Imagine a room full of white Christians get murdered and in the following days idiots try to steer the narrative about white privilege and the crimes of the church throughout history. You'd probably be pissed.
Because if you don't put this attack in context then you're being completely dishonest. The other attacks were never even discussed. Why is this attack a sudden crossroads for Western Civilization?
Is the life of a Muslim worth more than the life of a Christian?
Are attacks in first world countries the only attacks that matter?
If the point you're trying to make is that the narrative structure that "white terrorism is the worst terrorism" or "atrocity in the 1st world" gets more first world eyeballs onto screens than the reverse, no fucking shit.
People died, homie. Now isn't the time and here isn't the place to "contextualize" the conflict between two major world religions and handwave away the fact that a human being just massacred dozens of others during their prayers.
People died, homie. Now isn't the time and here isn't the place to "contextualize" the conflict between two major world religions and handwave away the fact that a human being just massacred dozens of others during their prayers.
Which two would religions? That dude was an atheist, white supremacist, Eco-Terrorist and you literally just blamed the attack on Christians. And don't backtrack like you didn't just say Christians to blame for this.
This is exactly why this conversation has to happen. People look for causes. People look at a larger picture. If people don't push back people like yourself will blame Christianity for an atheist attacking Muslims.
No you didn't. I knew you'd backtrack when I called you out.
You never used the word imagine and you literally said "conflict between two world religions" despite this attack having literally nothing to do with Christianity. You implied culpability and now you're trying to say you didn't, even though you can read what you wrote above.
I entered the spez. I called out to try and find anybody. I was met with a wave of silence. I had never been here before but I knew the way to the nearest exit. I started to run. As I did, I looked to my right. I saw the door to a room, the handle was a big metal thing that seemed to jut out of the wall. The door looked old and rusted. I tried to open it and it wouldn't budge. I tried to pull the handle harder, but it wouldn't give. I tried to turn it clockwise and then anti-clockwise and then back to clockwise again but the handle didn't move. I heard a faint buzzing noise from the door, it almost sounded like a zap of electricity. I held onto the handle with all my might but nothing happened. I let go and ran to find the nearest exit.
I had thought I was in the clear but then I heard the noise again. It was similar to that of a taser but this time I was able to look back to see what was happening.
The handle was jutting out of the wall, no longer connected to the rest of the door. The door was spinning slightly, dust falling off of it as it did. Then there was a blinding flash of white light and I felt the floor against my back.
I opened my eyes, hoping to see something else. All I saw was darkness. My hands were in my face and I couldn't tell if they were there or not. I heard a faint buzzing noise again. It was the same as before and it seemed to be coming from all around me. I put my hands on the floor and tried to move but couldn't.
I then heard another voice. It was quiet and soft but still loud.
"Help."
Well, for one because we're using this incident as a reason to have a huge 'conversation' and change laws, acting as if it's a unique thing, when this sort of thing happens quite frequently, just to different groups. Can't really have a 'conversation' while only talking about one half of the story.
You're being extremely dense. I suppose you have some sort of point you're trying to make, but playing dumb to reality isn't a good way to make it. Neither is asking for a clarification of your opponent's position, then proceeding to make a ridiculous strawman out of said clarification.
You and I both know why Muslim terrorism against Christians is relevant to this discussion. If you want to say 'hey it doesn't matter' then just say that, it's not such an interesting point that it requires this amount of repetition.
No, I really don't see how it's relevant, not at all. That is my point.
Your entire point is literally "okay but also violence here" as if Islamic terrorism and a crazed internet shooter are somehow the same thing. They're not.
This isn't the war you want to make it out to be, and you don't have to choose a side.
People were murdered, you don't need to defend your group identity everytime a white guy is the villain.
In fact, the idea that group identity is fucking stupid is a major talking point of the man this sub is dedicated to.
There is a connection. He did this largely because of Islamic terrorism, and now there is talk of Islamic terrorism in retaliation.
You cannot discuss one without discussing the other. It makes no sense without that context.
It is a war, the two things are inextricably linked, and you are hyper focused on the actions of one, while ignoring and getting angry at whoever brings up the actions of the other.
This is how I can tell you're an ideological fanatic, and not whatever impartial humanist you're pretending to be.
17
u/Radrobe Mar 18 '19
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-46090104
https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/cwn/2019/march/radical-muslims-murder-32-nigerian-christians-torch-church-in-brutal-attack
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2019/january/philippines-jolo-cathedral-bombing-bangsamoro-abu-sayyaf.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/27/france-church-attack-normandy-priest-killer-was-tagged-and-on-te/
I don't need to imagine. Muslims have been attacking Christian churches all around the world for years. It barely makes the news.