News Stories

[Zakoo]

Barbarians is a kind word.

[Archon_Wing]

I think it's more accurate to say that the United States, like many other countries in the West have distinct values that were built upon classical western liberalism. That being said, certainly there is no doubt that Christianity had a stirring role of influence since a lot of the people happened to be Christian. You can definitely say that the United States has had a strong Christian tradition in our culture, but we always like to claim our culture is a combination of many, and hence why the 1st amendment partially decreed the separation of Religion and State (though only when talking about Congress). Incidentally, if we take it on its face value; they were most likely thinking of different denominations of Christianity since conflicts between them have created great disaster. So if we were trying to be very technical, then certainly as of its founding the United States and its people could be said to be a Christian nation.

However, I would dare anyone to associate a religion or even a set of values, with a country like China and not end up politically incorrect. Is it maybe, a Confucian one? Are we going to base it off the values of the current Communist party which also would have derived its values from the west, or should we go back to maybe to Sun Yat Sen that started the revolution of modern China? Does anyone really fixate on what religion they had? Or is it that only white people practice their kind of religion so specifically to demand labels and push it onto others?

Of course, there is a certain limit to what can be associated with the Founding Fathers of the US. Now certainly we've established that Christianity most certainly played a role in their convictions even if they weren't Christian, but we certainly don't want everything associated with them. I mean the country was also founded on slavery too. And Hitler was a vegetarian.

But in any case, regardless of denomination, I believe they'd all call themselves Christian and at least have some degree of respect for each other's core beliefs.

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

After all, what are the debates over abortion and the wars over slavery about, if not a question of whose interpretation of Scripture is "correct"? And while it may no longer be politically correct to express the opinion nowadays, it wasn't very long ago that some Anglo-American thinkers and writers attributed the success of the West to the Protestant work ethic.

Just wanted to address this one. The slavery issue was never primarily a religious or even a moral issue at the forefront. It certainly played a role, but it was by and far an economic and political issue, as well as a societal issue when it came to power relations and hierarchy. If they could have resolved the Civil War peacefully by having the states rejoin the union, keeping slavery, they would have because preserving the union for many reasons is the first priority. Indeed, the religious input on moral matters is a justification, not a reasoning, when it gets brought up on popular discourse.

And so yes, we Americans don't consult the Bible as a primary source on those matters. I'm actually skeptical that many people actually read it, especially the ones that keep trying to quote it.

Abortion is definitely more of a moral issue and naturally religion comes to play though certainly the moral concerns there are not limited to Christianity-- holding human life in high regards is pretty much everywhere, but you wouldn't be wrong to say this plays a role.

[Ithekro]

The 13 Colonies were all formed from a mix of Europeans, mostly English, but also Dutch, German, Scottish, Welsh, and others. However all these nationalities were Christian in the 1600s and 1700s. A few of the Colonies were founded by essentally religious outcasts from England. The laws of the Colonies were based on English Laws were are also based somewhat on Christian laws as defined by way of the Bible (which in many respects would be Jewish laws to a point).

Since the laws and culture of the 13 Colonies was mostly derived from England, and England got its culture through a long line of Christian kingdoms as far back as the Romans, one could say that the United States of America, via its direct formation ties to England, is a Christian state. Culturally. It does not have a Christian Government, nor a state religion. But its value system and ethics are very much Christian based.

[Archon_Wing]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

The 13 Colonies were all formed from a mix of Europeans, mostly English, but also Dutch, German, Scottish, Welsh, and others. However all these nationalities were Christian in the 1600s and 1700s. A few of the Colonies were founded by essentally religious outcasts from England. The laws of the Colonies were based on English Laws were are also based somewhat on Christian laws as defined by way of the Bible (which in many respects would be Jewish laws to a point).

Since the laws and culture of the 13 Colonies was mostly derived from England, and England got its culture through a long line of Christian kingdoms as far back as the Romans, one could say that the United States of America, via its direct formation ties to England, is a Christian state. Culturally. It does not have a Christian Government, nor a state religion. But its value system and ethics are very much Christian based.

So yes, it's fair to say the US has a root in traditional Christian values. I like to use the more general term "western values" which of course has a strong relationship with.

