Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Ennui
Or, look at it this way
Thu Nov 2, 2017 12:12pm
67.240.127.252

An Islamic terrorist (and before I get jumped on, I am NOT saying that all followers of Islam are terrorist) yell something about Allah and bombs a crowd of people who are going about minding their own business.

Who do we put on trial? If Islam is responsible, or more generally, if religion is responsible, why do we condemn the terrorist? After all, his religion told him to do it, right? But can it be the terrorist is responsible for the bombing?

If any person does something, regardless of what that something is, we hold said person accountable (well I hope we do but let's not get into that mess). Why is that? Because the individual(s) is(are) responsible for their behavior. They can shift the blame on Allan, or Yahweh, or Ishkabibble the Great & Wonderful. . .but in the end, no matter how firmly they believe Ishkabibble is the one that told them to do it, in the end we haul the perps ass off to prison and not Ishkabibble. Why do we do that if religion is responsible and not the believer? Because we can? No.

We through the perp's ass in prison because he is the one responsible - he (or she) is the one that blew up the crowd.

Religions gets no where without its supporters. It can't get anyway. Its an idea, a belief, not a living breathing human being with arms and legs and capable of action.

You can't kill an idea. Ideas and beliefs will no doubt always be around as long as man himself is. But we can, and should, hold accountable for the ideas they accept and act upon. They are responsible for the 'I chose' part of the equation.


Click here to receive daily updates


Religion and Ethics BBS