A Fine Example of Theocracy Indeed

liah

I've been loosely following the goings-on of the Iran matter lately and last night this video of a young woman getting shot in the chest (most definitely NSFW or children; it is very violent, very disturbing, very real and very bloody) has cropped up.

It's hard to wrap my head around. What a sick, sick world we live in. It is a fine example of a theocracy when a man who considers himself some sort of vigilante can go around shooting innocent people for disagreeing with their government who is apparently appointed by a god, thus making it somehow justified.

Mental situation altogether. What the hell is in the water over there?

Hivemind187

I wish I could say that I believed that if more theists saw what their archaic beliefs and practices lead to, when concentrated in a single instant, when the perceived right to take life in the name of a chosen phantom over rides common sense and human compassion - that they would stop and re-evaluate their lives.

I wish it would happen that way. Instead, for most, it changes nothing. For a minority, it reinforces their zealotry and blood lust for all those who dare to disagree with their point of view.

Its scenes like this that make me lose a little faith in humanity. I'm off to search "moon landing".

JimiTime

Hivemind187 wrote: »

I wish I could say that I believed that if more theists saw what their archaic beliefs and practices lead to, when concentrated in a single instant, when the perceived right to take life in the name of a chosen phantom over rides common sense and human compassion - that they would stop and re-evaluate their lives.

I wish it would happen that way. Instead, for most, it changes nothing. For a minority, it reinforces their zealotry and blood lust for all those who dare to disagree with their point of view.

Its scenes like this that make me lose a little faith in humanity. I'm off to search "moon landing".

I find it quite unfortunate, that there are folk that use extremes to confirm their own pre-conceptions and prejudices.

Hivemind187

JimiTime wrote: »

I find it quite unfortunate, that there are folk that use extremes to confirm their own pre-conceptions and prejudices.

Thats very telling. No interest in the evidence of the destruction and horror that religion brings, no spympathy expressed, not even the basic selfish desire to distance yourself from the carry on in Tehran.

Only that someone may be remarking negatively on out-moded, out of date and ludicrous beliefs in killer-sky-fairies.

Yes, I am prejudiced towards religious zealots and irrational nutters of all forms. I am prejudiced but not without good reason. Something I sincerely doubt the religious cadre can bring to the table.

People are dying all over the world because of religious beliefs mixed up with politics into a violent and dangerous cocktail. You can claim that it is all the work of extremists but it is the so-called religious moderates who provide the solid base from which this insanity can grow. Without support from the middle ground, those who lack the spines to be seen and heard and to act but who provide the foundation of support in cash, turning a blind eye, quietly condoning etc - without them these zealots are merely disorganised lunatics.

JimiTime

^And quite a few thank you's. As i said, very unfortunate.

liah

JimiTime wrote: »

^And 2 thank you's. As i said, very unfortunate.

:rolleyes:

Whoosh.

JimiTime

liah wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Whoosh.

Indeed.

Dades

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Thats very telling. No interest in the evidence of the destruction and horror that religion brings, no spympathy expressed, not even the basic selfish desire to distance yourself from the carry on in Tehran.

Is there some form of stock answer required or something?

liah

I don't think he's looking for a stock answer at all; the opposite, in fact. What he wrote was well said and JimiTime's response was dismissive and a rather typical religious stock answer rather than actually taking note of what he said and expanding or developing on it. JimiTime's response to Hivemind's 2nd post is even more indicative of this-- instead of making an effort to disprove any claims or expand he just copped out with the "lol ur generalizing" style comment even though Hivemind addressed that in his post with this:

You can claim that it is all the work of extremists but it is the so-called religious moderates who provide the solid base from which this insanity can grow. Without support from the middle ground, those who lack the spines to be seen and heard and to act but who provide the foundation of support in cash, turning a blind eye, quietly condoning etc - without them these zealots are merely disorganised lunatics.

To which my reply of "whoosh" to JimiTime's other dismissal and bitterness towards thanks (???) implied that part must've gone over his head if he's still continuing with the same tired argument that the religious always use when someone calls religion out for being destructive.

JimiTime

I thought of all people, an atheist like yourself should know, that sometimes to argue with certain rationale is giving it more creedance than it warrants. A simple expression of disagreement is all Hiveminds view, and judging by your thanks, yours also, warrants. One can only hope that some will question your 'reasoning'.

liah

Lol alright. Whatever you say.

Zillah

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Yes, I am prejudiced towards religious zealots and irrational nutters of all forms. I am prejudiced but not without good reason.