[Ithekro]

Western values I would assume cover Western Europe as well. Probably most of the Americas since most of the New World is either British based or Spanish based in terms of ethical systems, which basically means Christian via the Roman Catholic systems and then spread it the various Protestant groupings in the former British and Dutch colonies as well as Catholic in the former Spanish colonies. The French influences would also be Catholic if I recall correctly.

It would differ from Eastern Europe that has a larger Eastern Orthodox base to Christianity as well as a Muslim base to it in places.

[Fireminer]

Cruxifiction in Syria

So should I treat this in Christian Value, Muslim Value, or Non-Human Value?

[TinyRedLeaf]

New Power Rangers movie announced

May 7 (Wed)

On the heels of their 20th anniversary last year, the Power Rangers are returning to the big screen. Power Rangers owners Saban are teaming with Lionsgate, the studio behind the Hunger Games and Saw franchises, for a new film.

It sounds like it could be considered a reboot, in that the press release says it will "re-envision the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers", the original incarnation of the series.

20th Century Fox released two Power Rangers movies in the 1990s, Mighty Morphin Power Rangers: The Movie and Turbo: A Power Rangers Movie.

Through its 21 years on the air, with many different casts playing different teams, the Power Rangers TV shows have maintained a loose continuity.

Several Power Rangers alumni are set to guest star on the current Power Rangers: Super Megaforce, to celebrate the recent 20th anniversary, which is not the first time Rangers from the past have made return appearances.

It remains to be seen if the new film, with its return to the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers concept, will have any ties to the TV show continuity or be set apart completely.

IGN

[Ithekro]

Originally Posted by Fireminer

Cruxifiction in Syria

So should I treat this in Christian Value, Muslim Value, or Non-Human Value?

Just an old form of degrading execution, as that was its purpose. It predates Christianity by at least five centuries.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Just an old form of degrading execution, as that was its purpose. It predates Christianity by at least five centuries.

Not to mention Christianity invented far worse execution methods up to and including the middle ages.

There was even a method reserved for killing innocent people; namely people who refuse to confess. Officially people can only be guilty if they confess. So for those who insist they didn't do the crime, they can be killed in a separate way that let their god sort them out.
Only god can judge people, as they say. Hence they need to die first to see their god. What's the harm? I mean if they are truly innocent then they get to heaven, that's hardly a bad thing is it?

[monster]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Not to mention Christianity invented far worse execution methods up to and including the middle ages.

I don't understand your reasoning. Christianity exists, but not Christian?

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by monster

I don't understand your reasoning. Christianity exists, but not Christian?

In this case I was specifying the Papal States. At that time other denomination were near insignificant as the Pope just kills anyone who isn't Catholic.

[ganbaru]

Abduction of Girls an Act Not Even Al Qaeda Can Condone
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/08/wo...e.html?hp&_r=1

The dismay of fellow jihadists at the innocent targets of Boko Haram’s violence is a reflection of the increasingly far-flung and ideologically disparate networks of Islamist militancy, which now include the remnants of Bin Laden’s puritanical camps, Algerian cigarette smugglers and a brutal Somalian offshoot.

“The violence most of the African rebel groups practice makes Al Qaeda look like a bunch of schoolgirls,” said Bronwyn Bruton, an Africa scholar at the Atlantic Council in Washington. “And Al Qaeda at this point is a brand — and pretty much only a brand — so you have to ask yourself how they are going to deal with the people who are doing things so hideous even the leaders of Al Qaeda are unwilling to condone them.”

[JokerD]

Originally Posted by Fireminer

Cruxifiction in Syria

So should I treat this in Christian Value, Muslim Value, or Non-Human Value?

I'll need to point out that despite the title, crucifixion is not the cause of death, they were put to death first then put up on crosses or whichever public spectacle they deem was necessary.

[Dextro]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Not to mention Christianity invented far worse execution methods up to and including the middle ages.

There was even a method reserved for killing innocent people; namely people who refuse to confess. Officially people can only be guilty if they confess. So for those who insist they didn't do the crime, they can be killed in a separate way that let their god sort them out.
Only god can judge people, as they say. Hence they need to die first to see their god. What's the harm? I mean if they are truly innocent then they get to heaven, that's hardly a bad thing is it?

