Debunking 6 Myths About Anders Breivik

Which guy?

 

That's an indication of crude views.

 

Well he’s more than just a theologian, he has a congregation and he is part of a larger church which is firmly part of established Christianity. Where do you find Alevi clergy who do not believe in an afterlife or that Jesus may not ever have existed as an historical person? I would claim it is proof however it is convincing evidence facing your inability to come up with anything close in Islam. The evidence is so overwhelming bringing one convincing example is hardly grabbing at straws! If it was then you could just rebuff it without any more ado.

You mean I should be grateful you at least concede that? Whether you believe it or not it is always fine to question however one must be receptive to the evidence.

Did I say it was dramatically increasing or are you adding that for effect? Well if you consider it a wild assumption then you have to admit it is a generally accepted one. Here is another example of this really “wild assumption”:

http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Islamic-veil-and-fundamentalism-are-back-in-Bishkek-18289.html

Its an interesting question what one regards as fundamentalism. I think believing that what is written in a holy book as the literal word of a deity denotes fundamentalism, what do you think? Maybe we can agree on that at least?

My fear of the unknown, where did that come from? My fear of fundamentalist extremism is that it is a destructive force sometimes deadly and striking randomly without warning, like when a boulder went through the roof of a bus on a route I frequently used with my kids. That felt very real and not at all unknown! No, the sound of churchbells or a Muezzin being disturbing is not to do with what I am accustomed to, I am relatively tolerant of noise and adjust fairly quickly to traffic, trains, binmen whatever. Our house though has been a building site the last couple of years and I must admit my tolerance for noisy pneumatic tools is definitely not what it used to be! Much better with the noises from three kids despite all. As for “cultural unity” you’re barking up the wrong tree, my family is about as multicultural as you can get.

No, lots of people are religious without believing in the literal word of God and without any obvious outward indication. I wore a Che Guevara t shirt without having much of a clue about him however it did inspire me to find out more about him, though not going so far as to read his writings. I agree there is likely some element of the same motivation however it is far outweighed by religious motivation. Spurred by this discussion yesterday I asked some of my two daughter’s Muslim friends, about the hijab. They were all in agreement that it was a religious thing. They were a diverse group from Palestine/Somalia/Turkey/Aserbajdsjan, from totally covered apart from hands and face and Ramadan abiding to casual wear and eating. Those that wore hijab did it because their father said they had to but they didn’t mind. The requirement of when you have to wear hijab, Ramadan etc. are clearly very topical for these girls and their peers. Fashion does come into it as a subsidiary theme though but more to do with what parents allow than what is regarded as smart or in. They are all very aware of the religious argument for wearing it. The Palestinian girl plays football covered except for hands and face and despite fasting.

The issue with Halal meat was primarily cost and use of resources. If it was not for that I would have made my own demands! I think there is a balance to be struck when it comes to using resources to accommodate different needs/requirements. As it is Muslim children do demand additional resources and grants are available for this but they don’t cover the true cost. Adding to that inbalance would discourage non Muslim parents from sending their children there and kindergartens would become divided. Well I suppose I’ve become more tolerant being a vegetarian in a meat culture and try to help by for example taking nut fill to barbeques and otherwise just explaining how easy a vegetarian can be accommodated. Most people are actually quite interested in veggie recipies and vegetarianism not to mention my kids cooking!

You need to see a little more nuances. I’m for real, I’m here where the action is! Have you read my updates on Breivik?

 

Just how often do you read JP? I am no fan of the paper however you are being quite unfair - see my other post.

Biker gangs are covered by JP and I have no idea why you should think they aren't. Instead of asking why things are not discussed you should be backing up your assertion that the degree of discussion is disproportionate with the actual problem. Left wing papers also quote from JP such as avisen.dk which I quoted.

 

I'm sorry but you are the one who couldn't discuss objectively. You appeal to personal experience but dismiss mine. I am open to your views and respect your experience unfortunately the same cannot be said for you. Bigotry and prejudice is easy to knock down without resorting to the tactics you do.

Lets take a break....

