Woman burned alive for being a witch

[debrox]

Ad hominem does not equal a good argument.

This coming from a person calling themselves a big boy with the implication that the person they're quoting isn't one. All I did was point out the irony of your statement.

People who make jokes about mothers brutally murdered for no reason in front of their 8 year old daughter are pretty damn close. Don't patronise to me and take 5 seconds to think before you get high and mighty. When it comes down to it I'm fairly certain you agree with me, Unless perhaps you'd like to laugh at this sort of thing? Go on, Tell me a joke about a modern day witch burning in front of a minor. I'm sure it'll be hilarious.

I'll keep this brief. I don't think people who joke about something - anything - are in any case worse than people who inflict actual bodily harm with no justification.

And I have no problem with black humor.

Ad hominem tu quoque does not equal a good argument. But that was not part of my argument. It was just a conversational way to say whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.

 

[debrox]

Ad hominem tu quoque does not equal a good argument. But that was not part of my argument. It was just a conversational way to say whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.

Note: I'm barely responding at this point.

First, what you call your argument could barely even be described as a sentence. Don't refer to it as some supreme put down or drop of knowledge. Second, I did address your argument. Third, you have no basis on which to invoke the Ad hominem tu quoque fallacy. All you're doing, twice in a row, is throwing latin at me, presumably in hopes that I'll cower in awe of your rhetorical skills.

The straw man fallacy does not equal a good argument.

 

[Deathmageddon]

Religious people doing stupid things that end up hurting/killing people?

Wow...that's SO new!

Please tell me you mean Extremists......

"Moderates" see human sacrifice as a good thing. They celebrate a man's conviction to follow the voice in his head to the point of gutting his own son. The main difference is how far you're willing to go in the name of your professed beliefs.

Moderates are better to be sure, but don't even imply that one is completely different from the other.

The point of that story was to differentiate the judeo-christian God from barbaric, pagan religions. Besides, Thou Shalt Not Kill.

 

[debrox]

Correlation does not equal causation. Leave the use of statistical argument to the big boys who understand it.

'Course it doesn't. Correlation doesn't mean nothing, either.

I find it ironic that you call yourself a big boy, when "correlation does not equal causation" is one of the most used terms on this forum, and that's basically the entirety of your post.

And you were using it with the assumption it showed causation. So saying it doesn't mean nothing is quite irrelevant. Weak argument there.

I am assuming something that is a necessity for his thoughts to be coherent:

I don't mind religion in general but it's things like these that sometimes make me hate it. People killing other people over pure fiction. And in such a horrible way. Bah! Makes me sick.

Don't get me wrong. Religion has it's good things too. Acts like these just sometimes make those good things hard to see.

People do stupid shit constantly, religion is merely a wayward justification. If religion weren't there, they'd find some other justification to be stupid assholes.

Would it be better if the woman was burned for monetary or political purposes (which I suspect are closer to the true reasons)? I somehow doubt she or her children would care.

Without religion, it would be one less crazy justification for killing people, and that's the whole point. Also, your assertion that without religion people would still kill each other just the same is downright false, as evidenced by the statistical fact that the least religious countries in, at least, western society, have the lowest criminal rates in the entire world.

The bolded part probably means that you either haven't been around religious people enough or are religious yourself and are rationalising your beliefs. Religions shape people's perception of reality, don't you dare tell anyone they're "merely" anything.

So his premise is lower amounts of religion correspond statistically (i.e. correlate with) lower amounts of violence. His second (implied) premise is that this correlation demonstrates causation, using the cum hoc ergo propter hoc. Therefore, he concludes, the religious violence absent in a less religious country is not replaced by other avenues of violence. His conclusion, which he expressly stated, makes no sense without the implied premise.

 

[debrox]

Correlation does not equal causation. Leave the use of statistical argument to the big boys who understand it.

'Course it doesn't. Correlation doesn't mean nothing, either.

I find it ironic that you call yourself a big boy, when "correlation does not equal causation" is one of the most used terms on this forum, and that's basically the entirety of your post.

