Before that other thread was closed Freefaller said something that I almost couldn't believe.
He described islamic radicals, some of them terrorists who have committed acts of mass murder, as "lost souls".
My personal opinion of Freefaller is that he's probably an idealist, who (like all reasonable people) would like the world to be a peaceful place where people of different beliefs had nothing to fear from each other.
But I also can't escape the feeling that we're increasingly being asked to sympathise in some way with the extremists. Calling them "lost souls" is to my mind a bit perverse, but not unexpected in the current climate.
Whilst an 8 year old boy strapped with explosives and told to walk up to a checkpoint could be considered a victim, what words would most of us here use to describe the person who strapped those bombs to him? A "lost soul"?
Frankly it seems we're going soft here. Showing signs of sympathising with extremely evil people who are enemies of the civilised world, plain and simple. And evil they are, in my opinion. People who have demonstrated a callous disregard for life, and ability to use extremely vile and brutal methods of execution.
Can anyone who is prepared to murder indiscriminately find any kind of redemption? Are these people no longer responsible for their actions, after having received extremist teachings? Is it right to consider them also to be victims? Would any sane, reasonable person actually consent to become a terrorist? Don't you have to be a very sick individual to contemplate murdering innocents, for any "reason"? Do they have any humanity left after committing such acts?
Now that thread was closed because it "brought out the muslim bashers" according to some.
Yet being a radical sympathiser will never get a thread closed, or even cause your posts to be censored. We don't need to go soft here, to start viewing evil men and women as victims themselves.
Or am I wrong here? Are there no truly evil men and women? Are we free to shed responsibility for our actions if we've been viewing and listening to the extremist teachings of radical islam? Are we then "lost souls"?
We do have the historical reality of Nazi Germany to consider, where ordinary men and women were complicit with the persecution of the Jews, even if the worst horrors were hidden from most. And this is at the back of my mind as I type this.
But still, it seems to me to be a denial of reality, if we end up viewing the likes of suicide bombers "lost souls". Hitler wasn't a lost soul, really. He was just evil. As are ISIS. Sick, but not necessarily driven by mental illness, but by hate.
Or is that too simplistic? Can there be shades of grey, can there be room for sympathy, when considering people who have murdered innocents over a religious teaching? I can't find it in myself to even start to make excuses for them. And I suspect that's where Freefaller and I differ. Surely few (if any) of us will have attempted these same mental gymnastics to view (eg) Hitler in a more sympathetic light?
He described islamic radicals, some of them terrorists who have committed acts of mass murder, as "lost souls".
My personal opinion of Freefaller is that he's probably an idealist, who (like all reasonable people) would like the world to be a peaceful place where people of different beliefs had nothing to fear from each other.
But I also can't escape the feeling that we're increasingly being asked to sympathise in some way with the extremists. Calling them "lost souls" is to my mind a bit perverse, but not unexpected in the current climate.
Whilst an 8 year old boy strapped with explosives and told to walk up to a checkpoint could be considered a victim, what words would most of us here use to describe the person who strapped those bombs to him? A "lost soul"?
Frankly it seems we're going soft here. Showing signs of sympathising with extremely evil people who are enemies of the civilised world, plain and simple. And evil they are, in my opinion. People who have demonstrated a callous disregard for life, and ability to use extremely vile and brutal methods of execution.
Can anyone who is prepared to murder indiscriminately find any kind of redemption? Are these people no longer responsible for their actions, after having received extremist teachings? Is it right to consider them also to be victims? Would any sane, reasonable person actually consent to become a terrorist? Don't you have to be a very sick individual to contemplate murdering innocents, for any "reason"? Do they have any humanity left after committing such acts?
Now that thread was closed because it "brought out the muslim bashers" according to some.
Yet being a radical sympathiser will never get a thread closed, or even cause your posts to be censored. We don't need to go soft here, to start viewing evil men and women as victims themselves.
Or am I wrong here? Are there no truly evil men and women? Are we free to shed responsibility for our actions if we've been viewing and listening to the extremist teachings of radical islam? Are we then "lost souls"?
We do have the historical reality of Nazi Germany to consider, where ordinary men and women were complicit with the persecution of the Jews, even if the worst horrors were hidden from most. And this is at the back of my mind as I type this.
But still, it seems to me to be a denial of reality, if we end up viewing the likes of suicide bombers "lost souls". Hitler wasn't a lost soul, really. He was just evil. As are ISIS. Sick, but not necessarily driven by mental illness, but by hate.
Or is that too simplistic? Can there be shades of grey, can there be room for sympathy, when considering people who have murdered innocents over a religious teaching? I can't find it in myself to even start to make excuses for them. And I suspect that's where Freefaller and I differ. Surely few (if any) of us will have attempted these same mental gymnastics to view (eg) Hitler in a more sympathetic light?
For all eternity, surrounded by 72 women, only able to talk...