Differences in Opinion - Intolerances

[ps501]

I struggled to come up with a truly relevant subject for this topic.

[Egeides]

My 1 cents (it's really not more):

I do not think that you or me should decide for them of the value of "flushing the Koran". It might happen, for whattever might suit them, to be of great importance. But I like this parallel with burning flags. That's not a thing I give a fancy about. I know some Canadian who went in USA and tested erm... a modified version hymna. NOT _ A _ GOOD _ IDEA. In Canada, both English or French side, it is taken pretty lightly as "this is not the real thing, the real thing is inside someone", just as Harry Potter doesn't start being fussy about "not saying the name of the bad man" and not making a great problem where there were none. Same idea ;)

And so, with such different views, I do not see very favorably to burn flags as if normal, while seeing flushing Koran as a damnation. Diplomats could discuss this in detail I guess. Language. But I still see flushing the Koran in front of Muslim (otherwise... different) as a serious issue, just as I see burning an American flag in front of an American for the sake of it the same. Language IS important... and this includes others' religious views, thus my differing position with you here.

[ps501]

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you.  Your saying that flushing a Koran infront of a Muslim is comperable to buring a USA flag infront of an American?  So you think that the US should find the guilty party and send them over to Afganistan, and also those Muslims that were buring the the flag should come over to the US for the same/comperable death sentence?

[Dude_Doc]

People should be respectable to each other. While religion isn't as hard and serious here as it is in the Arab World, we should still respect their ways of religion and beliefs. If you do not care about the burning an American flag, or an American flushing the Koran down the stormdrain, then why do you care about writing this topic? ;)

[ps501]

...then why do you care about writing this topic? ;)

I'm curious to know why people are honestly/seriously offended.  Remeber the old saying "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me"? 

Its kinda akin to the Terri Shavio case.  Hundreds (or thousands) of people die every day from starvation.  Why have marches for just one person, and not the entire cause of starvation?  (sure you could say because the government failed to act... but if a homeless person dies from starvation in the street in downtown New York, itsn't that the same inaction?)  More children die from falls down steps each year than from falls from bicycles.  But we have activists complaining and marching for more helmets, pads etc for children on bikes... Its like the manufacturer of a baby crib was forced to recall 25 years of cribs made because there was 4 instances of children deaths (over 25 years) associated with the product.  Yes its sad when chidlren die, unfortunately they die all over the world every day.  When thats a minor issue, and there are truely bigger issues in the world.

Or put a different way, was someone actualy harmed by flushing a book?  I'd say no.  Upset sure, harmed no.  Nothing was lost to humanity.  Now do they want the "responsible" party handed over so they can be shot?  Yes.  seems like the punishment doesn't fit the crime.  Secondly, they believe its perfectly acceptible to burn an american flag, but its not acceptible for me to burn a Koran.  Seems like thats a double-standard.

[Arvenier]

Secondly, they believe its perfectly acceptible to burn an american flag, but its not acceptible for me to burn a Koran.  Seems like thats a double-standard.

Man, you are at war with them, what do you expect them to do??

I think this 'double-standart' is caused by something, don't you think? They have a reason to burn your flag. You have occupied their country, how do you expect them to react?

I think they have every right to burn the american flag(no offence, could have been any other country). Why don't they burn the swiss flag, for example? Because they don't have any reasons to do that. With these action, they just express their feelings, their hate toward smb or smt.

[VigilVirus]

It's the nerve of people, invaders, to come into a foreign country and both literally and symbolically flush their Koran down a toilet - flush their culture, their beliefs down a toilet. I can easily believe that someone in the US military have done so on numerous occassions. After all, US military is to some extent composed of either hot-headed young republicans or the Cold War era conditioned generals who command them.

It's not the book, it's the message the destruction of it sends. You've already killed many of their people, you've destroyed their government, but now, you will also burn their religious doctrine.

[ps501]

I like you Devils Advocate; However I'm guessing you don't live in NYC.

[nemafakei]

There's a difference between an individual who decides to attack someone else's government, country, or culture in their own time on their own land and a representative of a country and employee of its government, attacking someone else's religion or culture, during the course of their job, being paid by their country to do so.

