The Drums of War beat slow and steady...

You're right Fano and to further that point the United States would fall into this category as well. Despite several attempts by major Zionist groups within the United States, major figures in the State Dapartment and FDR's cabnit refused to accept the Shoa as a worthwhile issue. There was conclusive evidence in 1943, when places like Auschwitz and Treblinka were just getting started, showing what the SS was moving towards in terms of a "Final Solution." Some countries sincerely beleived that the Shoa was actually English propoganda along the same lines as those seen during WWI.

I can't believe how deep the debate has gotten on this issue. First, this is correct:

If you think that countries were morally obligated to join WWII b/c of the holocaust you don't know your history. It was known that the Jews were being put in concentration camps, but in the States we put Japanese in concentration camps and we didn't murder them. Calling the Swiss evil bastards b/c of their WWII neutrality is silly. I would agree with Giggan, the Swiss hold the moral high ground for avoiding war.

The story which started this thread, however, reveals that when it comes to other things, the Swiss are not always on the moral high ground. I can't believe people are actually defending a ban on a type of architecture. Perhaps if these towers were of some detriment to Swiss society, like if they were prone to falling over or something, a ban would be understandable. But this is clearly a case of bigotry which is totally indefensible. For those of you who think that discriminating against Muslims is okay just because the 9/11 hijackers were Islamic, consider this: by that logic discriminating against African-Americans is justified because a disproportionate amount of American criminals are black. Islam is the largest religion in the world, if even 1% of all Muslims were terrorists then there would be a terrorist attack every day. Percentage-wise, less Muslims are terrorists than African-Americans are criminals, so this quote—

if your religion requires you to beat or kill me because I'm not converting, then prepare for some serious discrimination.

—is just the ridiculous, bigoted logic the Swiss used in enacting this legislation. Yes, as you point out, religion is different than race, but Islam is not how you characterize it. You frame Islam as some destructive, barbaric practice much like how the opponents of civil rights for blacks in the '60s tried to frame them as unevolved and mentally deficient. Sure, if that were the case your argument may hold some weight, but it most certainly is not. If the Swiss want to homogenize their architecture, that's fine, but banning one specific form which is specific to one religion just because it's unpopular is not justified discrimination.

Le sigh.

I was invoking the Lolocaust for the benefit of the 2 (make that 3) fruitcakes who even with the benefit of hindsight were stating with admiration that the Swiss were right not to fight the Axis. I know that the Nazis weren't exactly broadcasting what they were doing (although since Swiss companies were using concentration camp prisoners as slaves I think they were a little more likely than the Irish to know what was going on).
That's not why I correctly pointed out that they were assholes for their behavior back then.

Do you really think countries go to war and base diplomacy on "what would be the valiant thing to do?"

Even nowadays, countries are extremely hesitant to label anything as a genocide, because most countries in the world have agreed that in cases of genocide, there is a responsibility to step in. It's why America doesn't push Turkey on the situation with Armenia. We need an airstrip for the Iraq war, and soured relations would do us no favors.

This is a little over the top.

RazorSharp: If the Swiss want to homogenize their architecture, that's fine, but banning one specific form which is specific to one religion just because it's unpopular is not justified discrimination.

This sounds reasonable and closer to what I was trying to get at.

Do you really think the straw man is an effective tactic?

"THE DRUMS OF WAR BEAT SLOW AND STEADY..."

as I told Jane in chat, I think I made it up, but I'm not sure. Can anyone confirm if this is a quote from something that lodged in my brain and just now came out?

I only ask because if you google it, I'M NUMBER ONE!

FAPPING FAPPING FAPPING FAPPING FAPPING FAPPING FAPPING FAPPING

It sounds familiar, Mike, so it may have been around before.

Okay, so all those people that didn't accept him as their savior are going where now? Umm, that's right. Hell. Now would you send anyone you love there? Nope. But that's where all the kids that don't love, worship, and follow him are going. According to him.

Now, taking something away from you is stealing, correct? And the bible says not to steal, but then says here, if someone does steal from you, that you're not supposed to care, and/or try to get it back. Even though back in the day, if someone stole from someone else, they had to be stoned. It's contradictory...

