The War on Fundamentalism

I have found it most annoying to here so many in this country deride Islamic Fundamentalist (rightly so) but only putting emphasis on Islamic.

There are a few reasons for that, as your own examples show:

I care not whether those who would fly planes into buildings are Muslims or Christians, only that blind faith makes any act possible if one believes it is the will of God/Allah.

Yes, but consider the recent case of an airliner flight where the idiot fundamentalist Christian pilot asked the people on the plane during the flight if they are "saved" and started delivering a sermon, if I recall correctly.

No doubt some were annoyed... and rightly so... but how many of them were afraid at that point that he'll ram the plane into a skyscraper upon landing so that God could reward him in heaven for killing non-believers?

For a variety of reasons, both due to its docrtines and to other social reasons that are not strictly speaking religious, Islamic fundamentalism is a far, FAR greater danger to the world than any other sort of fundamentalism.
 
Skeptic said:
Yes, but consider the recent case of an airliner flight where the idiot fundamentalist Christian pilot asked the people on the plane during the flight if they are "saved" and started delivering a sermon, if I recall correctly.

No doubt some were annoyed... and rightly so... but how many of them were afraid at that point that he'll ram the plane into a skyscraper upon landing so that God could reward him in heaven for killing non-believers?
Click to expand...
Whatever became of that particular pilot? Reprimanded, fired, promoted, airline sued?
 
from varwoche:
I'm behind the title of this thread 100%. However, as destructive as I consider homegrown fundamentalists, they don't belong in the same sentence with Islamist jihadists in terms of threat to civilization.
Click to expand...
Just how much damage have they actually done in the last fifty years? What practical effect has Islamism had on the development of the non-Muslim world? The real threat to our civilisation is the effect we have on the environment that spawned the civilisation. That's been a common threat to civilisations, and has brought many down. The only military action that would threaten civilisation is a large-scale nuclear exchange. That is not going to come from the Islamists, even if they get one or two (the Pakistani arsenal is not in the hands of Islamists, and is never likely to be). Shia Islamism's grip on Iran is faltering, and will die out. It was the first modern Islamist state and thus has had the greatest opportunity to demonstrate its incompetence.

The homegrown fundies of the US - the down-homegrown fundies - do have many nucular weapons. And are keen on getting better ones. Putin's Russia, more pragmatic than fundie. China and India see the future as theirs and would therefore like to have one. And Jewish fundies are armed and in the cabinet. Just like the Southern Baptists.

We need a proper war on fundamentalism, and that means a proper war against Islam. Not because they're the most dangerous, but because they're the least. This is where we get the practice. Only then do we take on the Southern Baptists, who are, I understand, hair-pullers.
 
http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/908/908_aa.asp
God and the American Airlines pilot
In an exclusive interview with Advocate.com, Capt. Roger Findiesen explains how God told him to preach to his passengers about Christianity on a Friday morning flight from Los Angeles to New York on February 6.
Click to expand...

He was grounded shortly after his little outburst, but I don't see any update about his ultimate employment or flight crew status.

At least you know to listen for 'Capt. Findiesen' when you fly AA, and he was on the ground when he flipped out. I'd have asked the flight attendants to deploy the slides. It would've been a long, long flight if they were airborn when he pulled this stunt.

How about when Pat Robertson said the state department (and Washington DC) should be nuked?
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/10/09/robertson.state/
 
from a_unique_person:
The real war, as far as I can see, is not a war on terrorism. It is a war on fundamentalism and ignorance.
Click to expand...
(I'd like to try and raise a small cheer for India, where the people have just recently thrown out a fundie government, and are already moving to restore real history to their schools. Hindu History (and Hindu Science) got in there briefly, but hip, hip ...)

Ignorance of a religion is a common feature of fundamentalism. This is why so much of the Islamic establishment has been vociferously opposed to al-Qaeda style Islamism. In the UK, Islamism is mostly embraced by people whose parents were assimilationist. The same is true in France. Young, impressionable people with the usual generation conflicts. Southern Baptism is a pared-down religion, with no theology between Christian and The Book - but how many of them actually read The Book and think about it? They've been told what it means by radio and TV. And Charlton Heston, obviously.