And you were using it with the assumption it showed causation. So saying it doesn't mean nothing is quite irrelevant. Weak argument there.

I am not assuming anything. The original post stated it expressly in his argument:

I don't mind religion in general but it's things like these that sometimes make me hate it. People killing other people over pure fiction. And in such a horrible way. Bah! Makes me sick.

Don't get me wrong. Religion has it's good things too. Acts like these just sometimes make those good things hard to see.

People do stupid shit constantly, religion is merely a wayward justification. If religion weren't there, they'd find some other justification to be stupid assholes.

Would it be better if the woman was burned for monetary or political purposes (which I suspect are closer to the true reasons)? I somehow doubt she or her children would care.

Without religion, it would be one less crazy justification for killing people, and that's the whole point. Also, your assertion that without religion people would still kill each other just the same is downright false, as evidenced by the statistical fact that the least religious countries in, at least, western society, have the lowest criminal rates in the entire world.

The bolded part probably means that you either haven't been around religious people enough or are religious yourself and are rationalising your beliefs. Religions shape people's perception of reality, don't you dare tell anyone they're "merely" anything.

I was addressing the person I quoted. HE was assuming causation.

Yes, you're right.

 

[uncanny474]

Religious people doing stupid things that end up hurting/killing people?

Wow...that's SO new!

Come off it. It's not the religions that make people do stupid things--religions are just an excuse for them to do something they would have done anyway.

If power invariably corrupts, then I think it says something about the species being given that power, even moreso than it does the nature of power itself. People have shown me time and time again that they will act horrible to each other at the slightest provocation. I can't believe y'all are surprised.

And there we go again. Religion is not "just an" anything. It significantly alters the very perception of reality of those believing it. That isn't something minor you just brush off the same way you would an out there opinion on a movie or something.

But if you really want to go down this road, and claim that religion is actually just a ruse on the part of all believers, explain something to me. Explain suicide bombing.

People are willing to die for their intolerance. It's a very, VERY stupid thing, but people are willing to die for just about anything.

 

[WanderingFool]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/18/world/asia/nepal-witchcraft-burning/index.html

I hope those responsible are burned at the stake themselves. They killed the woman right in front of her daughter.

I sould point out that of the people arrested, there were two shamans. Somehow, this doesnt sit right with me, but I dont know why... well, okay, it doesnt sit even more right with me, considering that there was a woman burned at the stake... I mean for fuck sake...

 

[Zio_IV]

Well her children got one million rupees, do you know how many Hyrulean shields you could buy with that shit?

12,500 in Ocarina of Time, 5000 in Twilight Princess

Don't forget about when you show Zelda's letter to get the discount in OoT! Then you can get 16,666 shields!

Yeesh, why do I even remember that?...?

 

[Lilani]

I'm just waiting for this to happen in America. Then we'll be able to say with complete seriousness: ''AMERICANS''.

Dont be ridiculous Americans would never burn anyone for being a witch. they do communists and black people!

And homosexuals, don't forget them.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't that already happen in America? You know, the whole Salem witch trails and The Crucible.

The people of the Salem Witch trials were imprisoned, tried, then hanged. Not attacked, beaten, then burned.

Both are silly and should never have happened, but the one that was more cruel is pretty obvious. There were also a few that were found innocent during the witch trials.

 

[MercurySteam]

Nepal? Really? Glad I don't live anywhere near that hellhole. That is just messed up.

 

[Terminate421]

"Moderates" see human sacrifice as a good thing. They celebrate a man's conviction to follow the voice in his head to the point of gutting his own son. The main difference is how far you're willing to go in the name of your professed beliefs.

And those are the extremists. The ones who pull this shit. Trust me, us "Normal" religious types are just as disgusted by this as everyone else.

Religious people doing stupid things that end up hurting/killing people?

Wow...that's SO new!

Please tell me you mean Extremists......

An extremist just means people who have more extreme beliefs than the majority, so it's completely subjective. Most people who in the 13th century Europe would have been considered 'normal' we would today label extremists.

It really just depends on what group of people you are looking at. Are you talking about all the religious people in the world? Or particular sect or religion?

