Curse

ManadartheHealer · Jun 16, 2005, 08:55 PM // 20:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Than

What do you think would happen if the US occupied Mecca and barred moslims from visiting it?

A fresh new round of oh so fun terrorist attacks

Synthos · Jun 16, 2005, 08:59 PM // 20:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cap'n Hoek

Funny, I thought they were there to help people in need.

And anyone with as much bias as Carlin can't tell it like it is. He can only tell it as he perceives it, post-filtration. He can be funny and dead on, but he can also be so far in left field he may as well be in the parking lot.

*sigh* They are helping the people in need. In a culture where we define ourselves by rules and traditions, when that is all taken away suddenly what is left? Self preservation. And naturally this begins to infiringe on other peoples self preservation thus the lack of social structure. Looting of food, harsh protection over territory and goods. Thats when they need the red cross and national guard to come in.

Great Gjl · Jun 16, 2005, 08:59 PM // 20:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by ManadartheHealer

A fresh new round of oh so fun terrorist attacks

I think it would be a LOT more than that, since the Islamic extremists have yet to attract mass appeal to their cause even in the face of the Iraq and Afghan war. Blocking off access to their holiest site would be something even non-Muslims will condemn.

DarrenJasper · Jun 16, 2005, 09:00 PM // 21:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Than

What do you think would happen if the US occupied Mecca and barred moslims from visiting it?

A more valid comparison would be, what if Muslims decided their holy land was actually Dallas, became outraged that it was in the hands of infidels, and cut a bloody swath through the U.S. in order to reclaim it?

ManadartheHealer · Jun 16, 2005, 09:01 PM // 21:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Great Gjl

I think it would be a LOT more than that, since the Islamic extremists have yet to attract mass appeal to their cause even in the face of the Iraq and Afghan war.

I think there would be more terrorist attacks because they would be able to recruit more people. When you enrage an entire section of the world by taking something they value (Mecca, etc.), it is bound to stir up MASS anti-US (or whoever else is doing it) sentiment

Keesa · Jun 16, 2005, 09:02 PM // 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Great Gjl

I hope you aren't trying to sentimentalise or even commend such policies. The extortion of property only came during the later part of Hitler's reign before the war, anyway and seems more a sidethought he put into action because he could. Jewish properties weren't exactly absorbed by the state, either, but rather ransacked by a hateful public during a state sanctioned pillaging of Jewish properties.

I doubt Hitler was ever a devout Christian. In fact, he regarded it as a threat since it implied a being of greater authority than him. This explains why he created the bastardised Nazi Church. The simple fact is Hitler never mentioned religion as a motivating factor during his speeches, and it would be rather difficult to justify the slaughter of millions upon moral lines.

Sentimentalize or commend the seizure of private property? I hardly think the tone of my post implies so; no ethical, responsible person could condone this behavior (oh, wait... the US government also has that right. But I digress.). However, it did happen prior to the war, and many of these properties/interests were put in the hands of colleagues of Hitler's... I don't believe I said the properties were absorbed by the state at all, but I apologize if my post could be construed to imply it.

Great Gjl · Jun 16, 2005, 09:03 PM // 21:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by ManadartheHealer

I think there would be more terrorist attacks because they would be able to recruit more people. When you enrage an entire section of the world by taking something they value (Mecca, etc.), it is bound to stir up MASS anti-US (or whoever else is doing it) sentiment

Yes, but instead of sparking off another 'round of terrorist attacks', we'd probably see full scale war adopted by even moderate Muslims (which is what the terrorists have been trying to achieve all this time). In other words, a lot worse.

Than · Jun 16, 2005, 09:03 PM // 21:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrenJasper

A more valid comparison would be, what if Muslims decided their holy land was actually Dallas, became outraged that it was in the hands of infidels, and cut a bloody swath through the U.S. in order to reclaim it?

Not really. That was the land of Jesus. Had been recognized as such from the get go. And was probably THE major pilgramage site for Christians for the time period. Not to mention had been Christian land until the Moslim conquests in the 7th century.

DarrenJasper · Jun 16, 2005, 09:08 PM // 21:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Than

Not really. That was the land of Jesus. Had been recognized as such from the get go. And was probably THE major pilgramage site for Christians for the time period. Not to mention had been Christian land until the Moslim conquests in the 7th century.

I doubt the Muslims were living there, having "recognized" it as the "land of Jesus", just to piss everyone off.

Than · Jun 16, 2005, 09:12 PM // 21:12

No but the Seljuk Turks occupying the land, barring and harrasing christian pilgrams, and destroying a major church kinda pissed some people off.

Molims had live in and ruled that land for nearly 4 centuries w/o a attempted Christian retaking(with the exception of the Byzantines). The pope didn't get up one morning and say "You know, I really could go for some Falaffal. I know, Crusades!"

Edit:I would also like to add the Moslims knew damn well where Jesus lived and died. Hell Mary is mentioned more in the Koran then the Bible.

Edit(yes again):I would additionaly like to add the there is some conjecture as to the religious make up of the Holy Land at the period. It hasn't been proven that a majority of the population was Moslim. Or Christian for that matter.

Dreamsmith · Jun 16, 2005, 09:16 PM // 21:16

Yes, Jesus is a revered man by Muslims. They just don't deify him.

Muslims were also happy to allow Christian pilgrims in the Holy Land for centuries. It was the Turk invaders in the 11th century who sparked off the First Crusade by banning them.

Akshara · Jun 16, 2005, 09:25 PM // 21:25

Shouldn't this thread be in the "Off-topic and the Absurd" forum? While it started out with a reasonable question, it's drifted pretty far from GW territory...

