The Da Vinci Code

[QUOTE=Miriam]Abednego:  I quite agree with you.  If evangelical Christians were  insecure about their beliefs they'd be rioting in the streets over the DaVinci Code movie.  Instead, evangelical pastors are using this as an opportunity to address the issues raised by the movie from the pulpit.  When one has the truth, one needn't get all out of joint about it and act out in a negative manner that only brings insults and laughter from the world.

------------------------------------------------------------ ----

If the evangelical Christians and other Christians were secure, they will not protest against the Da Vinci Code! On the contrary they are taking some steps to stop or to protest against the Da Vinci Code verbally and orally! If they are really secure they will not give a damn to the movie!

That rationalzation is quite sophomoric.

Notice your own operative words here:

In the case of Di Vinci the protesters boycott, condemn, protest, sue.

In the case of the cartoons the remedy was threaten murder, destroy private property, publically call for the murder of those involved and precipitate the deaths of dozens by mob violence.

In the case of Van Goh the remedy was a public execution.

Lets take a look at your definition again.

The term hypocrisy is also commonly used in a way which should be more specifically termed a double standard, bias, or inconsistency. An example would be when one honestly believes that one group of individuals should be held to a different set of morals than another group.

So tell me how you rationalize the double standard you're applying? On the one hand you're perfectly happy with the persecution of Rushdie, murder of Van Goh, and deaths resulting from purile demonstrations. On the other hand you seem experience some angst over peaceful, non-violent and legal methods of protest.

By the way AbRah, what you are doing is called "projection"

from Webster online:

6 a : the act of perceiving a mental object as spatially and sensibly objective; also : something so perceived b : the attribution of one's own ideas, feelings, or attitudes to other people or to objects; especially : the externalization of blame, guilt, or responsibility as a defense against anxiety

------------------------------------------------------------ ---

My response:

You are not fair to yourself by saying such things to Muslims.

Have you forgotten how the Catholics and Protestants tortured and massacred each other during the Catholic-Protestant wars over their difference in Christianity. I wonder why didn't they protest peacefully instead of killing each other in the name of Christianity! 

Here is a quotation of the conflict:

By 1617, the Habsburg chosen as king of Bohemia was Ferdinand II (brother of the now deceased Philip II). Ferdinand was a pious man, attending masses at all hours and a monarch who went on pilgrimages and endured self-abasement. In 1618, Ferdinand moved against Protestantism by closing some Protestant churches in Prague. This was followed by rebellion and the rejection of Habsburg rule - as Ferdinand should have expected it would. Siding with Ferdinand was the Catholic monarch of Bavaria, Maximilian, and Philip II's heir, Philip III, King of Spain. Siding with the Protestants were some German princes. Between 1618 and 1625, Spanish armies supporting Ferdinand defeated Protestant armies, and with the help of the Jesuits and forced conversions, the area around Prague - Bohemia and Moravia - was made Catholic. In Prague, on June 21, 1621, twenty-six noblemen were executed. Other nobles who had rebelled in Bohemia and Moravia had their property confiscated and given to nobles who had demonstrated their loyalty to the Church and Ferdinand II.

Hey Abed... why don't you look at your own history before you Abed accuse Muslims of barbarity! Another question for you Abed :Why did the Christians burnt the scientists etc to death for introducing new ideas that contradicted the Bible during the Dark Age of Europe? Why didn't the Christians protest against the scientists etc peacefully?

[QUOTE=Cyril]Abrah

Your quote: "The West says proudly that it reveres and preserve democracy.It is an irony that the West rejects Hamas when Hamas has won the election in Palestine legally.

You seem (or pretend) not to know how international relations work. All states in the world, except probably North Korea, mutually accept the states which are defined as such.
The only reason why Hamas is rejected is not because it has democratically won elections, but because it does not recognize one of the states of the international community, and because it advocates the suppression of that state.
------------------------------------------------------------ ------

How can Hamas recognize Israel when Israel is formed by the Zionists who rob the Palestinian people of their land? Will you Cyril recognize the robbers who rob you of your home?

Some of Christians of the West have falsely accused Muslims of persecuting non-Muslims in Muslim nations while the Christians themselves abuse the rights of Muslims to practise their beliefs in the West. Muslim girls and women cover their hairs as a part of their beliefs but the Christians use the laws to force them to expose their hairs. Some Muslim women lose their jobs for practising their beliefs and some Muslim girls are barred from schools etc for covering their hairs.

In Muslim nations non-Muslims are allowed to practise their beliefs and there are many churches, temples etc. They may go to schools to study and hold positions in Muslim government and non-government organisations.