[ps501]

There's a difference between an individual who decides to attack someone else's government, country, or culture in their own time on their own land and a representative of a country and employee of its government, attacking someone else's religion or culture, during the course of their job, being paid by their country to do so.

Now that is an interesting statement.

[VigilVirus]

You seem to place everything in simplistic context. This situation is not about what the truth behind it is, but what others believe it to be. It doesn't matter whether he was acting out of individualistic tendencies - since he's a soldier he's still held accountable to represent his country. If you insult someone on your job and openly go against the restaurant policy for example, you're usually fired or punished. However, the US military overlooks these kinds of things or only symbolically punishes them. By not punishing those who work for your organization and do these innappropriate actions, the organization itself condones this behavior.

[ps501]

Sure. Boiling things down the root of the issue is generally an easier way to deal with them (as opposed to saying "its complex").  Even if the issue is complex, each point can be reduced to the root of the point, even if it had multiple facets.  (I could go into a long dissertation of establishing boundaries, stretching boundaries, moving boundaries, etc., but that isn't the point of this thread.  Suffice it to say that if you have two disagreeing parties, if you cannot find the crux of their disagreement then you will have a very difficult time getting them to agree.  Once you find the root of that disagreement, you can build on that root to the issue at hand.  Sometimes you can move forward, sometimes you have to move backward, but in either event, as long as the two parties are still in discussion, you are at least moving; this is a basic debate or interrogation tactic to allow the other side to agree, at least in principle, and then you can build on that principle -- "Every tangible object in the world is for sale/has its price".  "Anyone can agree to kill human".  If you don't agree with these points, then that is a great subject for another thread; I'll win those two arguements every time)

I do agree that truth is what you want to believe.  Truth is subjective to the person.

So if I insult someone on the job, and it was inadvertent, and then I apologize - is the issue over?  From what I'm reading from your text, regardless of my apology, or my attempt to correct my misdeeds, I need to be punished to the satisfaction of the person I offended?  Further you seem to indicate that if the restaurant doesn't take action to fire me, then the restaurant condoned my insult?  I don

[nemafakei]

Unintentionally causing offence clearly is a very different matter to intentionally causing offence.

With regard to individual or corporate responsibilities, the individual is responsible for any actions they commit. The employer is responsible for preventing such circumstances occurring, and must take reasonable care that no harm is caused (intentional or otherwise): to this end, they must also exact penalties upon individuals acting on their behalf (but deviating from their policies) and change their policies where they are found to be wrong - failure to do so means the body is then liable for negligence.

[Acriku]

I would think that the people who did it apologize, or the government apologize for them publicly. But as far as sending them over there for justice, bull shit. There's no way in hell that can stand.

[ps501]

Unintentionally causing offence clearly is a very different matter to intentionally causing offence.

With regard to individual or corporate responsibilities, the individual is responsible for any actions they commit. The employer is responsible for preventing such circumstances occurring, and must take reasonable care that no harm is caused (intentional or otherwise): to this end, they must also exact penalties upon individuals acting on their behalf (but deviating from their policies) and change their policies where they are found to be wrong - failure to do so means the body is then liable for negligence.

www.cnn.com

"The Pentagon on Friday released new details about mishandling of the Quran at the Guantanamo Bay prison for terror suspects, confirming that a soldier deliberately kicked the Muslim holy book, and that an interrogator stepped on a Quran and was later fired for "a pattern of unacceptable behavior."

I'd call this the correct thing to do.  Now why again are they still buring Flags and US Constitutions?

[VigilVirus]

Did you read about the one where a detainee complained that urine came down on him and his Quran through the ventilation system and then one worker admitted it was his fault? ...They are investigating if it was an accident or not. Urine in the ventilation system...seems like an accident to me!

And stop comparing flags and constitutions with Quran. No one would give a shit if an american starts burning an Iraqi flag or the Iraq constitution. Now, if there was a huge bible burning by the muslim community in Iraq, someone would be offended in the US and other predominantly christian countries. So please, don't even make the comparison between religion and nationality.