 

that is not true at all.

and if you want respect, you should perhaps not be so overtly bigoted in your approach to people of other faiths.

 

You're vastly exaggerating this pastor's importance. Unlike one of his German colleagues he was lucky enough not to get fired by his church for his unorthodox views that funnily enough seem to include that he doesn't identify as a Christian. I doubt that there are congregations, let alone churches full of atheist Christians, simply because – you may call me narrow-minded for thinking so – to most people that's a contradiction in terms.

Actually Alevi don't pay much heed to the afterlife and have rather pantheistic ideas. These days most historians think that Jesus existed as an historic person even though we don't know much about that historic Jesus.

If we were to enter a competition I could challenge you to find me some modern Christians who believe in reincarnation like some Sufi orders do. (Mind you, you might even succeed, even though off hand I can't think of any Christian group that does).
However such a competition would be very silly wouldn't it? Just as silly as saying that there's no truth in the broad observation that Islam is just as diverse as Christianity because there's an obscure pastor somewhere who doesn't believe in God. But if you really want to go into detail: Of course you're right: Islam isn't as diverse as Christianity. Seeing that there are probably as many different religious beliefs as there are people on the planet and that this planet only sports about 1,5 billion Muslims but 2,1 billion Christians, of course it isn't. Happy now?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that you presented a trend towards fundamentalist extremism among young Muslim immigrants as a bigger trend than that of mingling with Western culture. I didn't debate that there are tendencies for a rise in fundamentalist extremism in some kids, but regarded the latter trend as the one that is still prevalent. How come you suddenly talk of Kyrgyzstan is beyond me though. Do you often bend topics like that?

Not sure. I know some pretty laid back bible-true christians that would probably not like to be described as fundamentalists in the negative sense of the word.

Throwing boulders unto buses sounds more like the act of vandals than the act of fundamentalist extremists to me. That notwithstanding I hope that our respective secret services have an eye on any kind of terrorism – be it from religious or from right-wing fanatics. Meanwhile I shall have more fear of dying in a car-crash caused by myself. The likelihood of that happening is far higher than that of dying in any kind of terrorist attack. It's such a common occurrence though that the global media will hardly ever bother to report it.

Your tolerance for noise makes me want to wish you were my neighbour. Your tolerance for religion seems to be somewhat lacking though. If I wasn't such a tough bird you would have insulted my religious feelings at least once in this thread.

Where's the problem with religion? Would you be less worried about these girls if they took to drinking too much, stayed out past their curfew and had undesirable boy-friends?

If it's just a cost issue I would certainly gang up with the Muslim mothers. I'd rather my kids ate halal meat than the cheapest anabolics-infested garbage that's available. (Coming to think of it I think I may be 'militant' enough to make my kids visit a slaughterhouse before I let them decide whether they want to eat meat at all or not, I'll give it some more thought when the time comes.)

So far I'm under the impression that concerning the nuances you're willing to see you're very selective. But I have not read your updates on Breivik yet. Do you have a link?

 

Any expenses, training, and possible psy-ops from anyone else? We suspect he may have had some. But Greenfield doesn't mention any. We know there is one group he would not mention if he found absolute proof of involvement.

 

I thought liberals were supposed to be tolerant of viewpoints they don't agree with?

Oh wait, I forgot they only tolerate that which is ideologically acceptable to them. My mistake.

I will never understand how liberals can have the belief "I do not tolerate intolerance" and then completely glance over the fact that many people oppose Islam for that same exact reason.

 

I see no value in being tolerant of people who demonise others on the basis of race, creed or colour, do you?


if so - you would have fully supported the demonising of the Jews that led to the holocaust.

I don't know why so many americans are too stupid to understand that the purpose of freedom of speech was never to allow free reign to demonising people, butthe right to speak out against injustice.

