No you didn’t. I was speaking of how besieged cities, as a “common practice,” were treated if they offered more than token resistance against their invaders. If your response was to any other part of my msg, then it would have made even less sense. I then asked whose culture still enthusiastically embraces the indiscriminate slaughter of children and noncombatant men and women and who does not. You couldn’t bring yourself to answer. Would have gagged on the reply, I imagine. So you had to shift the ground to avoid conceding an unpleasant truth you couldn’t face.
I could have replied much more harshly. Considering your response, I could have inquired if you were suggesting that our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan are engaging in the same sort of indiscriminate slaughter as are the Islamic savages who infest the area. That’s the accusation Socialist/Marxists hurl at our armed forces. Do you agree? It seems that you do.
I could have then gone on to ask if you were also suggesting that Christians are unreservedly a bunch of murdering racists and bigots, who revel in the indiscriminate slaughter of Middle East innocents by our troops (Middle East. Get it? Dark skinned people. Those racist American Christians). Guess you do make that connection.
Oh, how you love to scramble your terms. First, it was the Quakers. They actually did something to relieve the suffering of the slaves (and maybe the Unitarians a little). But, not those filthy racist Fundies, whom Quakers can’t relate to. Then it became just simply ‘Christians’ who did everything in their power to oppress the former slaves. Guess that lumps all the Christians together as racist, bloody-minded killers of innocent women and children. Except the Quakers (and maybe the Unitarians)? Possibly you subscribe to the notion that Quakers, being much too nice, aren’t really Christians. Nor the Unitarians either? They are Deists, so a little credit can be thrown their way?
What was the original proposition again? That Muslims are just as likely to be right as the Jews and Christians. You immediately focused on Christians and their many transgressions (apparently even dismissing the Jews from your thoughts – such single mindedness is admirable). Guess JS1138 has registered his answer: It’s the Moslems who are right. It’s those awful Christians who fly very big planes into very tall buildings at very high speeds. It’s Christians who delight in the slaughter of millions of innocents (an especially delightful circumstance if the victims are dark skinned).
Oh yes, and it was Charles Darwin along with a small band of determined atheistic evolutionists who freed the slaves.
I would say that Christian nations are not a full century removed from this kind of behavior. More to the point, I would argue that nominally Christian nations have become less savage as they have become more secular. Our own nation provides numerous examples. I mentioned slavery, but there is also the forced relocation of the Cherokees, to cite just two examples.
I think I could make the case that many Freepers wouldn't consider Unitarians and Quakers to be Christians. Stick around on the religion threads and hardly anyone qualifies.
Folks have a tendency to forget that it was Christians who were the most rabid abolitionists. They are the ones who freed the slaves and gave them shelter on the way to freedom.