And what you define to be 'extremism', anyway?

I should have meant Religious Extremitism.

I am Catholic, I am not afraid to admit it. But I do get tired of the idea that apparently "only religious people could do this" so I meant to say Extremists because thats when they let their religion control their common sense. I don't mind religious people, but its idiots who kill people or prevent life saving medicine from reaching people thats the problem and gives us a bad image.

 

[A-D.]

Its rather ironic that the same argument that people are throwing against each other is quite probably the same argument and logic that actually led to a Mother being burned by her own Family, or rather part of her Family.

How exactly is it a equal evil to laugh at something horrible, to make a joke to deflect and defuse, as the actual Deed itself? That is illogical on so many levels i wont even bother arguing every single case where it would apply. And if i was very honest at this Point, if we as People would take every case of this, or something similar to it, as serious as you do verbally in here, then you might as well jump off a Bridge right now because at the end of the Day, we as a Species are stupid and very very nasty to each other. Shit like this happens on a daily basis, something we define as evil probably happens this very Minute you are reading this. Does that make the "Evil" any less worse? Nope, it doesnt. But to gather in outrage every time, and then point fingers at People who do not make that outrage heard in the same Way? Get off that high Horse.

 

[TotalerKrieger]

True that this involved religious beliefs hint why they burned the poor woman alive.. yet religion itself isn't responsible. Some people take beliefs way to far- including politicians. They don't have to be religious yet their beliefs in politics can drive them making very bad decisions (Hitler for say), or even scientists in their beliefs can cause them to create horrible things (video games and movies love to make scientists usually bad like in Resident Evil, ect.)

Still, it's the very hardcore religious people that usually tend to do acts like these. Sadly, my religion as a Christian is understandable to feel hatred towards since Christians tend to hate gays, judge people, and force their beliefs onto people. Yet they forget the very importance of a moral within the religion:

"Treat thy neighbor as you'd treat thyself." (Leviticus 19:18, Matthew 19:19, Matthew 22:39)

Even though I am a religious, I myself am not a holy person- I got flaws. Just I try to improve and still struggle. Yet it really does indeed sadden me dearly to see a mother die in such a state including having her daughter watch. That's not only traumatizing but will inflict her deeply, maybe even physically. All we can do is educate people hoping they won't take their beliefs to such a state and accuse people as being witches, satan(s), whichever it may be.

What does a religion become if the vast majority of the faithful are not willing to judge and act according to their religious beliefs? A spirituality, a set of traditions? Seems like a religion stripped of all power and influence to me, it ceases to be a genuine religion IMO. Passively/selectively believing in religious codes is a phenomena largely unique to the West, due to the rise of scientific thinking, personal freedoms and a common secular culture.

The more pervasive a religion is within a population (and the more deficient a population is of proper education), the more likely that individuals will judge and act based on these religious beliefs (including the use of force). In cases of extreme pervasiveness, the state and judiciary are willing to use force in the name of the dominant religion ex: Saudi Arabia, Israel. I agree that ideology can take the place of religion in this sense. The state "religion" of the USSR was Marxist-Leninism for example. Religious and ideologoical dogma take over where education fails; accepting what you are told to believe versus thinking independently and logically.

Blame lies soley with the individuals who carry out such acts of violence/oppression, but it is clear that their dogmatic beliefs are the root cause of the problem. If these people had not been "brainswashed" by the local shamans, do you really think they would have made the decision to burn another human being alive?

Albert Einstein is considered one of the most brilliant minds around, plus we use most of his theories/factors as evidence in science dealing with light, physics, ect. yet he was Jewish. The problem isn't religion itself, but the people who take their beliefs and warp it into judgement upon others without thinking it through.

If I saw a girl wearing Satan on her arm as a tattoo, I wouldn't think she was a witch or some sort of Satanist. Instead it's just an artistic style going on and she chose that for a particular reason. Doesn't define her as something against my religion but rather it's her choice to stand out as something in this modern culture. That, and there are many personal reasons why a war or act of crime is started. In America, protests and acts of violence are happening because of the people wanting the higher ups or higher classes to stop getting special treatment from the Government, and want fair jobs.