But then the ones doing the killing are violating the "Thou shalt not kill" commandment. How do they justify that?

Oh sorry, I forgot I shouldn't bring logic to their attention

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by JokerD

I'll need to point out that despite the title, crucifixion is not the cause of death, they were put to death first then put up on crosses or whichever public spectacle they deem was necessary.

Like every other religious or political persecution.

Federal agents target "spice" makers in Colorado drug raid

Federal agents raided this warehouse in Denver as part of a massive crackdown on synthetic drugs --- specifically something known as "Spice."

SOUNDBITE (ENGLISH) U.S. ATTORNEY JOHN WALSH SAYING: "Spice is a synthetic substance that claims to produce a marijuana-like high, but it's important for people to be fooled by that claim of a legal high. Spice which is known by many names, some of them pretty colorful like "Crazy Clown" is simply not legal. It isn't legal under federal law. It is not legal under state law, and it is very much unsafe. As I mentioned, over 200 Coloradans ended up in emergency rooms as a result of buying this often from convenience stores or other retail outlets where they perceived it was a legal sale." According to court records, "spice" or synthetic marijuana can be as much as 800 times stronger than marijuana. It can also trigger extreme hallucinations.

SOUNDBITE: GEORGE BRAUCHLER, 18TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY SAYING: "The things we've seen grow out of use of this is people trying to cut their own heads off, people trying to set themselves on fire, people doing harm to others." Authorities say 221 Colorado residents became extremely sick from use of spice during a month-long outbreak in September of last year.

The spice, MUST FLOW!

[monster]

Originally Posted by Dextro

But then the ones doing the killing are violating the "Thou shalt not kill" commandment. How do they justify that?

It is an unfortunate event caused by ignorance/misunderstanding/abuse of the Bible. And indeed, we should recognize it as such.

[PzIVf3]

Chinese ships ram Vietnamese vessels in latest oil rig row: officials

Vietnamese Marine Police ships patrolling Vietnamese waters were rammed by Chinese marine police, Ngo Ngoc Thu, vice commander of the High Command of Vietnam Marine Police said Wednesday.

Thu was speaking at an international press conference held in Hanoi after China deployed a giant mobile drilling rig to search for oil and gas inside Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone in the East Sea, also known as the South China Sea.
Videos showed at the press conference showed Chinese ships, backed by helicopters, aggressively obstructing Vietnamese ships.
The Chinese ships also sprayed water cannons, damaging Vietnamese vessels and injuring their crew members, Thu said.
Tran Duy Hai, deputy chairman of the Vietnam National Border Committee, said China deployed 80 ships to accompany the oil rigs, including 7 military ships, 33 marine patrol boats and surveillance ships and many other vessels including fishing vessels.

China blames Vietnam for sea collisions, but calls for talks

(Reuters) - China accused Vietnam on Thursday of intentionally colliding with its ships in the South China Sea, but called for talks to end a bitter row sparked by Beijing's parking of a giant oil rig in contested waters.

A senior foreign ministry official in Beijing demanded that Vietnam withdraw its ships after its southern neighbor asserted that Chinese vessels used water cannon and rammed eight of its vessels at the weekend near the rig. Hanoi said two vessels were badly damaged and six people were wounded in the worst setback to ties between the two Communist nations in years.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A4708J20140508

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

The Vietnamese were never that close to the Chinese historically despite some political links in recent history. Guess China is starting to piss EVERYONE off.

Couldn't China just, you know, bribe some Vietnamese politicians instead? Why ram boats when they didn't need to? This is worrying. China is being more aggressive than they needed to. And to a country they are not suppose to be hostile towards.

[SeijiSensei]

China and Vietnam have clashed over the South China Sea on a number of occasions dating back to 1974. They also fought a pointless land war in 1979.

[KiraYamatoFan]

I'll be blunt on that: those Chinese are acting like big fat c**ts. I can't wait for the day they will have body bags to fill with their own after crossing the line that shouldn't be crossed like idiots. On the day that happens, they better not start whining when warning signs were there.

Saying that the Vietnamese ship rammed... have you seen the size of the ships involved?

Spoiler for typical PRC reaction: