Teacher Murdered after Student DREAMS She Committed Blasphemy

[Veritas Aequitas]

the students were nut jobs, looking for an excuse to kill. the religion is their best defense within their culture. its a stupid as "the devil made me do it"

It is possible there could be other reasons and they are investigating on it.

It seem you have not researched and understood the essence of the religion.

Note my point above that the religion itself is inherently evil based on evidence, i.e. from the holy text itself.

Based on existing evidence how believers are so impulsive and driven to kill even upon drawing of cartoons, it is very possible they [those in the OP] were driven as duty bound to kill based on the dream.

no, you might understand

what your culture categories as "religion" is in Muslim eyes the way of life and to live that actually is agreed upon within the culture and nations that are rule by the same, "Islam". same with Israel in the none Israelite eye its a religion but in its day, the Tora is the law of the land that the nation Israel lived by and agreed to.


now saying, I had a dream that my god told me to kill you because in my dream you did something to offend, is a lie and fabrication no matter what religion or culture one goes by.

You need to understand the critical difference.

If say, a Christian A dreamt God told him to kill Y, and if A really killed Y, it as nothing to do with Christianity at all because the Gospel of Christ commanded Christians to love all even enemies.
In this case, no one and others are at fault, A is solely responsible as a murder plus as being human and not because he is a Christian. Christianity has nothing to do with the murder.

The OP is different,
in that case, the Muslims dreamt the girl offended God, they sensed her as threat [in addition to other experiences], therefrom obeying the commands of their God as stated in the holy texts, they proceeded to kill the girl.
The point is the religion as constituted in the holy texts facilitate the killing of the girl, so the problem lies more with the religion and less on the murderers.
The justification is, if there is no such holy texts and God, there will be nothing to trigger those believers [to save their souls] to kill an innocent girl.

Get the point?

It is the same with the prevention of vulnerable children to violence in the media, videos, cartoons, texts, etc. by getting rid of them.
So getting rid of the religion will ensure no vulnerable believers are triggered to kill non-believers in various vague situations.

in the case of drawings (in Texas it was, I presume) they had no right because they were not within their own culture and or country where they would agree to enforce such things because it would be the law of the land.

They don't have the right to kill any humans in any circumstances, especially with reliance on religious sentiments.

but as far as Islam being evil; yea, I agree seeing it claims the same God of Abraham, which is a lie. Muhammad the prophet of Islam instructed Muslims to hate Jews, and that is completely contrary to the God of Israel's will. Muhammad found his god in the building in mecca that in his day was a temple for many idols. not the place where one would find the God of Abraham.

It is not what the prophet said.
That the religion is inherently evil is supported by the evil laden texts in their holy book delivered from their God via the prophet.
One has to read the 114 chapters, 6236 verses and appx. 77,000 words in the holy text to understand the evil essence within that holy books. There are good things therein but the nett is net-evil.

[Immanuel Can]

One has to read the 114 chapters, 6236 verses and appx. 77,000 words in the holy text to understand the evil essence within that holy books. There are good things therein but the nett is net-evil.

When people say this, they never mention what "good things" they want to retain out of the Koran. And I've read it, in its entirety, and have a copy here if you want to point anything out. But it's not good enough to say, "Well, there are good things in there." You need to say what they are.

If they're better than the "things" other religions contain, maybe we should listen to them. But if they are merely the same or not nearly as good as the things other religions say, then what's the value of retaining the Koran?

[Veritas Aequitas]

One has to read the 114 chapters, 6236 verses and appx. 77,000 words in the holy text to understand the evil essence within that holy books. There are good things therein but the nett is net-evil.

When people say this, they never mention what "good things" they want to retain out of the Koran. And I've read it, in its entirety, and have a copy here if you want to point anything out. But it's not good enough to say, "Well, there are good things in there." You need to say what they are.

If they're better than the "things" other religions contain, maybe we should listen to them. But if they are merely the same or not nearly as good as the things other religions say, then what's the value of retaining the Koran?

Where did I ever state or even implied we must retain that holy text?

I wrote this;
One has to read the 114 chapters, 6236 verses and appx. 77,000 words in the holy text to understand the evil essence within that holy books. There are good things therein but the nett is net-evil.

Note the resultant is net-evil.
What I have not discussed in detail are the weightages I am giving to the evil elements. [you are not capable to this analytical skill as you have demonstrated in this post and elsewhere] The worst of the evil element facilitates genocides thus has very high weightage of evil.

There are the so-called "good" elements therein example,

• 7:157: Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.

The above and others which are so-called 'good' are only applicable to believers only and not-applicable to non-believers [dehumanized].

The resultant could be +10 good with -90 evil, thus a resultant of -80 evil.
With such high evil resultant, humanity would be better off without this religion. Thus I stated ..

So getting rid of the religion will ensure no vulnerable believers are triggered to kill non-believers in various vague situations.

[Sculptor]

Religion poisons everything.

Let's hope he does not get away with murder for some stupid religious reason.
The rightards and libertariarses would like us all to belief that society is in no way to blame for this. But how did the poison get placed in his head. What shit has he been brought up to learn?

And here is the next generation of recruits...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJoB5XCQ5gs

The difference between that and the next is only the degree of desperation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSEn_dVAtMk

It's all indoctrination

[Age]

Feel free to remove it, AND THEN I WILL answer your question here.

And earlier, Age wrote:
Because of the Truths WITHIN 'it'.

"...what "truths" do you see within THAT particular religion..."

There is only One God.

[Immanuel Can]

There are the so-called "good" elements therein example,

• 7:157: Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.

