Evil would find a way no matter if there was religion or not.
Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
That's absolute nonsense. His actions were very specifically targeted.
Yeah, the something else could have been the guy really into Magic The Gathering. It took a certain brand of religion to get him where he ended up.
How’s it absolute nonsense, the guy obviously was hardwired for evil to do what he did if it wasn’t that attack he’d have done something else.
Then maybe he would have beaten his wife, or jumped off a building, or joined the army to kill people. But because of his beliefs in white supremacy, Christian heritage and fascism, he chose terrorism.
What do you mean by "hardwired for evil"?
I don’t know what this means.
So, would you agree that religion is the grease on the rails or religion had no impact in the Brevik instance?
And talking about "hardwired for evil" is a very problematic approach, because it implies there's nothing we could have done, and nothing we should do. This is particularly dangerous today, when far-right radicalization is happening at an incredible rate online.
So you think a guy capable of killing 76 people wouldn’t do any other heinous crime given the chance.
It means with the right nurturing, someone who is "not right" can be directed towards something productive or positive. He could have had interest that had nothing to do with religion or hate. Instead, he was guided in a different direction.
He did have the chance, and he didn't do it until he was radicalized. And when he did, it was targeted specifically at left-wingers and perceived Muslims.
so by this theory there is no such thing as religious motivated terrorism, right?
or nationalist terrorism.
or any terrorism.
I believe he was an evildoer that didn’t live his life right and committed a terrible crime.
Why do you think he became that way?
He lived his life through his core beliefs, christianity being one of them. Sure, it’s a perverted, flawed version of the religion, but it is religion nonetheless.
I get that you don’t want to bad mouth your religion, but your contortions must be hell on your back.
I do not know his specific background is.
It's been clearly stated in this thread multiple times.
Why do you say he didn't live his life right? Was it maybe, just maybe, he was too deep into Christian extremism? I don't get how you are just brushing that aside as a major contributing factor and without it, the hate may not have been there.
Better than hot coals on my head.
No it hasn’t.
If he was living his life like a good living Christian he wouldn’t go out and murder 76 people. Do we not at least agree on that?
No we can't. There is no definition of good Christian and the fact that you can't see that there are Christian organizations that center around hate and bigotry is a major problem. You are a walking example of the No True Scotsman fallacy in this thread right now.
For him he lived his life as an ideal Christian.
I have no idea what this means.
Well if that’s what you believe then I am sorry you feel that way and any conversation will lead down a very different path than what I believe.
You can't brainwash someone without installing fear into them. The foundation of every single religion.
It's possibly a reference to burning in hell for criticising his own religion. Wild
So, nothing bad can be done in the name of religion?
For him maybe but that’s actually the complete opposite of an ideal Christian.
Again. Not for him.
I thought it was in reference to a spa mishap given that Breivek is Nordic.
It’s what will happen if you do evil, you will have to live with burning coal on your head, conscious/bitterness.
What is evil? Not abiding by the 10 commandments, working on a Sunday, wearing clothes that have mixed fabrics? I prefer a logical, secular approach to morality, not the bible.
I guarantee you that your idea of an ideal Christian is very different from that of a Christian in 50 CE, or 500 CE, or 1500 CE. And there are clearly many views of what makes a good Christian even today.
The meek shall inherit the earth.If he has no response for this then I don't think we were in a sincere discussion.
If you don’t know the difference between right and wrong at your age I cannot help you now.
Deery, I do want to say thank you for sticking with this. You are 1 against a handful of people that don't agree with you but I appreciate the back and forth.
Hey, I am just referring to the book that you feel dictates morality.
No actual arguments, though, so I wouldn't call it a back and forth. Quoting platitudes isn't hard.