zlacker

They've already tried to paint BLM as a violent organization, so no new low surprises me.

>>croon+(OP)
Who do you attribute the assassinations of police officers to? I guess you could argue that they weren't "organized", but it seems about as organized as right-wing terrorism like the shooting in Charleston (a.k.a. the fascism the anti-fascism is counteracting).

>>croon+(OP)
Well, technically the Bureau of Land Management does use threats of violence to enforce it's decisions, but it's a bit unfair to single them out next to much worse offenders like the ATF or CIA.

>>humanr+B7
I don't consider Christianity a violent organization despite the crusades and the inquisition, nor do I consider Islam a violent organization, or most other religions.

I consider an organization on their tenets, under which Black Lives Matter is completely fine.

KKK for example isn't.

Right-wing terrorism has no redeeming kernel of decency, nor does it have a productive movement behind the (few?) bad actors.

>>croon+59
> I consider an organization on their tenets

No, you don't, or you would consider a religion that endorses literally infinite amounts of torture for anyone who disagrees with them to be violent. There's also its attitudes toward homosexuality (Leviticus 18:22), slavery (Exodus 21:7), murdering people for working on saturdays (or maybe sundays?) (Exodus 35:2), and touching pig remains (Leviticus 11:7), among others.

>>a13692+sa
I wholeheartedly condemn a large portion of the evangelical movement, and any religious fanatic, but I also believe that there's a case to be made for more charitable translations and interpretations, and I know several Christians who believe not in the things you listed, but follow the less brimstoney new testament.

But to some extent I do agree with you, otherwise I would still be a Christian which I'm not, for the fact that any belief that subjugates moral philosophy and reasoning to interpreting holy text will always have blind spots.

Either way, I apologize if it distracted from the point I was trying to make, that all organizations, good or bad will have bad actors, but what's important is identifying which organization can be fruitful and which is inherently bad.

Maybe we will disagree on a few there.

>>a13692+sa
You’re quoting the Old Testament. The “lesser laws” of which were superseded by the “higher law” instituted by Jesus.

>>colejo+Dx
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters" (Ephesians 6:5 and Colossians 3:22) (the easiest one to grep for, since I remember the exact phrasing). Doesn't sound very superseded to me, and Christians continued supporting that right up until the South lost the Civil War (and a fair bit past that in other places) and slavery became politically impractical to defend. So it wasn't a case of a misquotation (by two different sources? really?) being corrected; it was a case of explicitly heretical values being forced on the church at (rather close to literal) gunpoint.

As someone more eloquent than me put it: Christianity had it's chance to rule the world; we call it the Dark Ages for good reason.

>>a13692+sa
Er, just to clairify, Islam is also horrible, but I have less in the way of citations for them because I don't interact with them as much and I don't speak Arabic. If you want to look up said citations yourself, I think the search keywords your want would be "sharia law", although "muhammed pedophile" would probably also help.

>>a13692+852
Read up on what the Quakers did that whole time.