All this says is that Mohammed is supposed always to be right...though in historical fact, clearly, he was often wrong, and not least of all about what he thought he remembered the Torah as saying. (For example, he couldn't even get the name of Abraham's heir right: the Koran says it was "Ishmael." It was Isaac.)

So what part of this do you regard as a "good" element in it?

[Immanuel Can]

Feel free to remove it, AND THEN I WILL answer your question here.
And earlier, Age wrote:
Because of the Truths WITHIN 'it'.

"...what "truths" do you see within THAT particular religion..."

There is only One God.

There's two problems with that: unless you are a Theist yourself, you don't believe that's true -- so to you, it cannot be "good." The second is that the "god" the Koran describes is very different from the God described in Torah and the New Testament, having very different characteristics and values. So even if you concede that there IS one God, it's not the same God as the others.

So what's "good" about that?

[RCSaunders]

Feel free to remove it, AND THEN I WILL answer your question here.

And earlier, Age wrote:
Because of the Truths WITHIN 'it'.

"...what "truths" do you see within THAT particular religion..."

There is only One God.

Will the real God, please stand up.

[Impenitent]

Slim shady has been standing for a while

-Imp

[Immanuel Can]

Will the real God, please stand up.

He has.

Happy Easter.

[RCSaunders]

Will the real God, please stand up.

He has.

Happy Easter.

Link to his picture, please.

[Immanuel Can]

Will the real God, please stand up.

He has.

Happy Easter.

Link to his picture, please.

Do you have one of Napoleon? A photograph of Caesar, maybe? How about a meme of Socrates? Or a rock video of Ashurbanipal?

Well, if you don't, then why do you expect to have one of a humble, Galilean Carpenter?

[RCSaunders]

He has.

Happy Easter.

Link to his picture, please.

Do you have one of Napoleon? A photograph of Caesar, maybe? How about a meme of Socrates? Or a rock video of Ashurbanipal?

Well, if you don't, then why do you expect to have one of a humble, Galilean Carpenter?

Do you worship and claim Napoleon, Caesar, Socrates, or Ashurbanipal created the universe, rose from the dead, and answer praryer?

If you claimed Napoleon was still alive, I'd expect to see a picture. Same goes for anyone else who is supposed to be alive. I don't believe in zombies.

[DPMartin]

It is possible there could be other reasons and they are investigating on it.

It seem you have not researched and understood the essence of the religion.

Note my point above that the religion itself is inherently evil based on evidence, i.e. from the holy text itself.

Based on existing evidence how believers are so impulsive and driven to kill even upon drawing of cartoons, it is very possible they [those in the OP] were driven as duty bound to kill based on the dream.

no, you might understand

what your culture categories as "religion" is in Muslim eyes the way of life and to live that actually is agreed upon within the culture and nations that are rule by the same, "Islam". same with Israel in the none Israelite eye its a religion but in its day, the Tora is the law of the land that the nation Israel lived by and agreed to.


now saying, I had a dream that my god told me to kill you because in my dream you did something to offend, is a lie and fabrication no matter what religion or culture one goes by.

You need to understand the critical difference.

If say, a Christian A dreamt God told him to kill Y, and if A really killed Y, it as nothing to do with Christianity at all because the Gospel of Christ commanded Christians to love all even enemies.
In this case, no one and others are at fault, A is solely responsible as a murder plus as being human and not because he is a Christian. Christianity has nothing to do with the murder.

The OP is different,
in that case, the Muslims dreamt the girl offended God, they sensed her as threat [in addition to other experiences], therefrom obeying the commands of their God as stated in the holy texts, they proceeded to kill the girl.
The point is the religion as constituted in the holy texts facilitate the killing of the girl, so the problem lies more with the religion and less on the murderers.
The justification is, if there is no such holy texts and God, there will be nothing to trigger those believers [to save their souls] to kill an innocent girl.

Get the point?

It is the same with the prevention of vulnerable children to violence in the media, videos, cartoons, texts, etc. by getting rid of them.
So getting rid of the religion will ensure no vulnerable believers are triggered to kill non-believers in various vague situations.

in the case of drawings (in Texas it was, I presume) they had no right because they were not within their own culture and or country where they would agree to enforce such things because it would be the law of the land.

They don't have the right to kill any humans in any circumstances, especially with reliance on religious sentiments.

but as far as Islam being evil; yea, I agree seeing it claims the same God of Abraham, which is a lie. Muhammad the prophet of Islam instructed Muslims to hate Jews, and that is completely contrary to the God of Israel's will. Muhammad found his god in the building in mecca that in his day was a temple for many idols. not the place where one would find the God of Abraham.

It is not what the prophet said.
That the religion is inherently evil is supported by the evil laden texts in their holy book delivered from their God via the prophet.
One has to read the 114 chapters, 6236 verses and appx. 77,000 words in the holy text to understand the evil essence within that holy books. There are good things therein but the nett is net-evil.

you're not listening or you just want to argue

its simple in the OP the girl dreamt the offence, the teacher didn't actually do the offence. therefore the dreamer is a liar. trying to justify her act of murder that is murder even within her own religion. doesn't matter the culture or the religion the girl is a liar and a murder.

you have to actually offend to receive justifiable punishment anywhere in the world.

[Immanuel Can]

If you claimed Napoleon was still alive, I'd expect to see a picture. Same goes for anyone else who is supposed to be alive.

So that's interesting.

You think "proof of God" would be a photograph?

Well, I suppose if you could convince the Almighty to sit still for a family snap, just to please your skepticism, then maybe you could have one...

But what if He did something better...say, not just a photo but actually becoming incarnate and walking around, and talking to people, and maybe healing a few incurable diseases, or manufacturing food from nowhere, or commanding the seas to be still...

Would any of that count, for you?