And to the OP's question...

I've seen your guild's adverts ingame, and didn't have a problem with them. I'll be honest that my initial reaction wasn't good though... while I respect any guild's desire to have membership requirements, and think it's a good idea for christians who want to play together to have a guild, I really don't like encountering evangelical proselytizing in an online fantasy based video game. And some of the adverts I saw we're a little more than just a "christian guild looking for members" kinda thing...

Frankly, I think it's somewhat hypocritical that a "real" Christian guild would even exist for a game like this... the game is about killing as many other living things as possible. In other words...

Jesus wouldn't play Guild Wars.

Than · Jun 16, 2005, 09:27 PM // 21:27

What? Your saying Jesus didn't eat meat? I coulda sworn there was this whole bit about Fish.

Edit:and I almost forgot, Exorcising possessed pigs and driving them into a lake(and killing them).

Cap'n Hoek · Jun 16, 2005, 09:30 PM // 21:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synthos

*sigh* They are helping the people in need. In a culture where we define ourselves by rules and traditions, when that is all taken away suddenly what is left? Self preservation. And naturally this begins to infiringe on other peoples self preservation thus the lack of social structure. Looting of food, harsh protection over territory and goods. Thats when they need the red cross and national guard to come in.

I have strong doubts that the Red Cross was formed due to a fear of disaster-stricken people becoming barbaric and waging resource war on the more fortunate people nearby.

As another example, the European man who started directing traffic in New York during the city-wide blackout. Do you think this man was motivated by fear of barbarism? What about foreign aid workers in Iraq? Do you think they put themselves in that much danger because they are afraid the middle east and subsequently the whole world will fall into chaos if they don't?

I think you are letting the negative behavior of a small percentage of the population define the general state of the population. There are some people who are concerned with things above and beyond self-preservation, regardless of their immediate circumstances.

Cap'n Hoek · Jun 16, 2005, 09:34 PM // 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akshara

the game is about killing as many other living things as possible.

Um, last time i checked, digital bits were not considered life.

ManadartheHealer · Jun 16, 2005, 09:37 PM // 21:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cap'n Hoek

Um, last time i checked, digital bits were not considered life.

It's about the concept though...

Would you not say Grand Theft Auto is an "immora"l (or "unethical" for the rest of us), even though it is not "real"? The concept behind GTA is horrible

Tactical-Dillusions · Jun 16, 2005, 09:37 PM // 21:37

Best wishes for your guild. With the wrath of the Lord Jesus on your team, how can you possibly fail?

Let us pray for those who smite us.

Synthos · Jun 16, 2005, 09:38 PM // 21:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akshara

Jesus wouldn't play Guild Wars.

If he did hed probably be a monk

Could you imagine playing PVP against Jesus

Hed probably win

Eclectic · Jun 16, 2005, 09:39 PM // 21:39

First, someone wants to recruit Christians into a guild where I guess they can pray before going to ambush and kill usually minding-their-own-business monsters and take their stuff, I have no problem with it. Seems an odd thing for Christians to band around but again, no problem.

I do have a couple problems with Christianity and with the current American state of Christianity. The Religious Right (TM), instead of loving everyone and being non-judgmental and turning the other cheek, has become the source of bigotry in our times with their hatred and discrimination against gays in the secular world. They "defend marriage" from people who want to be married while ignoring the fact that evangelicals have a higher divorce rate than the average couple. They are filling the same exact role (and usually using the same religious rhetoric) that the people trying to keep segregation in place and those trying to stop interracial marriage used. The followers of the Prince of Peace go to funerals of people killed for being gay and shout "Fags Burn in Hell" to the grieving family members. These same people are feted and given money from the Bush administration. They are MAINSTREAM, not out in left field Christians now. They've institutionalized bigotry in half their state constitutions, all led by a brazen political objective that had nothing to do with Christianity, but by raising fear of the other and making people feel persecuted when they most decidedly are not.

That's the next complaint. Someone got ridiculed in a chat in a game over their Christian themed guild and someone is comparing it to the persecution that caused early Christians like Stephen to be crucified upside-down. When people burn down your church and kill your people, then you are being persecuted. If nobody does anything about it, then you're seeing official persecution. Being flamed in a chat room in a game is so far from being persecuted as to ruin the word's meaning. Try to get some perspective people.

Christians run the country. They've got political power. They're using it in a variety of ways that run antithetical to a "Christian nation".

I wanted to mention something about the religious aspect of wars that were being argued about. Religion is often used to rally people for a cause, usually by cynical leaders pressing an agenda. The rally against gay marriage to give better electoral chances for Republicans for example. Riled people up in election season sending out pamphlets showing two men kissing and a big "Allowed!" on it and Bible with a big X on it saying "Banned!". Truly I'll have more respect for the Christian church when they don't fall for such imbecilic crap.

Where the people arguing for the religious aspect of war have things right is that when it comes to religion, nobody has the provably right answer. When an argument over which religion is right comes along, it cannot be decided, which leads to some form of coercion or force being used to decide the issue. We can argue about whether global warming is real because we can measure and eventually know a real, true, answer. Short of Armageddon and the Second Coming happening we can't do that with religion. So we've got to try to just live together and quit hating each other for what we believe. But I don't believe I'd be remiss in asking that those who profess a belief in loving everyone and turning the other cheek start doing that too.

Oh, and a "culture of life" that likes war and supports the death penalty? Whatever.

ManadartheHealer · Jun 16, 2005, 09:40 PM // 21:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synthos

If he did hed probably be a monk

Could you imagine playing PVP against Jesus

Hed probably win

Nah, he'd be beaten by a mob of psycho warrior/necros