[ps501]

Did you read about the one where a detainee complained that urine came down on him and his Quran through the ventilation system and then one worker admitted it was his fault? ...They are investigating if it was an accident or not. Urine in the ventilation system...seems like an accident to me!

Humor I get it.

[VigilVirus]

I'll capitalize whenever I want. Plus, you have no clue what you are talking about, see the following:

"And in March 2005, a detainee complained that urine came into his cell through an air vent and splashed him and his Koran, the statement said. A guard had left his post and gone outside to urinate, it explained. "He urinated near an air vent and the wind blew his urine through the vent into the block," it said."

This is an excerpt from http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=8&id=339383&display=all , but of course, it was pretty much the same kind of post on CNN as well a while back.

Furthermore, don't assume that people are like you and since certain things have no effect on you, they don't have an effect on the majority. As for item ownership, that's a difficult issue. There's a difference between owning a flag or a Koran and owning a cheeseburger. Some things have significance to large groups of people who are sensitive to the possibility of their desecration. Especially you must understand the prejudice against Islam or at least the prejudice that the some muslim extremists place on the westerners.

But anyhow, how you can understand if you keep referring to yourself as the judge? It takes more than that to see it from the eyes of the Iraqi natives.

[ps501]

Your missing my point.

[VigilVirus]

Vent/ventilation system - whatever you want to call it. My point remains the same, it is highly improbable that this was an accident. Your cheeseburger example is a silly hypothetical situation that fails to underscore that Islam is one of the most powerful and the fastest growing religion in the world. There is a difference between an insult that refers to a separate individual and an insult towards a sacred item.

"To me its not much different when you look at what

[ps501]

Well to play devils advocate, If you start from a small base, then being the fastest growing is easy.

[Faetarius]

ps501, this point has been made by Devil's Advocate but I just want to reiterate why the burning of American flags is less important/noteworth than the destruction of th Koran.

If an Iraqi burns the US flag in his own country then, as you say, what's the big issue. (It's more the symbolic act of rebellion against the invading opressors than a genuinely noteable act.)

If an American in their country decides to burn an Iraqi flag in response then again there is nothing to get too worried about.

However, if Americans destroy the Koran, the basis for the fundamental principles of some Iraqis' lives, in front of Iraqi prisoners then there is fair cause for concern. This American has been a part of taking away the prisoner's life, liberty, happiness and dignity. If he then destroys the holy book, the detainee's source of comfort in an intentional act of opression, then I would say that the prisoner's fellow countrymen have every right to get upset.

(The destruction of the bible owned by an American in a similar predicament would be equally abhorrent, I am not disputing that)

[VigilVirus]

Now who is being intolerant?

[ps501]

ack

I'm not debating what someone will take offence to.

[VigilVirus]

Dude...you aren't getting it at all. I'm only speaking of the actions on the side of the americans and the american military. I'm assuming that the islamist militarist will retaliate to such acts of insensitivity, because we have seen that in the past. Nothing requires retaliation, however, extremist groups tend to spurn out propaganda that magnifies even the smallest discrepancies. And hey, if you doubt my point, go to an Al Qaeda training camp, piss on their Korans and then convince them to swallow your bullshit. No one cares what you think is unnecessary - you can only control your behavior/reaction and no one else's. That is why, for probably the tenth time I am forced to repeat and pay attention to this: /We must regulate our armed forces to control acts of relgious intolerance in their midst while dealing with prisoners of that religion and/or negotiating with enemies of that religion. The reaction of the Islamist extremists cannot be controlled directly - only indirectly through our suppression of the need to throw fuel onto the fire of intolerance/. I'm not saying that this eye for an eye doctrine is acceptable, but I am saying that is the reality among many extremist groups. I posted here to deal with reality, not your silly concepts of what is the moral way to respond to an action. You should know by now that morality has little to do with religious differences.

And stop talking about your cheeseburger religion. 2000 years ago Islam wasn't an official religion? So what? I'm talking about NOW. Keep it real.