‘They kill people like us,’ says gay Iraqi

[sabra]

Source: MSNBC

BAGHDAD – Widespread violence is down across Baghdad, but not for one minority group.

Iraq’s gay population is being targeted by militia groups in a wave of killings that has claimed the lives of up to 25 young men and boys in the past month.

"They know I am gay. I don’t know if I am going to be killed, this is up to God," said Moyad, a 38-year-old Baghdad resident who would not give his last name out of fear for his safety.

Visibly frightened, he said that he has many friends who have been sadistically tortured, some even murdered. "They are sticking glue up their anuses; some hospitals refuse to treat them. Is it a war waged against homosexuals?" he asked.

...

Moyad said that unfortunately things have actually gotten worse than it was during Saddam’s reign things. "I was imprisoned because I was gay, but there was a court, a trial, and the judge let me loose at the time; now they kill people like us."

Read more: http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/05/04/1921277.aspx

[AlbertCat]

1. this is up to God

No, it's not. How sad. The people killing you REPRESENT god. It's PEOPLE who are killing you and your friends now. "god" kills everyone eventually...but it's self righteous worshipers of god that are murdering you before your time.

Religion is just dreadful!

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[No Elephants]

6. Show me evidence that a higher power does NOT exist. If you can't, will that prove YOUR mind is

diseased?

Beliefs don't hurt you. Behavior does. Why don't you focus on that?

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[No Elephants]

17. Sorry, but neither quotation proves that a higher power does not exist. One or both may

persuade those who are already persuaded or inclined to be persuaded. But neither of them actually proves that a higher power cannot possibly exist, especially the second one. (Whoever said a higher power cannot exist unless predestination also exists? Methodists, maybe?)

So, what you are saying is that YOU believe these arguments that the authors are having (with themseves--with no one there to argue back to them), even though their conclusion cannot be scientifically verified. That comes really close to the definition of faith.

So, if I were you, I would not be so quick to label insane those who believe in something that cannot be scientifically proven.

[Fearless]

29. Then you didn't understand what I said.

[No Elephants]

31. I did. Maybe you don't understand the meaning of scientific proof.

[Fearless]

34. There are two kinds of proof. One is tangible or so called "scientific"

As you have misnamed it. The other is logical. I am using logical proof to prove that something that isn't tangible doesn't exist. You cannot use tangible proof to prove something that isn't tangible exists or not. That's like saying find me proof of the existence of liberty. You can give examples OF liberty but you can't prove that what you are discribing actually tangibly exists. These are two different fields which require two different points of view. Each is scientific in that each uses the scientific method in its preparation.

[No Elephants]

36. Claiming your quotation proves something does not mean that it actually does prove.

anything. My first response to the two quotations--I think that was Post 17, but I am not sure-- remains my position on the two quotations.

[Fearless]

39. You're welcome to your position but I didn't quote anything...

It is my writing and if you read it, it is my reasoned logical proof that god not only does not exist but by the laws of logic and nature CANNOT exist.

[No Elephants]

40. I thought the formatting indicated two quotations. My mistake. Sorry.

[Rebubula]

10. Nor...

...do I believe that Unicorns, Leprechauns, The Easter Bunny and Santa Claus exist. They are creations of man just like god. Does my lack of belief in those creatures mean that I am a fool because someone else does?

Man has been creating gods since the inception of the species' logical thought. There are over 100 major gods (those that created the Earth and people) in the course of human history. The ones that are left are the ones that have been beaten into the population by force, coercion and epic marketing.

I just do not understand how an otherwise intelligent adult can look at all that is around them and all that they have seen,felt and experienced in their lives and STILL think that there is some benevolent being watching over everyone.

I agree that behavior hurts - religion just sometimes provides cover for those that do hurt others.

[No Elephants]

19. My post did not ask people what they do or do not believe or what they can or cannot

understand. Also, I never said anything about a benovolent higher power, just a higher power. So, that brings me to the last sentence of your post, in which you agree that no one's belief hurts anyone, only their conduct does.