I wasn't saying that religous people are not intelligent. I was saying that secular education and the resulting democratic culture run contrary to religion. Science contradicts long held religious beliefs using undeniable facts. The Rule of Law provides a fair and egalitatian legal system, the same cannot be said of Sharia courts in the Middle East or the now abolished Christian legal systems. Secular humanism has unified large populations crossing borders and oceans, religious morality has a long history of creating violent divisions. If secular education was introduced as the global norm, major religions would decline to the simple spiritualities seen in much of the western world (this is exactly what the Islamist terrorists are fighting against).

If that girl lived in Saudi Arabia she would be imprisoned or murdered for violating the state's religious dogma, tolerance does not seem to exist in most religious societies.

 

[Deathmageddon]

Religious people doing stupid things that end up hurting/killing people?

Wow...that's SO new!

Please tell me you mean Extremists......

"Moderates" see human sacrifice as a good thing. They celebrate a man's conviction to follow the voice in his head to the point of gutting his own son. The main difference is how far you're willing to go in the name of your professed beliefs.

Moderates are better to be sure, but don't even imply that one is completely different from the other.

The point of that story was to differentiate the judeo-christian God from barbaric, pagan religions. Besides, Thou Shalt Not Kill.

Thou shalt not kill, until I tell you to slaughter thousands and thousands of people and take their virgins as slaves. Or was that part a metaphor? The point of the story was to show what kind of reverence God expects of you. The old testament is just as barbaric as any other religion ever was.

No, it wasn't a metaphor, it was simply "Thou shalt not kill." The Bible also says to love your enemies and do not hate non-christians, but rather pity them, because they don't know God's love. It also warns against false prophets: people who show the same blind, hate-filled fanaticism that you show here. Humans aren't perfect. Don't follow clergymen blindly; for Christians, the Bible is the only spiritual authority on Earth.

The Old Testament is called Old for a reason. Read the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, since you probably don't know).

 

[Darkmantle]

It's Nepal. They're currently trying to establish a Communist Government. They had a Civil war for years and have only recently got out of it. Of course Extremists are gonna do crud like this. The important thing to remember, however, is that A majority of Religious people, don't do these things.

I'm sorry I don't follow. Communism is sparking up there so CLEARLY they burn witches? I don't see the connection

No, Communism isn't sparking up there, that's why they had a Civil War. The Country is broken basically, and just like in say Afghanistan or Iraq, a Broken Country allows these things to happen.

oh okay, that makes more sense.

 

[Moosejaw]

Without religion, it would be one less crazy justification for killing people, and that's the whole point.

So if someone kills somebody else because of a particular reason, we should strive to GET RID of that reason, despite whatever benefits it may confer on the vast majority of people who DO NOT utilize this reason for murder? There are too many to name. Money, private property, resources, romance, competition, none of these things are wrong. They have a purpose, and just like anything else, they can be abused.

Even if you might think it is silly, religion helps and gives a purpose to many, as well as encouraging a good deal of helpful values to society. Sure, it's not the only thing that does those things. Sure, it doesn't matter to YOU personally, but it has certainly helped others. Just because someone used it for the wrong purposes does not mean you should stamp it out.

Also, your assertion that without religion people would still kill each other just the same is downright false, as evidenced by the statistical fact that the least religious countries in, at least, western society, have the lowest criminal rates in the entire world.

Correlation does not imply causation. If I told you that the countries with the lowest crime rates also had the least vending machines, should we scrap all of those as well?

The bolded part probably means that you either haven't been around religious people enough or are religious yourself and are rationalising your beliefs. Religions shape people's perception of reality, don't you dare tell anyone they're "merely" anything.

I'm quite free to claim whatever I like, and you can make as many guesses to my character as you like. It has no bearing on what I've said.

 

[Moosejaw]

You'll notice that resources aren't the same as religious beliefs, and neither are competition or romance.

Name one moral thing that can be done by a religious person that can not be done by a non-religious person. Then try and attempt the opposite. Why you even attempt this moral value thing is beyond me. You are aware that "the Good Book" promotes activities ranging from child beating to genocide for little more reason than disobeying authority, are you not?

