningless. Religion existed so theres no sense in a theoretical example. The communist ideology is based off the dismantlement of religion.

Karl marx
“Communism begins where atheism begins.”

By saying that you are basically saying that those religious people that were killed caused it themself and they are to blame.

Do you not think those people had the right to believe in their faith????
Or were they deserving of their death?

Stalin never had the right to kill those people!!!

It sounds like you are justifying his actions as necessity?

Answer? I think youve gone a bit off the tracks. Im simply identifying motive and criticizing doctrine. You are practically affirming my equating of religious doctrine with other radical doctrine.

Finding motive and criticizing doctrine us not pointless or meaningless, you getting emotional only serves to reveal your disillusionment.

You lost me when you made a straw man of my argument. Nowhere did i justify Stalin. I guess im thinking out loud and comparing and contrasting between religiously motivated killing and killing motivated by other ideologies. I do not mean to offend but only to get closer to the truth through discussion.

 

[OddBall1st]

Answer? I think youve gone a bit off the tracks. Im simply identifying motive and criticizing doctrine. You are practically affirming my equating of religious doctrine with other radical doctrine.

Finding motive and criticizing doctrine us not pointless or meaningless, you getting emotional only serves to reveal your disillusionment.

You lost me when you made a straw man of my argument. Nowhere did i justify Stalin. I guess im thinking out loud and comparing and contrasting between religiously motivated killing and killing motivated by other ideologies. I do not mean to offend but only to get closer to the truth through discussion.

Take the young Black lad that was committing a crime by being on drugs, wielding a knife at police that wanted to detain him. A policeman got out of his car and shot him dead . His excuse was that he was dangerous, had a knife and considered a threat, so he killed him. Sounds legit until you see that the cop emptied all his bullets on him to make sure he was dead before using non lethal forces they had with them.

It was murder, and the motive was hate. 50 years from now if you tell this story, you get the same results, murder, fueled by hate. His doctrine could not help him.

 

[PCXV]

The religious doctrines are a shield to hide the real truth of the killing. Power.

All of the killing in the bible is done in the Old Testament. Nowhere in the New Testament does Jesus say to kill. He speaks of forgiveness when one kills by defending themselves but does not instruct to kill.

Also to add, you don`t need a doctrine to kill, just motivation or will.


There is no acceptable reason to kill in the name of a God to me. Others may not share that view.

Try looking at fake Muslim killing real Muslim calling them fake. There are more Muslim scattered over the Globe, only those that seek power are killing, Syria/Iraq, Nigeria/Boko Harem, Somalia, Yemen, all seek the power or they would not be overthrowing the Governments.

Killing in the name of a God is unacceptable, and nothing more than an excuse to justify.

Lets assume what you say above is true. It still doesnt disprove my argument. If a religion or any other ideology explicitly states in its text that it is OK or commanded to kill, then when people kill in that religions name, the doctrine shares blame. If the doctrine is being edited or perversely interpreted to justify killing then that new doctrine is to blame and the original may not be. Differentiating between the two isnt something im arguing against. But in this thread the more specific point is the powerful ultimatum and tool of manipulation of religion that non-religous ideologies lack; eternal damnation.

 

[The-Budster]

Answer? I think youve gone a bit off the tracks. Im simply identifying motive and criticizing doctrine. You are practically affirming my equating of religious doctrine with other radical doctrine.

Finding motive and criticizing doctrine us not pointless or meaningless, you getting emotional only serves to reveal your disillusionment.

You lost me when you made a straw man of my argument. Nowhere did i justify Stalin. I guess im thinking out loud and comparing and contrasting between religiously motivated killing and killing motivated by other ideologies. I do not mean to offend but only to get closer to the truth through discussion.

The motive of Stalin killing those millions was his doctrine.

His doctrine believed he should destroy religion.

So basically he belived his idea was so superior that lives should be destroyed to enforce it on others.

Any religious murderer will try and justify his murder as he believes his ideas should also be enforced on others.

The whole reason Stalin came up was to show how Athiest ideology is far from innocent and when it comes to numbers had caused far much more death and destruction than any religion has done.

 

[OddBall1st]

Lets assume what you say above is true. It still doesnt disprove my argument. If a religion or any other ideology explicitly states in its text that it is OK or commanded to kill, then when people kill in that religions name, the doctrine shares blame. If the doctrine is being edited or perversely interpreted to justify killing then that new doctrine is to blame and the original may not be. Differentiating between the two isnt something im arguing against. But in this thread the more specific point is the powerful ultimatum and tool of manipulation of religion that non-religous ideologies lack; eternal damnation.