 

Vastly exaggerating! I was merely pointing out that this was not a lone individual as your depiction of him as a theologian rather than clergy conjures up. Any exaggeration here is yours. On the contrary it wasn’t luck but the democratic essence behind the Dutch Protestant Church vesting authority in the congregation. You are very much mistaken and clearly out of touch with the state of Christianity in northern Europe at least. Here in Scandinavia most of the congregation in mainstream churches like the Rev Hendrikse's one, are in fact atheists. They are there because they are invited to a Christianing or other traditional church happening. If there is none then the congregation numbers are very minimal, at times none existant. I don’t know whether most people see any contradiction here but it certainly is a matter of ongoing debate.

Sorry but you are trying to bridge a gap which is too wide and we are not talking history but faith.

You really are out of touch! Around a quarter to a third of Christians in the West believe in reincarnation and although contrary to mainstream Christianity there are esoteric sects which incorporate reincarnation in their basic beliefs. No such competitions are not entirely without merit if they help to illuminate the issue. The fact is that Christianity has undergone a reformation and had to modernize in order to remain an active part of modern Western culture. The same cannot be said of Islam. I know it doesn’t make you happy but as a result Christianity is far more diverse and Christians generally more tolerant of other beliefs and it has nothing to do with comparative numbers of Muslims and Christians.

I presented a trend towards fundamentalism without mentioning extremism, that was your addition. One result of the trend though is an increase in a dangerous militant form of extremism. The trend towards fundamentalism is prevalent although not unified. One result is an increasing hostility towards the wider Western society with the generation change in many Muslim immigrant communities living in the West. I was asked for evidence for this trend and named the use of hijab. This was disputed and ridiculed so I brought the example from Kyrgyzstan where hijab use was linked to fundamentalism. It is not bending the topic to provide evidence for generally accepted assertions when they are challenged.

It isn’t relevant what fundamentalists like to be described as when trying to agree on what constitutes fundamentalism. Nobody likes to be associated with negative senses of words, should we just forget about negative characteristics and pretend everyone is wonderful?

Dropping boulders onto buses goes way beyond vandalism in my eye and falls pefectly in line with acts of fundamental extremists in particular when they come under particular campaigns of retribution such as that resulting from the Mohammed caricature case. Naturally the authorities do what they can to keep an eye on certain groups however when it comes to such opportunistic acts by small groups of youths there is a limit to what can be done. The real preventive work lands on the broad table of society generally and here it is important to see what is really happening and not try to hide from the uncomfortable facts by waiting until traffic deaths take second place to deaths from such attacks!

Please do move in I’d be only too happy to see the back of our racist neighbor whose only goal in life is to force us to move to what he considers a more appropriate quarter for immigrants like us. I don’t insult gratuitously whether you are a tough bird or not.

There can be plenty of problems with religion however you are deviating from our topic here. I brought these girls into the picture because of our dispute over the significance of the hijab and I did not write that I was worried for them. That said, there is more reason to be worried for these girls even though they don’t run the same risks learning to handle modern personal freedoms.

There are alternative options, my kids never ate meat, anabolic infested or otherwise. I don’t think Halal meat is any more or less nutritious than cheap supermarket meat. In fact with all the scandals surrounding Halal meat it doesn’t have a good name. A little OT but I wonder if your kids might force you to watch an operation years from now before helping you fill out your presurgery form?

I think your impression may be influenced by your views! Well for example in this thread #92.

 

That's what Muslims do, so I have your permission to not be tolerant of them? Cool!

That was a quick Godwin.

Free speech is free speech. It's not dependent on what you find acceptable. If we only accepted the free speech we liked, we wouldn't need to protect free speech.

 

lols ... by that logic I should be intolerant of all americans.

it follows. intolerance of an entire group of people based on blind prejudice is what created antisemitism over two millenia of christianity.

you show the same characteristics.

not really. If it were I should be able to call you what you are without risk of an infraction.