What is clearly necessary in order to win the war on fundamentalism is education in critical thinking, in those years before the hormones kick in. People have to be ready for the cultists that will move in on them in those vulnerable teenage years. It should be treated like "Stranger Danger", but these people will be after your mind.
 
from a_unique_person:
Having worked as a software engineer for years, I like to fix a problem properly, not just apply a patch. Patching only works in the most trivial of problems. Otherwise, you are only making problems worse.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but if you're working on contract and you don't expect to go back ... Bodgitt and Scarper get called in. But don't call them now, they're booked up for months.
 
Hi, I'll be your your pilot for today, and have you considered that you might be meeting your maker sooner than you thought? Ponder that as I go back to the checklist.

"Worry-beads?"
"Check" ...
 
from skeptic:
For centuries, the west had occupied, controlled, and interfered with Japan, SE Asia, India, and China, yet there are no movements there (except perhps fringe groups) to kick out the evil westerners.
Click to expand...
"Kill the kwai-lo!". Always raises a laugh from the Chinese. The Chinese were never part of anybody's empire - nor were the Iranians, as it happens. Forced into accomodations, but never subjugated. And as to Indonesia, which has to count as part of SE Asia, oh yes there are. But then, they were subjugated. And mostly still are - a Javan Empire simply replaced a Dutch Empire.

The world is a complicated place. The "fringe groups" presumably don't include the Vietnamese, since that falls into the "commie agression" pigeon-hole in a simpler one.
 
the only real difference I see between islamic fundies and christian fundies is he body count. But I think that the xian fundies are far more dangerous because they are more insidious.

Look at the active distruction of our education. Science is a joke in k-12 thanks to a VERY large part of the continued efforts of fundies. If this continues the only choice we'll have is picking which fundie side you'll want to carry a weapon for because it will be jihad vs. crusades.

C
 
from Shane Costello:
Do "Christian" states actually exist, insofar as the moral, social and religious teaching of a Christian sect is incorporated into law?
Click to expand...
There may have been no backing in law, but Serbian behaviour of late is largely justified by their sect, and had a very solid backing from its priests. Another example of fundamentalism following generations that have done only lip-service to their religion, and the corruption of neglected priests. Damn that felt good: dissing priests and Serbs in one swoop.
 
Shane Costello said:


Do "Christian" states actually exist, insofar as the moral, social and religious teaching of a Christian sect is incorporated into law?
Click to expand...

Islam was one more step in the evolution of religious thought in that it created the notion of uniting church and state, which is, of course, dangerous. Thinking Muslims will work around this, and settle for a secular state, and leave thieves hands intact.

It is worth noting, of course, that the head of the Church of England is also the Monarch of England.
 
Originally posted by evildave:
If you listen to the Christian Supremacists, America was built from Christianity, is only about Christianity, and anything short of a Christian-run theocracy with all the non-Christians either disenfranchised, in prison, converted, or dead, is unacceptable and 'ruining the place'. Similar to talk that 'ni**ers' shouldn't drink at the same water fountain, or go to the same schools IMHO, but politically acceptable, even expected, in U.S. politics.
Click to expand...

Isn't America a secular nation, with a secular constitution, and haven't attempts to change this by Christian fundamentalists floundered at the supreme court? And if Christian supremacism is rampant, then why does Bush have a fight on his hands for re-election?

Originally posted by a_unique_person:
Islam was one more step in the evolution of religious thought in that it created the notion of uniting church and state, which is, of course, dangerous. Thinking Muslims will work around this, and settle for a secular state, and leave thieves hands intact.
Click to expand...

This depends on their being a critical mass of thinking Muslims, and on their ability to keep their heads long enough to do so.

It is worth noting, of course, that the head of the Church of England is also the Monarch of England.
Click to expand...

It's also worth noting that England is probably one of the least Christian and most agnostic countries on earth.

Originally posted by CapelDodger:
There may have been no backing in law, but Serbian behaviour of late is largely justified by their sect, and had a very solid backing from its priests. Another example of fundamentalism following generations that have done only lip-service to their religion, and the corruption of neglected priests. Damn that felt good: dissing priests and Serbs in one swoop.
Click to expand...

So is religion co-incidental to all of this, or might it be described as a root cause of it? A possible analogy with Northern Ireland springs to mind, where a "religious" conflict has been fought between Catholics who never go to mass, and Protestants who've never opened the book of common prayer in their lives.
 
Shane Costello said:


Isn't America a secular nation, with a secular constitution, and haven't attempts to change this by Christian fundamentalists floundered at the supreme court? And if Christian supremacism is rampant, then why does Bush have a fight on his hands for re-election?

