Quote:
Originally Posted by SenaxFlatulus";p="
In my opinion it doesn't matter what little good you do in this world like Hamas has done, if you engage in terrorist activity, you negate anything you've previously done.
If Hamas did some help in the form of aid, I'm sure that was nice. However when they turn around and send a suicide bomber into Jerusalem to kill a busload of school children, I tend to forget the good and focus on the bad. I guess I'm a bit cynical in my old age.
Regarding Cat Stevens:
I feel he can speak out against Rushdie and use Islamic rhetoric to call for the "death" to those writers who "misuse the prophet muhammed's words". I feel he can study the Islamic religion all he wants. Even when he makes rhetorical statements agains the state of Israel I just chalk it up to another hate monger singing the "Peace Train".
It's when he raises money for Hamas that I draw the line. If he would insure the money went to parts of the arab world that strictly gave aid to charities and not in any way related to Hamas, then I wouldn't have a problem.
|
Though I would not share completely the point of view expressed, I understand and respect your very rational perspective. For some the merest equivocation on 'support' for those who kill innocent people is a bridge too far - they can not then countenance supporting such individuals on any level, on purely moral grounds. This is a widely shared, morally rational viewpoint.
It only becomes a coherent ethical standard, however, when it is universally applied.