 

To say that I'm out of touch with my Church is a bit rich coming from somebody who declares to be an atheist. As it happens I belong to the small group of people who attend services more often than just on Christmas, christenings and weddings. And I'm well aware of the theological discussions within my own and the Catholic church. I'm not Scandinavian, but I doubt you'll find very many Skandinavian church officials who don't subscribe to the Apostolic Creed etc. It's nice you as an atheist can probably bond with Hendrikse . It's also nice I can bond with Islamic theologians such as Amina Wadud and probably more so than with some of my Christian brothers and sisters from some weird bigotted American Evangelical Church

Your argument that Islam is supposedly stuck in the middle ages is a) not disproving its diversity b) highly and chauvinistic c) totally ignorant of its diverse fractions, histories and teachings. Many people say the same of the Catholic Church, totally ignoring the fact that even Catholics are quite diverse (as hard as it may be for me as a Protestant to concede that).

All in all I get the impression that your mistaking secularization with diversity and we're discussing different topics.

To regard wearing the hijab as a proof for for hostility against the wider Western society is nonsense because it assumes that wearing a hijab and being hostile to Western culture is synonymous. This assertions may be generally accepted in our local pubs, but it constitutes a gross and misleading generalization and would be dismissed as methodologically unsound by any social scientist who's learned his trade.

Should we stop pretending that religion in itself is negative only because that happens to be your personal opinion?
As for fundamentalism, discussing what constitutes it would probably require a new thread: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism#Controversy_over_use_of_the_term

Discussing what's really happening also includes not blowing what's happening out of proportion.

So you actually meant to hurt my religious feelings? Wow! Why?

You must have gotten the number wrong. Post 92 was written by you.

But of course my impression is influenced by my views. So is yours. Nobody is totally objective however much we may want to strive for that. Which is of course a statement that in turn is influenced by my slight knack for poststructuralism. It's this very knack that tells me that the best way to fight fundamentalist extremism is to give a voice to alternative Islamic ideas and role-models rather than reiterating the fundamentalist views of those we most disagree with over and over again.

 

Bit rich or not its true when you doubt that there are congregations full of atheist Christians. You weren’t talking about what many church officials subscribe to but congregations and churches. I haven’t had any personal contact with Hendrikse so no chance of bonding there but I did get an opportunity of hearing Amina Wadud when she was here though I didn’t see any bondage. She is quite keen on the Scandinavian model and has some following here receiving the Danish Democracy prize in 2007 but she doesn’t seem to have much in the Islamic world where she has been met with the usual death threats and intolerance. Maybe she can be the bond between Kurt Westergaard and you?

Your moving the goal posts again, its not about disproving Islam’s diversity but about comparative diversity. The epoch making changes in the Christian world which gave rise to our modern world have changed the face of Christianity unlike any of the minor influences this culture has had on Islamic theology. Yes I would say the same of the Catholic church, it isn’t as diverse as the rest of Christianity and that should be just as obvious! This doesn’t ignore diversity but compares it. No, clearly my example with Henrikse is not mistaking secularisation with diversity, he is a Christian clergy is he not?

No, I didn’t attempt to prove hostility from hijab wearing. Again I was defending my assertion you ridiculed. From today’s BBC you can see yet another example from Malaysia where hijab wearing is associated with fundamentalism:

According to the activist, the pressure to wear the hijab grew after the Iranian revolution in 1979, and it is now the most visible sign of Malaysia's rising Islamic fundmentalism.

source

From Kyrgyzstan to Malaysia, and you still think its fashion!

Are you denying that fundamentalism has a negative connotation these days? So you go along with my suggestion and you don’t have any of your own you think I might. Perhaps you don’t really want to help the discussion?

What have I blown out of proportion?

My talking about the noise of church bells insults your religious feelings? OK that wasn’t intentional, I didn’t realise you were such fundamentalist!

Yes, post #92 was written by me, you asked for my updates about Breivik.

That’s right and that’s why I was suggesting that you were verring towards the subjective. Its fine to give a voice to alternative Islamic ideas however exaggerating their significance is misleading and likely to backfire. No, I think presenting the truth and confrontation are required in the present situation. The time has long passed for Muslims to get their house in order. Your strategy since 9/11 has only led to more fundamentalism and extremism.

