Monday, April 22, 2013

What was the cause of the Boston bombing? "Religion" and "Faith", says AP

Of course it was.

There's that nice, broad brush, not to mention the abysmal vocabulary. So faith, generally, led to this bombing? Religion, generally, led to this bombing?

Left-wing sympathies or politics are hardly ever blamed for North Korea's general state or their belligerence. When a country goes to war for oil or money or power, you never hear anyone talk about 'secular desires' being the driving cause of their war declaration.

But if an Islamic radical carries out a bombing, it was 'faith' and 'religion' that was the culprit. Not 'Islam', or a specific variety of Islam, but 'faith' and 'religion' generally. And it's done so people can feel confident in going on to attack and criticize the religions they dislike, but which aren't responsible for this bombing, while they can remain quiet about the religion that it's not politically correct to criticize too strongly.

4 comments:

Codgitator (Cadgertator) said...

I think you'll find this interesting, if you haven't already seen it: http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/20/bill-maher-violence-islam-christianity-liberal-bullshit/

Crude said...

I saw it. It's reasonable enough, though Maher's going to be tuned out when it comes to this. He's going against the grain on the topic as well, and he seems to realize it.

Samwell Barnes said...

I think David B. Hart pointed out something like this a while ago: "Religion" is a horribly imprecise term. To denounce "religion" is (to take a cue from Wittgenstein) like denouncing "games."

Joe K. said...

I actually think this sort of stuff is really fascinating, where things can be categorized by bare-minimum general principles in such a way that people can dismiss everything those principles touch.

It's like the actual, nuanced reality of things mean nothing.