Well let's be clear here. To be prejudiced is to have made a pre-judgment; a conclusion without all the facts. If I met a person of a certain ethnicity and pre-judged them based on that ethnicity, then that is a prejudice. It is not the same thing to condemn religion and it's active adherents.

I have an existing opinion of rapists, but I would not term that a prejudice.

JimiTime

Zillah wrote: »

If I met a person of a certain ethnicity and pre-judged them based on that ethnicity, then that is a prejudice. It is not the same thing to condemn religion and it's active adherents.

It absolutely is. Religion is such a huge term, to meet a person of 'religion' and pre-judge them is of course prejudice. It is also liable to make or keep you ignorant. Funnily enough, by seeking views of atheists here showed me how diverse atheists views on atheism were. So even with something as specific as atheism, I can't in good concience pre-judge what a particular atheists stance on atheism is. 'Religion' is so huge a word, that to lump people of 'religion' in one big pigeon hole is quite extremely prejudice.

Zillah

JimiTime wrote: »

It absolutely is. Religion is such a huge term, to meet a person of 'religion' and pre-judge them is of course prejudice.

Sorry, I meant to imply that we can judge people according to their specific religious beliefs, not necessarily the simple fact that they are religious.

So even with something as specific as atheism, I can't in good concience pre-judge what a particular atheists stance on atheism is.

Well of course. As an atheist the only thing I necessarily share with other atheists is a lack of belief in God. Not so with such immensely involved belief systems such as Christianity or Islam.

JimiTime

Zillah wrote: »

Sorry, I meant to imply that we can judge people according to their specific religious beliefs, not necessarily the simple fact that they are religious.

Phew. The thing is though, even each religion have so many diverse denominations, and then those who aren't associated with denomination can have different beliefs again. I suppose rather than argue what is and what isn't prejudice, what I would say, is that it is unwise to pre-judge people on the basis of religion. Though we all probably do it to different extents.

Well of course. As an atheist the only thing I necessarily share with other atheists is a lack of belief in God. Not so with such immensely involved belief systems such as Christianity or Islam.

Thats somewhat the point. Some atheists disagree on what atheism entails. Someone who says, 'I'm an atheist' means certain things to one person, and another thing to another person. You have the view, 'its simply a lack of belief in God'. Some view their atheism as rabid anti-theism. They believe their atheism and anti-theism are one in the same. You may say, 'yeah, but they're wrong', but again, that is the point. Its not about who's right and wrong, its about forming pre-conceptions about people based on the title they or you give them.

The Mad Hatter

I wouldn't be so quick to ascribe the Iranian violence to religion when a simple power grab seems to explain it just as well.

liah

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

I wouldn't be so quick to ascribe the Iranian violence to religion when a simple power grab seems to explain it just as well.

I agree with that but it gives them the cop out excuse of the acts being "righteous" and for a "god," and in an incredibly theocratic country this transcends all, since it surpasses the government and goes straight to the big guy for justification.

The Mad Hatter

liah wrote: »

I agree with that but it gives them the cop out excuse of the acts being "righteous" and for a "god," and in an incredibly theocratic country this transcends all, since it surpasses the government and goes straight to the big guy for justification.

While that will almost certainly happen, I think if religion were removed from this picture completely the violence would be just as bad.

Hivemind187

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

While that will almost certainly happen, I think if religion were removed from this picture completely the violence would be just as bad.

Violence during any power grab is an almost foregone conclusion (with the exception of Thai land who just waited from the top-dog to go on holiday before seizing power). However, I dont think it would manifest as quickly and with quite as much zeal as it does when religion is involved.

Religion provides more than just a justification for violence, in many cases it provides a directive to comit violence - particularly in Islam (among the big three anyway). A belief in a higher power, and the reinforcement of that belief by those with another agenda, absolves one from the morality of the things they do. "I do this in the name of Allah" or "I invaded Iraq because it was Gods will".

The Mad Hatter

Yes, I understand that - what I'm saying is that I've seen nothing during this particular power grab to suggest that the violence is religiously inspired.

Surely religion digs itself a big enough hole for itself without us trying to widen it.

Hivemind187

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Yes, I understand that - what I'm saying is that I've seen nothing during this particular power grab to suggest that the violence is religiously inspired.

Other than Had-Me-Dinner-Dad being declared president by appointment of god and with the approval of the Mullah clerics?

As I saidm inextricably linked. I'm certainly not say it is the sole cause, politics is more than capable of causing enough hassle on its own, but this is a particular brand of violence and partisanism. Spend five minutes reading the various different comments on the different websites hosting the footage, nearly every one of them (with the usual YouTube exceptions of idiots and trolls) invokes God in support of one side or against another.