I never once said that ONLY religion can promote reality, I even acknowledged that in my reply, which you decided to skip over. And hell, if there's any better analogy to use in this situation than romance, I don't know what it is.

From a practical viewpoint, it's useless. You don't need a monogamous relationship to create a child, you just need a relationship for five minutes. After that, the mother can take care of it on her own or with her own family. Or give her child away to an entirely different family. Many would say those circumstances don't matter, that kid could turn out perfectly well. Having parents is not 'necessary'.

But the nuclear family is stable, a mother and a father (Or two mothers, or two fathers, I'm not going to judge) raising a child in a loving home is, while I'm not being as scientific about it as I'm sure you'd like, very beneficial to that child. But it may not always work out that way.

Love can fade and lead to adultery or divorce and you can ruin a child's life, even have a motive for murder (one of the oldest one's in the book) - but should we strive to phase out committed relationships because you don't personally like it or there are other ways to raise a child? What we can try to do is push against needless violence, wherever it appears and whatever the cause.

I sure do think it's silly, because:
A) There is zero evidence for any of the world's religions;
B) The big western one, at least, contains dozens and dozens of contradictions both in its ideas and in its asserted facts.

You saying I want it stamped out for being used for the wrong purposes implies that there is a "right" purpose for religion. Explain that purpose to me, and then explain why that purpose is right in the first place.

If this were some completely benign thing that didn't impede critical thinking, like, say, preferences in art or pastime, I wouldn't have a problem with it. This is something that claims truth without evidence and has very real results on people's minds. As it is, there are tens of millions of drones in the supposedly greatest country of the world who were conditioned right from their childhood to take things on faith, whether it's what their parents told them as a kid, or a preacher tells them now. No doubt you know of the problems plaguing the US politics and policy.

I'd more blame US politics on the fact that the government and corporations are tightly entwined, given that most people holding federal elected office are millionaires. One side bribes the other, the other side implements laws to benefit the other. And it's not just Republicans that do this, and it has not just been going on since 2000. There is certainly a blind faith in authority, but the authority brandished is rarely God these days.

I can imply causation in the increased understanding of and ability to use reason and the scientific method versus the decreasing religiosity, but violence, no, you're right.

I bet you find exactly as many stupid people who are religious as you do those that are atheists. Just because you believe in God does not mean you're an idiot, no more than not believing in God means you're a genius. Of course, you may disagree and think folks who think like you do are awesome and folks that don't are idiots. But that's just tribalism.

I didn't say that you're not free to claim it, I said you're wrong. And you are downright wrong. Religious beliefs do shape the very understanding of reality in its believers, the fact that you refer to it as just a justification implies that you either think religious belief isn't real, a ruse on the part of believers, or don't actually think that and have nothing better to say.

And yet as has been said, just because you claim to be religious does not mean you are a devout bible-thumper that follows every word to a T. A lot of things are about shades of grey, you can believe a lot, you can believe a little, you could not believe at all. I'm sure even atheists believe in unreasonable things, so long as they're people.

 

[Zen Toombs]

It's funny because I know people who actually identify as witches, I think they practice Wicca or something, and I have literally heard them say "Hah, stupid Christians, they tried to kill us all but they didn't we're going to get revenge because we're still around".

Then something like this happens and I wish people could just shut the fuck up, whether they be shamans, witches or the damn Pope. Stop inciting hatred, because it'll always backfire.

0.o What kind of Wiccans do you know? The Wiccan Rede (basically the central tenant of the whole shebang, think of it as the Bible's "Ten Commandments") is "Do what you will, but harm none".

 

[lacktheknack]

Well her children got one million rupees, do you know how many Hyrulean shields you could buy with that shit?

Not many. That's about $12500.

Anyways, it's remnants of superstitions from previous centuries. You don't even want to KNOW how some African tribes dealt with a chief's death.

 

['Record Stops.']

I really DON'T want to live on this planet anymore... When can the Space colony of love and peace be finished so I can pack up my stuff and go there?