Tweet
What is wrong here?
"Baroness Uddin, who was the first Muslim woman to enter the House of Lords, said politicians must put pressure on Pope Benedict to express regret for the "disappointment and hurt" that he caused by his remarks."
That completely negates the apology if he does it under pressure (duress). A forced apology is not an apology.
duress - compulsion by threat or force; coercion; constraint
pressure - to force (someone) toward a particular end; influence
logical conclusion = "Mr. Pope, you said something that hurt my feelings now take it back or else!"
Not very open-minded is it. You can not express your thoughts on us but we can express our dislike for your comments on us.
Tell me .. Why does one group get the right to express and the other only gets the right to express as long as it does not concern me and/or my feelings/beliefs.
Secondly the phrase "to express regret". Well, what they are asking him to do is express regret. Is that the same as feeling regret? Do they want regret or would the appearance of regret make them feel better?
You hurt my feelings now make it better by saying something you may not even mean. But say it anyway because we want to hear it. Say it nicely or we may not believe you. You better make it convincing. I want you to tell me you are sorry even if you do not mean it.
Now factor this in.
The whole problem the Muslims had was the fact that they felt like the Pope was saying that they spread their religion using violence
The Pope's speech quoted from a book recounting a conversation between 14th century Byzantine Christian Emperor Manuel Paleologos II and an educated Persian on the truths of Christianity and Islam.
Here is what the Pope said:
"The emperor comes to speak about the issue of jihad, holy war," the Pope said. "He said, I quote, 'Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached'."
Hmmm, here is what I see when I read this: We the muslims are not a violent people. We are offended by the statement you made saying we are a violent people. Now lets hear from one of our own on the situation. In steps Baroness Uddin ( a Muslim) who says :
"But she (Baroness Uddin) urged Muslims to be "thoughtful" and "restrained" in their response and warned against any form of violent retaliation."
If there is no history of violence and/or "his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached'." then why the call to not respond with violence.
Well let me put it like this: Do you have to warn a person who completely lacks the desire for sexual relations about the risk of sexually transmitted diseases?
Anyone else see through all the garbage to the truth under it?
This is not about religion. This is not about the Pope or Mohammed. This is about self-serving feelings. This is about one group of people playing the emotional card over another. It is like a playground argument between two childern.
He called me a butt-sniffer.
Did not!
Did too!
Did NOT!
DID!
Take it back!
No!
Yes!
NO!
Take it back OR ELSE!
Or else What?
There is no merit, no substance to this entire sutuation. Nothing will be gained that will benefit either group in a sense of existence. Nothing will be lost that will deter either group from their existence.
It is all about the "me" in both groups.
How long will we continue to put our emotions before logic. When will humans see that emotions do nothing but cloud the mind and the ability to weigh the entire situation with any clarity.
Comment