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Surely religion digs itself a big enough hole for itself without us trying to widen it.

It does. Why shouldnt we draw attention to things like this though? Call me an "aggressive secularist" or a "millitant atheist" if you like, I'm happy to jam the crowbar into the little cracks of the religious caste and keep wiggling it until the chunks come away.

CDfm

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

I wouldn't be so quick to ascribe the Iranian violence to religion when a simple power grab seems to explain it just as well.

Islam has always been associated with policitical power.

Zillah

JimiTime wrote: »

Phew. The thing is though, even each religion have so many diverse denominations, and then those who aren't associated with denomination can have different beliefs again. I suppose rather than argue what is and what isn't prejudice, what I would say, is that it is unwise to pre-judge people on the basis of religion. Though we all probably do it to different extents.

Forming an iron clad, unchangeable opinion of a person based on their religion; quite a foolish thing to do, of course. But allowing it to inform your expectations; useful and usually quite accurate. If someone identifies themselves as a Christian then they've already declared certain things about the way they think and the values they hold.

Thats somewhat the point. Some atheists disagree on what atheism entails. Someone who says, 'I'm an atheist' means certain things to one person, and another thing to another person. You have the view, 'its simply a lack of belief in God'. Some view their atheism as rabid anti-theism. They believe their atheism and anti-theism are one in the same. You may say, 'yeah, but they're wrong', but again, that is the point. Its not about who's right and wrong, its about forming pre-conceptions about people based on the title they or you give them.

Well, now I'm going to be very predictable and say that yes, those people are wrong. The word 'atheist', in the English language, is one who does not believe in God. Anyone who views their atheism as rabid anti-theism is an idiot who needs to read a dictionary. I know this isn't the point, but I'm setting the stage here:

I fully accept your point about pre-conceptions, but your point is less about whether you and I are right or wrong in how we go about things, your point is more that we need to account for the stupidity of other people before we reach a conclusion. I could just as easily say to you "Just because you've been told someone is a murderer/terrorist/president/philanthropist doesn't mean you should form an opinion based on that as the person telling you this might be an idiot who needs to read a dictionary".

Hivemind187 wrote:

Call me an "aggressive secularist" or a "millitant atheist" if you like

LOOK OUT HE'S WRITING A BOOK, GET DOWN!

Flamed Diving

JimiTime wrote: »

Indeed.

Let us know when you are ready to pull the fingers out.

CDfm

Zillah wrote: »

If someone identifies themselves as a Christian then they've already declared certain things about the way they think and the values they hold.

Like peace and non-violence

Flamed Diving

CDfm wrote: »

Like peace and non-violence

As long as you're not gay.

CDfm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

As long as you're not gay.

Let us know when you are ready to pull the fingers out.

stevejazzx

Zillah wrote: »

LOOK OUT HE'S WRITING A BOOK, GET DOWN!

lol


On topic - pretty shocking vid, had to knock it off sing la la la, grab a beer from fridge and continue where I left off with 'The Hills', Laurens boyfriend is cheating on her agian! It's like awful.

Seriously though have to agree with Hivemind - religion exaccerbates this in that it acts as a legitamizer (thanks robin!) a world where murder can helped on or carried out wihtout question in stark delusion of the 'greater good'...terrifting stuff.

Zillah

So has I'm-A-Dinner-Jacket been overthrown yet?

Stercus Accidit

Shocking video, in my years of internetting I haven't watched a beheading, or a shooting incident or any of the extreme real world violence you can watch on it.

I watched this video, and I feel sick, not the blood, not even the woman dying in front of me, the blood was shocking, the woman dying was upsetting, but the context of this incident, is what is making me sick.

I don't feel comfortable at all sitting in my home several countries away from the events in Iran, this violence and corruption feels so close to home its unreal.

I'm so grateful for the internet, it is really wonderful that this video on its own or combined with the media cover for context, has had such an impact on me. If the internet continues to provide a medium to get this real material across and further the global condemnation of the suppression and violence towards these people I'm delighted.

I'm a world away from these troubles and they have never felt closer to home, and I feel as though I have watched someone die for the first time, and I'm overwhelmed. Its hard to get that to sink in a little.

I don't know, I don't even know what I'm trying to say in this post.

CDfm

stevejazzx wrote: »

religion exaccerbates this in that it acts as a legitamizer (thanks robin!) a world where murder can helped on or carried out wihtout question in stark delusion of the 'greater good'...terrifting stuff.

Political ideology acts as a legitimizer too,tribalism acts as a legitimizer, and in some countries the military act as a legitimizer. You could also say individual ambition or egomania

Isolating religion is a bit disengenius.