Exactly, if they are motivated by evil nonsense then use their nonsense to make them afraid to be evil, murderous monsters; Trump as usual gets it.
You call us “emotional” for knowing the doctrine of radical Islam and using reason and common sense to determine how to use it against them as they plot to kill us, while you simultaneously worry about making them more motivated to kill us in a reality where they teach their children from birth that their god will reward them based on how many of us they can slaughter? That it is okay with their god to rape and abuse our women and children? That any lie or other deception told in the interest of slaughtering Americans is righteous?
Physician heal thyself.
Not with you. They do fear eternal damnation, and they believe it will happen if subjected to said defilement (pig hides, blood, etc.).
BS, AS. Their “female battalions” are there for the purpose and use of their MALE battalions, AS. They don’t arm women and send them out to kill Americans except as suicide bombers, of course.
ISIS members don’t follow the doctrine. Parts of it, sure, but it’s well known they don’t fully adhere to it. Just like radical Christians they rationalize and interpret it the way they want.
This is a better argument…
Why is respecting corpses reserved for everyone? What does that even mean?
We do that because we have a fundamental right to speech. We don’t have a right to respect alive or dead, and disrespecting someone means disrespecting someone not some vague respect for some kind of collective dead or alive or something, which is what I hear in this argument. I’m having a really difficult time connecting free speech to respecting the dead. Not sure who we’re respecting since you said it wasn’t about respecting the actual dead guy. So, if this is a line you buy or consider a strong argument, please elaborate and correlate it for me.
Same argument as AS’s. So shut up out of fear? I get the point, but there must be some limit to how much we submit to murderers out of fear of pissing them off.
Which makes me think about the NBA and Blizzard, Hong Kong and China. If you want to continue collecting almighty dollars, you will not criticize the Chinese government. Do you – or AS – think that the NBA or Blizzard should shut up as instructed by the Chinese government?
Also, would it have been as unwise to disrespect Hitler’s corpse? Do y’all think it would have let to more Nazi recruitment?
In one case, you have capitalist interests and in the other, you have people’s lives.
This is where things might get confusing for some (not you, I know you’ll understand).
What Blizzard and the NBA are doing is at least one more step removed (if not more) from what Trump is doing when he reacts with the things he says.
China’s ability to crack down in Hong Kong is in no way influenced by the NBA or Blizzard. Now I personally think that the NBA and Blizzard should put ethics over profits and if enough people in the US feel as I do, they might change their policy.
What Trump is doing not only incites ISIS members to commit violence against Americans and people in the “west”, but they can use his comments to incite people that might not otherwise submit to indoctrination.
We don’t “owe” any terrorist “respect”…dead OR alive. In fact, we “owe” them as much DISrespect as we can heap on them. I couldn’t care LESS if it pisses off a bunch of their followers (or potential followers, for that matter.). If they are prone to joining ISIS, disrespecting the corpse of their leader won’t make any difference and they’ll just provide more targets. These aren’t particularly smart people. They follow a hate filled and hateful ideology that revels in disrespecting the LIVING…including members of their own ideology.
When they attack us and we respond with temperance and show them respect they view that as WEAKNESS and PROOF to those they recruit that we are cowards who cannot stomach a fight.
Trumps response is EXACTLY what will kill their recruitment, they already know we are a superior force so seeing our Commander in Chief mock THEIR cowardly leaders with absolutely zero respect or restraint is the very thing that will make their recruits think that they will die in vain if they join up.
Your way breeds hope in Terrorists, Trumps way breeds hopelessness.
They have specifically trained women with AK-47s.
Because everyone is human. The value of human dignity has to be universal, or it doesn’t exist. Just like natural rights in general.
Doing the opposite cheapens human life and dignity. It encourages the idea that you can be cavalier about what a human being is worth, so long as you have a “righteous” claim involved.
I’m not saying you can’t approach things practically; we buried Bin Laden at sea because we didn’t want to create a rallying point for extremists to gather around.
I also get that Trump is bad mouthing the guy’s final moments to demotivate the people who followed him.
But giving into motives of vengeance and wrath, and calling that “good” just sounds like a good way create hell on Earth.
I don’t agree. I remember hearing it pointed out that most middle-eastern Muslims are actually nominal; and when ISIS started their crap, these nominal Muslims knew that ISIS was practicing genuine Islam. That turned them off, and many started turning to Christianity. A Christian who commits atrocities isn’t following the Bible. A Muslim who commits atrocities is following the Koran.
I guess I don’t particularly give a rip about this. I’m not even really sure what that means. Muslim terrorists have no dignity, don’t respect human dignity themselves and don’t magically become dignified because they died.
Someone who is actively trying to kill you isn’t worth very much.
I expect I will continue to disagree with you nor care much one way or the other about it, but I’m curious what you mean by human dignity and why you think it’s universal or even exists? That’s probably the point of my disagreement with you about this point – separate from the practical effect of pissing off Muslim terrorists.
I expect that you will probably be consistent. You’ve demonstrated it for years. I expect it from CSB as well even though he’s a commie. But do you think anyone else throwing a fit about the president on this one would also defend the corpse of Adolph Hitler the same way?
CSB, I trust that you know that’s tongue in cheek and I only really think of you as a socialist right? Also you know I consider socialists terribler than commies, right?
Again, you’re appealing to righteousness, and how you judge the person, when human dignity must go beyond that.
What Westboro Baptist church does with their speech is abhorrent; it doesn’t change the fact that their exercise still needs to be respected.
The righteous objection of families of KIA soldiers who revolt at how their loved ones funeral is protested with “God Bless IEDs”, is subservient to that need.
The person doesn’t matter. Their undignified demeanor doesn’t matter. The right exists separately from them.
It’s still a human life that was taken. It was a still human life that is gone from this world.
Human life must be respected when here, and mourned when lost. Afterall, no one gave themselves life; that was a gift from God. Destroying that gift should never be a tasked relished in. That’s simply giving into vengeance, to wrath.
They’re dead. What they were trying to do doesn’t matter anymore. All that remains is that a human life was lost. A gift was destroyed.
Baghdadi “destroyed” his “gift” decades ago when he accepted the lies of the Quran and vowed to follow it “religiously.”
You’re asserting a right. What’s the basis for that right?
I fail to see where I’m appealing to “righteousness.” People who suck, suck.
But it doesn’t follow that a corpse deserves respect. The life is already gone.
Can’t remember where I read it, but it struck me as quite likely a truism of human psychology that “ideology is usually an excuse for a behavior, not a reason”.
Saying that “people should be mourned when they die” is different than saying “all people should be mourned by everyone when they die”.
I suppose these murderous monsters were “mourned”, likely by other murderous monsters; but the targets of their hate fueled violence will rejoice at their demise and they should.
Ditto, RET. Evil men would only be mourned by other, equally evil men. Everyone else…and I mean EVERYONE else…should revel in their deaths and celebrate them.
Cannot agree with that phrasing, PD. ‘Revel’ (to me) carries the wrong connotation. ‘Rejoice’ would be more appropriate in my mind. We’re all (presumably) glad a murderous scumbag is permanently forestalled from perpetrating more crimes and satisfied with his comeuppance, perhaps proud of our
country’s continual efforts to eliminate the like. But ‘revel’ in their deaths? Like dancing in the streets and such? That’s what they do, and I don’t want to be like them.