How so? Do unto others as you would have them do to you? So Jesus must want to go to hell then, since he is sending everyone that doesn't agree with him there, right?

I don't care, the bible isn't something you should base your life off of. At all.

Does Jesus say that? Or is it Christians?

I'm not a Christian, I don't live my life according to Biblical rules. That doesn't mean I grant myself permission to attack it because of gross misunderstandings.

The Bible is a work of incredible intelligence, regardless of its moral or religious significance. The Book of John is one of the subtlest pieces of writing I've ever read, and I'll defend it against any accusations of stupidity. Just because there are religious morons doesn't mean that the Bible was written for morons.

Also, until the recent shift in Dogma, it was believed that when Jesus died he went to Hell. He had the full eTicket experience.

I'm pretty sure some still believe that. Unless I'm mistaken, it was in one of the versions of the Bible. It was the fact that he had to descend into Hell to lead out the Jews that hadn't been able to get into Heaven because the Gates weren't opened.

Not an idea I'm much a fan of.

But honestly, its just that. Its a book. I happen to like reading through Job, myself. But the idea of structuring a religion around it is ridiculous. And no, it wasn't written by morons. And perhaps I was wrong in saying that it was written for simple minded people, but if you think too much into it, it stops making sense. Maybe I should've said, it takes a simple minded person to believe it.

Perhaps it's not best to resort to insulting people for their beliefs.

Great post. I'm not traditionally religous anymore but I think there is a lot of subtle greatness in the Bible, and the Qur'an as well. However I think if you were going to blame anyone for the whole Hell dilema it would be the God the Father person in the Trinity. He is the one who stacked the deck.

An argument could be made that a simple-minded person would read through it and accept it as 100% fact, but most religions nowadays freely admit it is a book written by the hand of man, guided by the word of God, and as such must be open to interpretation. Yes, there are flaws. But there's a lot of good stuff in there too.

I'm so jealous of all you that got to meet Jesus and really know about him.

Dude, he was at the bowling meetup, you shoulda been there. PERFECT GAME. Plenty of wine too. And that mahfah can breakdance!

I thought this was awesome!

I don't know what all you assholes are rambling about, but I was curious if anyone knew anything about the success of middle eastern immigrants in North America(USA, Canada) as opposed to Europe?! I mean, I know dick about this, but it seems that in the states they are one of the more successful minority groups, economically speaking. Of course there is no shortage of hatred towards muslims here, but I don't seem to ever hear about 'middle eastern ghettos', as it would seem they have in Europe. Why is that?! Did we just get a more educated immigrant base, is our entrance policy more strict?! Could it be as simple as Europe's proximity?! Or is it really just policy based, with Europe's being more harsh towards them?! I don't know, but this really fascinates me and I'd love to be enlightened...

This is why 6 and xec killed your 'religion suxx' thread in its crib.
They did you a favor.

What if I don't worship the God and Jesus thing, but really dig their appeal and work ethic? Are they kosher with that? One of my biggest fears/dreams is that when I die I'll find out God actually is real and be like, "Oh, Shit...Awkward..." and just stare down at a cloud before I break out into nervous laughter of the doomed.

HardCandy wrote:

Maybe I should've said, it takes a simple minded person to believe it.

You mean the type of simpletons who wonder why there isn't a "nice tourette's"? Some of the smartest people in the world and in history believe in Christianity. The guy who developed the theory explaining the origin of the universe was a priest.

I prefaced that tourette's comment by saying that it was part of a comedy bit....

Anyway, which theory of the universe would that be? There are hundreds upon thousands of people who have published theories of the origin of the universe. And smartest in the world based on what? And if the guy who created the theory you mentioned was a priest, than he didn't believe in Christianity, he was catholic.

Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings, I believe the Two Towers. I think he says "the drums of war beat in east" or something like that.

I love the use of .gifs to express stuff.

I like how his hat basically stays in the same place while his face goes flying off screen.

I never thought i'd say it, but ozymandias is pretty much my hero in this thread.

i mean this in a totally hetero way but colin farrel is a cute guy.