I add that conduct includes speech. This board abounds in posts making incredibly rude and hurttful remarks about those who have faith in a higher power, whether or not the believer posters have been kind or neutral. That is simply olders of one unprovable belief hurling terms like crazy, stupid, moron, fucking, etc. at the holders of another unprovable belief. Is that atheism providing cover for hurting fellow Democratic posters simply because of an unprovable belief that is different from the unprovable belief that you prefer?

[Zhade]

11. The burden of proof's not our responsibility, pal.

Just as soon as you have ANY evidence for ANY god, then you'll be right. Until then, by default, you're not.

[No Elephants]

20. Why is not your responsibility? Simply because you say so? And all I did was ask

for proof (in response to a request for proof of the opposite). A request is neither "right" nor "wrong." It's simply a request.

However, I take your post as an admission that you have no proof that a higher power does NOT exist . Don't feel bad. No one has proof for either side of this argument.

[RomanHoliday]

18. Proving a negative is ridiculous.

There are a lot of things you cannot prove DON'T exist, but you don't simply assume that they do exist. Science doesn't work that way and our society doesn't work that way either.

There's a reason why you have to be proven GUILTY to be thrown in jail, rather than proven NOT GUILTY to be freed.

Having faith means believing in something in the absence of proof. Trying to apply scientific methods to religion will only make your case weaker.

[No Elephants]

21. I once posted that you cannot procve a negative and another poster responded to me,

contradicting me very successfully. I wish I had saved the post, but I did not. But let me give it a shot. I can prove that I do not have green eyes, or two heads. I can prove that broccoli is not orange. The other poster did a much better job, both with the explanation and the examples (but I cannot prove that, even though it is not a negative, because I did not save the post).

As far as being thrown in jail, that is only in this country. In other countries, you can be thrown in jail, whether you are guilty of anything or not. In fact, even in this country, despite the requirement that the prosecution prove guilt beyond any reasonable doubt, innocent people get "thrown in jail" anyway.

As far as making my case, what case? A poster demanded proof that a higher power exists, so I asked him or her to prove that no higher exists. My point is that there is no scientific proof for EITHEr side of that coin, so perhaps you and I are more in agreement than you thought at first.

[RomanHoliday]

23. But you can't disprove the existence of something..

..because there is no possible way that you could literally search the entire universe and say "Yep, I'm 100% sure that ______ does not exist". Is there a secret wizard society we can't see that sends their kids to a school called Hogwarts? I guess you can't really prove there isn't one when it comes to these magical issues. Yet you cannot simply accept that it does exist. You can BELIEVE it exists but that's your own personal belief. Other people believe in Scientology. Should we as a society have to abide by the laws of a religion that cannot be proven just because it's been around a long time? Is it really any more reasonable or logical than something newer like Scientology, which is mostly ridiculed?

Which is the fairer way of prosecuting people though? Having to prove you DID NOT commit a crime to get free or having to prove that someone committed a crime to have them imprisoned? Just because some countries still practice it a certain way doesn't make it right.

[No Elephants]

27. I wish I had saved that post. However, the point is that no one has, or can,

prove either the existence of a higher power or the absence of the existence of a higher power.

And, candidly, my further point is that insulting someone solely because he or she has a different unprovable BELIEF than you do is nothing but rude and stupid. (I notice a lot more posters want to discuss whether I can prove God exists than actually respond to the question my original post posed: why not focus on conduct, rather than focusing upon what goes on only inside someone's head?)

If someone is advocating prayer in schools or calling you names or trying to convert you or engaging in ANY other CONDUCT offensive to you (universal "you"), fine, go at that conduct hammer and tongs. I'll probably do the same. I advocate and work and donate for total separation of church and state, respect and equality for all humans, and many other liberal causes and I don't believe in coercion.

I am just a little tired of seeing people who believe in a higher power being cursed at and insulted here gratuitously solely because of a belief and nothing more--no conduct. (This thread is only one example of that. The OP quotes an Iraqi referring to God's will and bang-EVERYone who believes in God is fucking stupid, insane, etc. If that isn't dumbass bigotry, I don't know what is. And posters who do that know full well they are hurting people here who do have faith because I've seen the people of faith respond on occasion, too.

This is the very first week I have responded to any of these unprovoked insults to people of faith--just because of their belief in a higher power--though I have been reading them for months. Yet, this morning, I read a pm from a liberal, intelligent poster whose posts I have enjoyed. He or she thanked me, adding that that he or she was not returning to DU because of the name calling and cursing on that basis.