 

With the privilege of freedom of expression comes the responsibilty not to abuse that freedom. What many idiots seem to do is hide behind the skirts of that privilege and use the touchstone of the 'freedom' in order to justify or excuse their hatred-spewing agendas.
How would it be if a gun-toting, murdering moron used the right to bear arms as an excuse for his actions?
That responsibility is no less sacrosanct than the freedom of speech.

 

To paraphrase the philospher Issiah Berlin: "One has the freedom to move ones fist in the direction of my nose, but that freedom ends at the point at which the fist makes contact with it."

 

Actually it is you who keeps moving the goal posts.
An atheist Christian is as much a contradiction in terms as an atheist Muslim is. Of course there are loads of Christians and Muslims by denomination who rarely see a church or mosque from the inside and who are pretty secular on the whole. As for the Catholic Church: It's just as diverse as the Protestant ones and various Muslim denominations and sports people ranging from Marcial Maciel to Gustavo Gutiérrez , from Hans Küng to Joseph Ratzinger. And now we can start another non-sensical discussion with you trying to defend your statement that the Catholic Church isn't as diverse.

I think it is a choice of clothing that can have a lot of meanings in a lot of settings.
Your assertion that wearing the hijab equals fundamentalism is just as wrong as the assertion that it equals hostility. There may be very many individual reasons to wear it or not to wear it. The Muslim world is not just black and white and easy to categorize as some people would like it to be.

I agree that 'fundamentalism' has negative connotations for most people. Which does not mean that it does for all. To elaborate on that point would enter a discussion that I don't really want to have with somebody who derogatively compares being religious to the belief in UFO's and who – no offense meant – obviously is not very knowledgeable in matters of theology.

The trend of young Muslims in Western countries to become religious fundamentalists. Such young Muslims exist but they are outnumbered by those who'll happily knock down shots of vodka, listen to popular music and follow all sorts of trends that young people all over the Western world follow, at least in my town they are and I assume that yours isn't worlds apart from it.

I work night-shifts, thus I probably suffer more from the sound of church bells than you do, I'm more bothered by noisy birds though. That aside it was me who first mentioned church bells. That you forgot about that indicates that you did not try to hurt my religious feelings on purpose after all, which is nice. But it also shows once more that you're losing track of our discussion, which to be honest deems me to be more and more a waste of my time.

You wrote: „I think your impression may be influenced by your views! Well for example in this thread #92.“ So I thought this is where I could find proof for me being influenced there. How this post on Breivik shows that you „see more nuances“ is beyond me. All it shows me is that you're willing to see 'nuances' when they please you, and you're willing to overlook them when they don't.

My strategy since 9/11 would have been to get a criminal investigation going and to prosecute those who were found to be responsible, it would not have been to bomb entire nations, set up kafkaesque torture-camps and to demonize an entire religion. It was the latter points, that my strategy would not have been about, that led to more fundamentalism and extremism. As stated by someone who should know: "The reason why foreign fighters joined al-Qa'ida in Iraq was overwhelmingly because of abuses at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib and not Islamic ideology" http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...y-killed-more-americans-than-911-1674396.html

 

well said!

you can't have rights without responsibility.

that is basic - so if a person thinks they have the right to vomit hatred about others, then they have to accept responsibility for that which results from that.

 

Indeed, although the US notion of unconditional freedom negates against this.

 

What? He was saying that these kids deserved to die because they were taking part in a government plot to destroy Judeo-Christian values by instilling in them the values of secular leftism. How can he not be associated with Christianity? He was a Christian, he shot up a group of kids at a summer camp over Christianity, and he wrote a 1500 page manifesto about the decline of Christian values caused by seculars and Muslims to justify it all. That's one hard core fundamentalist Christian.

 

interesting.

I have always emphasized that rights without responsibility is empty - and there is even evidence it can lead to quite antisocial levels of selfishness.

If what you are saying is that "rights" without "responsibility" is what the US notion of freedom is really all about, then it would inevitably lead to disunity, the breakdown of any sense of community and a society where people feel like they are under seige from others - real or imagined.

I guess thats why they all need guns, and generally appear to have low trust of others - including the government, and their fellow citizens.