Yes some will no doubt misuse or interpret it wrong, that is the person`s doing, not the doctrine. You can`t blame the many for the actions of the few.

 

[PCXV]

Great. If you don't want to believe it then you are free to do so bud.

The religious doctrine is open to interpretations though. Some "think" killing is justified when the majority don't.

Stalin's doctrine for example was not open to interpretation it was the cold belief if destroying religious people and their faith.

I understand that many have stated their religion has led them to kill HOWEVER those murderers that used this faith to justify murder haven't read their Bible right.

i dont see the relevance my freedom to believe to this discussion.

If it can be in any way interpreted to justify murder/killing its still wrong though! If they are clearly twisting and editing the original doctrine then i agree that the original doctrine is not to blame. The question is do the original tenants or prevelant interpretation of communism or islam or Christianity command it or encourage it.

 

[PCXV]

Take the young Black lad that was committing a crime by being on drugs, wielding a knife at police that wanted to detain him. A policeman got out of his car and shot him dead . His excuse was that he was dangerous, had a knife and considered a threat, so he killed him. Sounds legit until you see that the cop emptied all his bullets on him to make sure he was dead before using non lethal forces they had with them.

It was murder, and the motive was hate. 50 years from now if you tell this story, you get the same results, murder, fueled by hate. His doctrine could not help him.

He acted in spite of his doctrine, very different than what ive been criticizing.

 

[UncleBuck]

You can`t blame the many for the actions of the few.

says the trump loving retard who wants to ban all muslims because 0.0001% of them have done some bad stuff.

but hey, at least you got a like from a holocaust denier. that's the kind of endorsement a jew hating loser like yourself can really be proud of, eh?

i honestly hope you choke on a pretzel and die. tonight.

i would second amendment you myself, it would be horrible.

 

[PCXV]

The motive of Stalin killing those millions was his doctrine.

His doctrine believed he should destroy religion.

So basically he belived his idea was so superior that lives should be destroyed to enforce it on others.

Any religious murderer will try and justify his murder as he believes his ideas should also be enforced on others.

The whole reason Stalin came up was to show how Athiest ideology is far from innocent and when it comes to numbers had caused far much more death and destruction than any religion has done.

Not atheism, but Stalin's agenda to spread atheism. The doctrine of atheism, which doesnt even make sense to exist, could not have been interpreted to justify Stalin. Acting on the behalf of atheism makes no sense, where as acting in the name of your god makes sense. Therefore atheism cannot share blame equal to religion. Also, to be transparent im not convinced either way whether the new testament or Koran truly call for killing in the name of the religioun, but the more i read the more i an convinced that they do or that they could moreorless easily be interpreted that way.

 

[PCXV]

Yes some will no doubt misuse or interpret it wrong, that is the person`s doing, not the doctrine. You can`t blame the many for the actions of the few.

What if the doctrine could be easily interpreted the other way but followers are negligent in amending it to reflect logical morality? I blame the doctrine more than the complicit followers, but the followers bear responisbility over their doctrine. If they amend their religion to reflect morality, then the doctrine is righted and the power of religion can be a positive. The power of religion isnt inherently immoral, people make it that way by injecting immoral threats and commands into the doctrine. There is no harm in beleiving in a god, unless the doctrine under which that god exists commands you to kill under the ultimatum of eternal damnation.

 

[The-Budster]

i dont see the relevance my freedom to believe to this discussion.

If it can be in any way interpreted to justify murder/killing its still wrong though! If they are clearly twisting and editing the original doctrine then i agree that the original doctrine is not to blame. The question is do the original tenants or prevelant interpretation of communism or islam or Christianity command it or encourage it.

I think its very relevant. You have the freedom to believe or not to believe. Those under Stalin, Mao and Paul Pot were forced to not believe.

Communism was not twisted at all to condone genocide of religious people some of the key players of the ideology openly supported it.

Christianity is a clear pacifist religion, Jesus was always against violence and discourged it many times.

Islam well I personally have seen stories that do encourage violence or at least that is my interpretation. The story of Umm Qirfa and the camels definitely does not concur with Jesus's personal teachings...