Is driving away an interesting poster with whom we probably agree on almost everything else we post on here somehow intelligent and unbiased? That's only a rhetorical question, btw. I'm done with this subject for at least a couple of days.

[RomanHoliday]

28. There will always be a debate over whether religion is a net good or bad.

Would people NOT do philanthropic deeds without religion? If we follow Christianity's good examples, then why ignore the less lovely passages? Why isn't the Bible updated for more current times, now that we know of cells, DNA, the fossil record and gravity?

I went to Sunday School as a kid (mostly out of curiosity and personal interest) and from what I learned of the Bible, a lot of it is not particularly pleasant. In fact, I was rather freaked out by a lot of the stories. And again, when I had to read it over the summer for AP Lit in High School, I couldn't for the life of me understand why the bible is so influential in this day and age. Yeah, it made for good source material for John Steinbeck novels. But a lot of religion is just used as a weapon for bigotry and ignorance.

As for the whole disproving the existence of God, it's always being used as an argument for teaching intelligent design/creationism (BIG pet peeve of mine). "Well, they can't DISPROVE that there was some God driving everything". Sure, but that doesn't prove anything either.

[No Elephants]

30. I wasn't debating whether religion is good or bad, though. People responded as though I did, but

that's their issue. Their responses have nothing to do with me or my posts.

[anonymous171]

37. How do you know they "represent God"? Have you spoken with him lately?

[get the red out]

4. Big issue

This needs to become a big issue, not pushed to the back burners of discussion. Human rights are important.

[No Elephants]

7. What do you suggest? Everyone knows both homosexuals and women are getting treated horribly in some

Muslim countries. Nobody in power seems to care enough to do anything about it.

[dflprincess]

9. While not being treated as badly, let's not forget that GLBT people

do not have full rights in the U.S - and that 17 Democrats voted against hate crimes legislation.

[Baby Snooks]

13. Actually they do...

The 5th Circuit Court ruled several years ago that a federal judge had "misinterpreted" the 14th Amendment when she dismissed a lawsuit against the City of Houston on the basis that that homosexuals had no protections and rights under the law and stated that under the 14th Amendment they in fact do. Neither the city nor the state seemed particularly interested in taking it further. Perhaps they should have because the Supreme Court most likely would have, with the exception of the Nazis on the court, stated the same.

The Constitution does not exclude anyone from protections and rights. As it has already ruled in terms of housing in a case in Colorado and sodomy laws in a case in Texas although of course some states have not removed the sodomy laws from the books. Texas among them.

We all have protections and rights under the law. The same protections and rights. We just have judges and attorneys and ministers, usually the ministers of the judges and attorneys, telling us that we don't.

All waving their Bibles while they're telling us we don't. Many of them Democrats.

[dflprincess]

14. They do?

Did the 5th District ruling actually give Gays and Lesbians the right to marry in all 50 states and have the marriage recognized by the Federal government by filing taxes as "married" and being able to collect survivor benefits on the spouse's Social Security account?

[Baby Snooks]

15. No but then there is DOMA

And anyone who thinks there will be "marriage equality" needs to read DOMA and while you may think that is an "equal protection and right" issue it is not. Congress defined marriage. And so marriage has been defined. An appellate court can only rule on the Constitution and any act of Congress becomes part of the Constitution until the Supreme Court rejects it. And so far it hasn't. But denying marriage equality does not give anyone the right to deny equality in other areas as defined by the 14th Amendment. Unless Congress amends it which Congress did when it passed DOMA. The Republicans would like to do so. They have never had enough votes to pass legislation to bypass not only the 14th Amendment but the Civil Rights Act. But they did have the votes for DOMA.

Marriage equality will not guarantee equality in housing and employment nor will it prevent discrimination by law enforcment or eliminate hate crimes. But some believe it will.

Eventually the Supreme Court will rule on DOMA unless Congress rescinds it and it is doubtful that Congress will do so. The Supreme Court may or may not uphold the 5th Circuit when it rules. Most expect it will.

You have to get it to the Supreme Court first. But keep in mind we have a president who is about to appoint a new Supreme Court justice and he is a president who has said he does not support marriage equality apart from the individual states deciding for themselves.

[Fearless]

35. And DADT, and anti-marriage amendments in over two dozen states.

[No Elephants]

25. My state has a growing number of churches where ALL are truly welcome and

cherished. I suspect the same is true in every state. And while I have never waved my Bible while marching in favor of equal rights, I do own a very nice looking one, black leather, gold lettering, etc., so maybe I should have waved it. However, I have debated believers on this issue many, many times and my knowledge of what the Bible says has proven very useful in those debates. Then again, I don't seek to change their beliefs, only their conduct.

[No Elephants]

24. I never forget that. I am a donor/member of the ACLU and HRC and I have marched

on the State House in my state. Happily, in my state, Massachusetts--we now have equal rights--first in the nation. I am very proud of that, but I don't forget how many states where equal rights don't exist or are outright banned by state constitutions.

[Baby Snooks]

12. They aren't treated that well here either....

Gays and lesbians aren't treated too well in this country despite the "political correctness" of some including Barack Obama.

And anyone who thinks heterosexual women have "equal rights" in this country is definitely "disconnected" from reality but then most people in this country appear to be anyway.

Our founding fathers intended a wall of separation between church and state and yet "chattel law" is still the law of the land because of judges who believe the Bible is the law of the land.

Don't slam Muslims when there are just as many oppressive Christians right here in America.

And many of them still believe in the Curse of Ham for those heterosexual minorities who think they have civil rights. They do and they don't. Depends on which back road they travel and which sheriff they encounter on that back road in this country.

We still have the same old hierarchy in this country we have always had despite everyone pretending it's not there. The top half of the hierarchy is comprised of White Anglo-Saxon Protestants aka WASPS and the bottom half is comprised of everyone else.

And lest you think all WASPS are the same they are not - the males are in the top half. The females aka Stepford Wives are in the bottom half. Along with everyone else who is "less than" in the eyes of the WASP god who made all men equal but some just more equal than others.

[No Elephants]

26. Excuse me? Try reading things in context. Someone posted this:

"This needs to become a big issue, not pushed to the back burners of discussion. Human rights are important."

The topic of this thread is homosexuals getting killed in Iraq. Therefore, it is not a leap to assume the poster's use of "this" refers to that topic. In other words, that the antecedent for the pronoun "this" is killing and other mistreatment of homosexuals in Iraq.

One of my favorite topics is actually taking action on issues and candidates, as opposed to simply posting. Therefore, I replied:

"What do you suggest? Everyone knows both homosexuals and women are getting treated horribly in some Muslim countries. Nobody in power seems to care enough to do anything about it."

Given the thread topic and the specific post to which I was replying, I did not find it necessary to discuss as well how gays and women are treated in America or any other specific country.

I also did not find it necessary to go on about the history of the British common law doctrine of femme covert as adopted by each colony and then by each state. Nor did it occur to me to include a recipe for stuffed grape leaves. However, none of that means that I am out of touch with reality or unaware of American history, or unaware of American current events or unaware of recipes for stuffed grape leaves.

See also Post # 5, which while very terse, was a negative comment on how gays are treated in the U.S. Or see any of my posts, not a one of which evidences any insenstivity to gays or women.

Indeed, being myself a woman who remembers reading about the first feminist meetings in the Sixties and the founding of NOW, I am probably as aware--first hand--of how women in this country have been treated and are treated as any female who is still alive.

As far as my allegedly slamming Muslims, kindly specify how my post did that. Or maybe just apologize.

[saigon68]

16. These guys sure don't

[No Elephants]

5. Lifestyle choice? Riiiiiiiiiight.

[marshall]

32. Give the religion of peace another hundred years or so

Peace will come eventually. It has gotten better for the Christian community. Mainline Christian groups that once also publicly supported such violence now turn their backs on it, and such hate crimes are relegated to splinter groups.

[UndertheOcean]

33. too bad for those living now

[No Elephants]

38. Bad is not even the word for the things the OP describes. I really object

when people say wait another generation or wait another century. It's been way too long already. Real human beings are involved, some of whom may die before I finish this post, hopeless and heartbroken. What the hell makes that okay?