Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
Tue Sep 20, 2016, 09:36 PM Sep 2016

Chelsea bomber ,"Smart, funny, humble" before, "had become more religious"

Isn't it a reconfirmation of the ill effects of religion that becoming more religious is associated with transforming from a "Smart, funny, humble" to a terrorist?

Let's even say this person became disaffected due to a feud with his family. Isn't it an indictment of religion that it should give a violent justification and outlet to some unrelated anger?

Ahmad Rahami: Fixture in Family’s Business and, Lately, a ‘Completely Different Person’

(..) Ahmad Khan Rahami (..) In recent years, though, some friends noticed a marked change in his personality and religious devotion after what they believed was a trip to Afghanistan, where he and his relatives are from.

(..) Around four years ago, though, Mr. Rahami disappeared for a while. Mr. Jones said one of the younger Rahami brothers told him that he had gone to Afghanistan. When he returned, some patrons noticed a certain transformation. He grew a beard and exchanged his typical wardrobe of T-shirts and sweatpants for traditional Muslim garb. He began to pray in the back of the store.

His previous genial bearing turned more stern. “It’s like he was a completely different person,” Mr. Jones said. “He got serious and completely closed off.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/20/nyregion/ahmad-khan-rahami-bombing-suspect.html?_r=0

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
2. But religion is giving the "moral imprimatur" to grievances
Tue Sep 20, 2016, 09:44 PM
Sep 2016

If "unbelievers are the worst of creatures" as the Quran says, why would it not be OK to impose things on them, by force if necessary?

Taking this present example: it's harder to justify to oneself planting bombs in NY if one doesn't have the 'holy' back-up excuse of waging a holy war for some convoluted reason.

 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
4. Some things can be bad, even in moderation. Like Arsenic.
Wed Sep 21, 2016, 12:10 AM
Sep 2016

When a religious text tells you to slay the unbelievers,
I do not see what amount of moderate use is going to make those verses good.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
6. Religion's extra tricky because it's got no brakes for extremism.
Wed Sep 21, 2016, 08:22 AM
Sep 2016

Political philosophies, etc., eventually have to put up or shut up. It's a good part of the reason communism collapsed - enough people saw through the lies because they could observe the shortages, etc.

All of religion's "error correction", if it existed, would only be in the afterlife. Nothing here and now that a true believer will accept to overturn their beliefs.

 

cpwm17

(3,829 posts)
8. And they don't have to do the killing themself
Wed Sep 21, 2016, 03:44 PM
Sep 2016

since they can cheer on the power of the US Government to commit the mass murder. There are far more dead inferiors that way.

Though I still think it's preferable that people would stop believing in these religions.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Chelsea bomber ,"Smart, f...