Click to expand...

One of the advantages of democracy. Having a war started on fraudulent grounds is cause for concern. Even if Bush goes, however, the Islamic extremists will see no change.



This depends on their being a critical mass of thinking Muslims, and on their ability to keep their heads long enough to do so.
Click to expand...

Again, one hopes so. We would also hope the that rash acts that feed fundamentalist (and also reasonable) rage are not carried out.



It's also worth noting that England is probably one of the least Christian and most agnostic countries on earth.



So is religion co-incidental to all of this, or might it be described as a root cause of it? A possible analogy with Northern Ireland springs to mind, where a "religious" conflict has been fought between Catholics who never go to mass, and Protestants who've never opened the book of common prayer in their lives.
Click to expand...

I was not referring to a regional nationalist issue. There are plenty of these around the world, where the combatants are fighting with a scope that doesn't extend beyond the regional boundaries. The xian fundies are talking about armageddon, the Islamic fundies a global jihad.
 
from Shane Costello:
So is religion co-incidental to all of this, or might it be described as a root cause of it? A possible analogy with Northern Ireland springs to mind, where a "religious" conflict has been fought between Catholics who never go to mass, and Protestants who've never opened the book of common prayer in their lives.
Click to expand...
In many cases religious differences reflect ethnic and class differences, which are the real cause of conflict. Fundamentalism can presumably apply to ideologies - socialism, fascism, nationalism, etc. - as well as religions. The socialist zealots hawking Socialist Worker in town are definitely fundies.
 
CapelDodger said:
Just how much damage have they (Islamic Fundamentalists)actually done in the last fifty years? What practical effect has Islamism had on the development of the non-Muslim world?
Click to expand...
Forget 50 years; the practical effect since 9/11 is nothing short of profound, in the US at least.

And whatever one's views on the middle-east (mine are well documented here), the death and destruction wreaked by Islamic fundamentalists in Israel speaks for itself.

How about Pakistan's role in nuclear proliferation?

I mostly reject the "non-Muslim world" qualifier in any case. Where else are third-world Muslim countries/groups going to inflict misery other than their own neighborhoods?

The real threat to our civilisation is the effect we have on the environment that spawned the civilisation. That's been a common threat to civilisations, and has brought many down.
Click to expand...
I don't understand.

The only military action that would threaten civilisation is a large-scale nuclear exchange.
Click to expand...
Wrong for two reasons. 1) biological weapons, 2) another way to destroy civilization, other than killing, is to cause it to become uncivilized.
 
dsm said:
You forget the Dark Ages. Christian Fundamentalism just had a several hundred year headstart on Islamic Fundamentalism.
Click to expand...
Depending the extent that history is weighted in this discussion, no argument here.
 
varwoche said:
Depending the extent that history is weighted in this discussion, no argument here.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's my point. The extent of history's role in this discussion is probably being underestimated.
 
from varwoche:
Forget 50 years; the practical effect since 9/11 is nothing short of profound, in the US at least.
Click to expand...
"Profound" would surely mean that it affects day-to-day life in a serious way, but I can't see that. The economy has carried on in pretty much the way it was going, WalMart continues to be a growing evil (allegedly), great and dreadful TV continues to be produced, technology advances. Pork-barrel politics continues to thrive. The practical effects are minimal.
How about Pakistan's role in nuclear proliferation?
Click to expand...
Only a large-scale nuclear exchange could threaten civilisation (which is where this exchange started). Such a capability couldn't be achieved secretly. That cat is out of the bag, and we'll have to learn to live with it. As to biological weapons, they could be a threat, but from what I've read they're not yet. Civilisations have survived plagues - and others have been brought down by them.
... another way to destroy civilization, other than killing, is to cause it to become uncivilized.
Click to expand...
Our lives might become more restricted under the threat of terrorism (from any source), but is that the end of civilisation? We might lose some of the life we've become used to, but perhaps that kind of life is untenable in the long-term, humans being what they are.
 
Liberty for 'safety'. What a deal.

I have a magic rock that keeps tigers away. See any tigers? It works! I'll give you this magic rock if you sign this petition to have the bill of rights revoked!

There are no guarantees, except that once you've allowed freedoms to be taken, it will take decades to restore them, if they ever even can be restored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom