Today’s headdesk

Today’s headdesk September 24, 2014

Red-blooded Murkan Christian: Tonight is a big deal for the USA, the president took a big step against Islamic terrorist by attacking strategic sites in Syria, proud to be American to see our country help to stop these scum of the earth low life terrorist who want to spread their Islamic ideology. Take them down to their knees and then give them a one way ticket to burn in hell.

Me: Are you a Christian? If so, do you realize it is a grave sin to pray for anyone’s damnation?

Red-blooded Murkan Christian: Are you a Christian Mark? You sound like a pacifist to ask that question. Maybe your a Islamic terrorist sympathizer.

"It is great website, thanks for pointing it out."

Ignatius: A Brief Introduction to the ..."
"Ok, I misunderstood you. I apologise. You said that Catholics did not worship a God ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"The references may be clear to you. My point, obvious, is that English-speaking readers are ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Brad Harvey

    Why do you hate Murcan Christians, Mark?

  • Joseph

    Hmmm… I’m a little concerned that the ‘Murkans have been totally suckered by the media… again. The US government’s move to bomb Syria has little to do with ISIS.
    Oh, and he wishes for death… nothing new. But, the first round of airstrikes has already claimed the lives of civilians, surprise, surprise.
    The ‘are you Christian’ question was recently posed to me by an evangelical acquaintance, BTW. Not because I sounded like a *pacifist* but because I was sympathising with the Catholics getting slaughtered in the Middle East. He objected on the grounds that they weren’t true Christians because they were anti-Semites. Ugh.

  • Ben Govero

    Beyond prayer, I don’t know what to do about ISIS. Military action seems to be needed for the protection of so many innocent people. But have we not learned anything about middle eastern wars? Our presence in the middle east serves as a great recruiting tool for Islamic militants and gives them something to unite together against.

    Personally I think we should offer refugee status to all of the displaced Christians and others in Iraq and seek peace treaties with the militants. Otherwise, from what I’ve read, we’re looking at the very real possibility of a brutal WWIII in the middle east.

    • Joseph

      I agree.
      1) Immediately offer these refugees sanctuary in the US. It’s irresponsible for the US not to.
      2) Prayer, tons of it, for both the persecuted and for the persecutors (that they don’t drive themselves even closer to eternal damnation).
      3) This is the most unpopular idea as it appears that most people believe that Islam is impeccable and not responsible at all for the behaviour of the oppressors: Put political pressure on Muslims in Muslim nations to actually do something about it if they want the world to believe that they truly do believe in peace. Meanwhile, realise that Muslim immigrant communities have the real potential (and in some cases this is more than just potential) foment this ideology; begin an aggressive campaign by cooperation or even legal force in these communities that encourage reward extremist whistleblowers, reward healthy Muslim communities, encourage the public humiliation and rejection of those within the communities who hold this sick ideology, etc. When I say by legal force, I mean, create legislation that if known extremists are being protected within one of these communities, consider deportation of individuals who are not citizens where possible, dissolve the communities and reintegrate them in *good* Muslim communities where their own kind will eventually show them that behaviour is not welcome… sort of a reintegration programme. Let their own police them in the sense that they will be ratted out the minute they do anything suspicious. It will require lots of training. Convict the imams spreading this ideology of hate speech and put them through endless hours of sensitivity training when they are let out of jail as a community service for the rest of their lives. Make them pick up trash on the highways and clean dirty diapers in retirement homes.

    • As a first step, you can declare them outlaw, literally outside the law. A second step would be to establish a coordination center so that the very many people who want to kill these guys don’t get in each others’ way and that will minimize the deaths of innocents. There are further steps which I won’t cover here because that’s not the thread topic.

      If you recognize IS as a state headed by the Islamic Caliph, you have done a momentous thing. You have taken a side in the muslim civil war and not just endorsed the radical side, but a particular radical faction. There is absolutely zero chance of a peace treaty without such recognition.

      Between your proposals and the caricature Mark painted in the post, yours is the more dangerous.

  • petey

    it’s 2003 all over again.
    i like the way he opposes pacifist with christian.

    • Joseph

      I think it’s actually worse than 2003. 2003 was riding a wave of emotion from 9/11, something that was done to us. It was easy to get caught up in that.
      This one… what the hell are we doing? It’s like the Twilight Zone. We come to find that our government has actually been *aiding* Al Qaeda (the guys who allegedly orchestrated 9/11) and the Muslim Brotherhood to overthrow the soft dictators in the Middle East and replace them with bloodthirsty Christian killers; The US, in conjunction with Turkey and Saudi Arabia, funded and armed what is now being called ISIS to overthrow Assad; and now the US is pretending that they are going after ISIS… their creation… with Turkey and Saudi Arabia as allies (when many of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi) who also were co-conspirators to remove Assad? And everyone buys it that we are going to kill the ISIS dogs?
      Come on!!! There is a total difference. In 2003, not only did we have the emotional tidal wave of 9/11, we had *evidence* (irony) provided to the UN by such trustworthy liars as Colin Powell, remember? Evidence of WMD… satellite images! In this case all the *real* evidence points to the contrary. How can anyone believe the presented intentions of the US government?
      The internet… the internet is the worst (but sometimes best) invention of the US government. If it weren’t for those wackos posting YouTube videos over the years, it would have been easy for the US to conceal all of this.

  • Reading your description of this person, I found it very difficult to identify with him as a fellow child of God in need of prayer and salvation. He seemed a caricature, a cardboard cutout. You might as well have labelled him Emmanuel Goldstein or Snowball.

    How accurate your transcription of this man’s positions is, I cannot say. If it is even within shouting distance of the truth he’s certainly lost the thread of what being a christian means. I’m really saddened that I see in your depiction of him, the same dehumanization, the same problem. That you don’t want to kill is certainly a differentiator in your favor. You’re only dealing in half measures on the same road.

    • Joseph

      Oh God, get off your high horse, will ya? Do you want him to write boring blog posts? The title of his blog would just be “Catholic!” without the “and Enjoying It!” part. No one would show up.
      Anyhow, let’s not forget that God loves each and every one of us equally… even the guy chopping heads off of Christians for fun in the Middle East. But, you wouldn’t have a problem explicitly saying something negative about him, let alone implicitly, would you?
      Lighten up.

      • I would be perfectly content if Mark wrote Catholic posts. In fact, very often he does. It’s why I haven’t given up coming here.

        Why is it wrong to pray for damnation? It’s wrong because when someone goes to hell it is not a victory for Christ, but a loss. Warfare is acceptable in the same way that triage deaths are acceptable, only because we haven’t figured out a better way so that we can eliminate the sad process entirely.

        Mr. Cardboard Cutout being dehumanized by Mark is very likely not properly dumped in the same category as Mr. YouTube HeadChopper. He’s an easier case, so why dump him in the triage pile?

        • Joseph

          Actually, I was *dumping* him in the same bucket of God’s love… He loves us all equally the same so, as far as that is concerned, we’re all in the same *triage* pile.
          You can’t make God love you less than someone else and you can’t do anything to make Him love you more than someone else.
          Nobody said it wasn’t wrong to pray for someone to go to hell. I’d say that Mark agrees with your assessment. But, I think the point is, like the ISIS head chopper, Mr. Cardboard Cutout actually dehumanised himself by making such an absurd statement. What’s wrong with Mark pointing it out? He kept him anonymous.

          • I did not accuse you of dehumanizing Mr. Cardboard Cutout or dumping anybody. I was talking about Mark’s habit of caricaturing american christianity across a significant number of posts.

            The failure of Mr. Cardboard Cutout is to neglect the spiritual battlefield, not giving it the attention it deserves, not clearly understanding the victory conditions in favor of attention to the physical battlefield. The interplay of these two fights is not taught very well today and it’s a subject that I, at least, have found difficult myself and therefore have been contemplating it for quite some time.

            The muslim strategy of permanent siege of christians held in dhimmi agreements is quite effective and good at neutering the Church until it dissipates entirely. It is a siege that combines the physical and the spiritual battlefield in a combined strategy. We need, not a mirror image but a similar approach to genuinely combine the physical and the spiritual battlefields in a way that is authentically christian.

            Mr. Cardboard Cutout’s stated approach doesn’t do that. Mark’s approach doesn’t do that either.

            Pope Francis does better. His idea of radical involvement with those who are not doing so well actually gets the job done, though (fairly unsurprisingly for a Pope) he’s sketchy on details.

            Mr. Cardboard Cutout wants to win and that’s a good thing. What he needs is to be tutored on how to achieve total victory. That’s not what he got from Mark. And that’s what’s making me headdesk, reading how a Pope Francis groupie like Mark is so completely missing such a major point of Pope Francis.

            • Joseph

              Hmmm… I really can’t argue with that response. Nice one.

            • Dave G.

              I’ve often said that if the first casualty of war is innocence, the first casualty of the Internet is perspective. But your posts always do a nice job of keeping that perspective more often than not. Nicely put.

              • I try for always but am astounded if my batting average is better than your average baseball catcher. “More often than not” is high praise. You make me blush.

          • Silly Interloper

            “He loves us all equally the same so. . .”

            Not to hook into the main discussion or even take sides at this point, but this kind of language is incoherent and meaningless. Love is impossible to quantify among us humans, but it is even more impossible to quantify He Who Is Love.

            Words like “equally” and “same” are attempts to discuss His love in a quantifiable form, which is misguided at best, but, worse, it is against truth in harmful ways. It clearly muddles up *understanding* of love.

            Is the love a man has for one son or the other the same? Of course not–they are different people and the love is distinctly oriented–distinctly personal–toward a different person–and I would expect that God’s love for you and me is also distinct and personal and, therefore, different. (Not the “same.”)

            How can you possibly quantify such personalized love? Saying they are equal is just as incoherent as saying love for one is (or isn’t) more or less than the other. What’s worse, though, is that it buys into the modernist language (built for lies) that hopes to bring all thought into incoherence in order to assert what is irrational.

            Is God the Father’s love for the Holy Spirit equal to his love for you? Does Jesus love you as much as he does Mary, his mother? These are utterly foolish questions, but your assertion of “same” and “equality” would naturally raise them. I strongly suggest you don’t do that any more.

            God loves everyone–stop. Okay, you might add a “him/her, too” if you really need to–but to add “equally” or “same” hurts the discussion, doesn’t help it. So I would encourage you to abandon it. Completely.

    • Peggy

      Ding! Ding!

  • Mike Blackadder

    I like how even the caricature spells “you’re” wrong.

    • chezami

      Not a caricature. An actual person.

      • Mike Blackadder

        Sorry, was this actually a quote of the exchange?

        • chezami


          • ivan_the_mad

            Well, that certainly derails the sanctimony below …

          • Once again, I’m disappointed that, yes, humanity can really be that stupid. And to be perfectly clear, that is an observation regarding both sides of the exchange you wrote about.

            Here’s a hint, next time you meet one of these fire breathers, don’t say that they’re rules breakers. Instead point out to them that they are defeatist. You might move someone towards Christ instead of away from Him with that approach.

  • kirthigdon

    Hey, is everybody worried about ISIS (or IS or ISIL or the Caliphate or whatever)? That’s yesterday’s boogeyman. As of 48 hours ago, America’s most dangerous enemy is the Khorasan group, a group unknown to almost all Americans until – well until 48 hours ago. But not to worry. This group, composed of 50 (count ’em) 50 terrorists was hit by Obomber’s air strikes and 30 of them were killed (per cable news) so that they now number only 100! terrorists (per cable news) 12 hours later. A few more air strikes and they’ll number 10,000 by Christmas. Of course, by that time, they’ll have been replaced by an even more dangerous terrorist group – maybe the Sinbad or Aladin group or some such.

    Kirt Higdon

    • It’d really help if you were to take this seriously.

      Do you even have a clue why the Islamic State is a threat? They’re laying a claim to resurrect the Caliphate, which means they’re laying claim to population jurisdiction over all the world’s muslims. This is an actual threat against millions of US citizens that their rejection of all foreign princes and potentates is invalid. For a muslim to reject the rule of the Caliph is not a crime that bears a minor fine. It’s much more serious than that.

      • kirthigdon

        What would really help is that you not take so seriously the propaganda from Mordor on the Potomac. For a majority of its existence as an independent nation, the US co-existed with the Ottoman caliphate and that was not a problem. For most of the time since the initiation of Islam, there has been one caliphate or another; it’s the last 90 years or so which have been exceptional. If the US is to commit itself, as Obomber proposes, to prevent by force of arms the establishment of a caliphate and to preserve by force of arms the national boundaries established by the western powers after WWI, then the US is condemned to a condition of permanent warfare with the Moslem world. This is not what our Holy Father wants, it’s not what’s good for either Christians or Moslems anywhere, and it’s not what I want. It’s apparently what Obomber wants and you seem to be buying it along with the majority of other Americans – at least temporarily.

        Kirt Higdon

        • Joseph

          And that’s the kicker… lol… this whole time, the simple folk who group themselves in the Republican and Democrat camps all thought that Obama represented the Democrats… yet he’s clearly been the perfect Republican/Democrat hybrid (based on the caricature). Just like Bush Jr…. just like Clinton…
          One day, the people will be able to free themselves from the grips of the machine that does their thinking for them.

        • Once we leveled the Barbary pirates, you’re right, we had a good run where we didn’t have much of a muslim problem. They do seem to respond well to military defeat. And today if we are willing to give up the right to freely travel and trade, our problems would grow less. But since we now have a measurable muslim population we still would have a problem.

          Muslim emigration into the US started in large numbers in the closing days of the caliphate at the turn of the last century. Modern muslim radicalism is of relatively recent vintage. Sayyid Qutb published his condemnation of the US in 1951, post caliphate.

          Muslim immigration and coexistence in the US works fine if the muslims don’t try to overthrow the westphalian system. It works fine if they accept religious plurality. This caliph does neither, he is in the anti-american tradition of Qutb, and claims jurisdiction over all muslims. If he is not defeated militarily, he will make it stick at which point we have a serious problem.

      • chezami

        I’m laying a claim to the Tsar of All the Russias. I mean business. You should therefore be afraid! Be very afraid!

        • Were you to actually ‘mean business’ and try to enforce such a claim, you would end up in jail, a federal prison in fact. Since you’re joking, you won’t.

    • Joseph

      Khorasan… hmmm… conveniently makes their appearance around strategic targets in Syria… and they are *worse* than ISIS (I suppose that makes them a varsity team)… and there’s no intelligence on them besides what the US government holds in *top secret*… shadowy…
      I’d definitely need more than one hand to count all of the times the US has asked us to *trust* their intelligence when it pertains to strategic political targets (Iraq: WMD; link to Al Qaeda, Ukraine: Russian separatists shooting down a Malaysian airliner; Russian separatist snipers shooting protesters (turned out to be US backed Ukrainian fighters), Syria: US backing an honest revolution (turns out they’ve been backing Al Qaeda and ISIS), Bengazi… and that’s only contemporary issues).

  • Alex