Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

No matter what those nut-cakes believe, the fact is they truely believe what they are doing is the work of God. If YOU truly believed that if you walked into a mall and killed everyone you could as well as yourself you would be instantly transported to heaven for eternity. Would you do it? Remember, you have no doubt what you're doing is right and God's will. Me? Yeah, I probably would.

I suppose if I was that far gone and truly believed that rhetoric I would then.

I could be a terrorist but I'd call myself a freedom fighter

I wouln't be a suicide bomber, what's the point I wouldn't live to see the outcome of the battle for freedom, or be able to help in the struggle. It would be a waste of resouces, especially seeing as freedom fighters are normally the underdogs.

Of course. If you honestly believed what you were doing was right, I would hope EVERYONE would say yes.

Thankfully, we all know that terrorism isn't right. I'm not even sure a lot of terrorists think it's right. They're probably just throwing a temper-tantrum because America is so awesome.

Not me, I'm a defiant little bugger. Let it squish and squash me. I don't a shit. If it doesn't make sense to me, then I don't do it.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
Not me, I'm a defiant little bugger. Let it squish and squash me. I don't a shit. If it doesn't make sense to me, then I don't do it.

The hypothetical is if it DID make sense to you.

But I'm a sensible person. I don't even kill bugs.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
But I'm a sensible person. I don't even kill bugs.

You aren't in the hypothetical.

lol

Originally posted by long pig
No matter what those nut-cakes believe, the fact is they truely believe what they are doing is the work of God.

Not necessarily true. I did quite a lot of research on so-called "Islamic extremists" a few years ago, and everything I found pointed to one issue as being the most important factor in terms of the who and why people join such militant groups: Poverty. In quite a few cases, it was literally a way to provide income to families...

To answer your question...no, I wouldn't be a "suicide bomber." I don't believe in any ideal enough that would allow me to see killing civilians as a viable option. The distinction between "terrorist" and "hero" can be rather complex, depending on the side you're on, though.

Having such certainty in something so inherently unknowable is a sign of simple insanity, I believe. As such I can't say that I would ever be able to do that, as I am not insane.

Terrorist? Yes, though I can't imagine thinking of myself as one.
Suicide Bomber? No.

Well this is a pretty strange question. It's basically "Would you be a suicide bomber if you had the mindset of a suicide bomber?" Well, yes. I don't really see how it could ever be otherwise.

This is how my luck would go though. I would tell someone off, then they would shoot me. That's about how it's been going as of late. lol

If I would ever say "Bad, bad bad people, god said stop cause you're bad."
Then...I"m .....gasp.... lying there in a pile of blood. Blurp...

Yeah, it's an odd question. As I see it, this is the ultimate downfall of religion. (is there any religion that hasn't commited massacres? ) But when I put myself in their shoes, I felt less hate for them and more sympathy. I sort of feel sorry for those who do this kind of thing because they honestly believe in it. I also felt a bit of jealousy, wishing I believed in something that strongly. But then angry that this is the reason why religion is viewed the way it is. If you believe in God, do you believe these people are damned? I have a very hard time believing god wouldn't have sympathy for these people.

Originally posted by The Rover
Poverty. In quite a few cases, it was literally a way to provide income to families...

this is really only true in cases like Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, etc, where it is local people fighting for an "Islamic independence" from a direct occupational power

when it comes to the international scene, you often see people who are highly educated, and who have a good deal of opportunity back home.

The psychology is pretty simple. A poor person, or a person with no opportunity, will feel the need to take direct action to do this, and it is fairly simple to get them involved in an activity that they see as directly confronting the causes of their poverty.

Someone who has the opportunity, but sees these larger geopolitical patterns as being the primary causes of the oppression experienced by other muslims, is more likely to attribute these issues not to local oppression, but to international forces of the economy and American hegemony.

It is why AQ was not hugely popular in Afghanistan following the fall of the Soviets, many of the fighters had no interest in fighting the "great satan", they had their nation. Even high ranking members in its leadership where against OBL and Zawahiri's decision to attack America, and needed to be "taken care of" before OBL to launch his campaign.

it doesn't hold 100%, you can find examples that go both ways (Ross Kemp interviews a member of a Palestinian group who has a Law degree, yet is about to blow himself up), but in general, poverty is a much greater motivator of local movements than it is of the larger international terrorism.

EDIT: I've also seen a number of studies that look at, especially, the gender component of muslim extremism, and they find male concepts of humiliation are extremely powerful motivators as well, not that this isn't correlated to poverty or anything

Originally posted by long pig
(is there any religion that hasn't commited massacres? )

Jainism, but I tend to think this is because of a lack of political power than any form of true pacifism in their doctrine.

it would be a hard one to twist that way, however.

I also can't think of a Sikh massacre off the top of my head. Operation BlueStar certainly shows they aren't above violence and killing (They assassinated Indira Ghandi) but maybe not a massacre

Originally posted by long pig
No matter what those nut-cakes believe, the fact is they truely believe what they are doing is the work of God. If YOU truly believed that if you walked into a mall and killed everyone you could as well as yourself you would be instantly transported to heaven for eternity. Would you do it? Remember, you have no doubt what you're doing is right and God's will. Me? Yeah, I probably would.

I think the question is sort of set up like KK said it, ie, if you were a suicide bomber, would you be a suicide bomber...

but, to answer just slightly differently, I sort of refuse to believe a God exists that would ask for one person to end the life of another. I know that isn't exactly what you were looking for as an answer, but, even if I truly believed in a God and all that sort of thing, I would have to call whatever it was an evil spirit if it demanded me to do evil things.

EDIT: oh ya, tripple post

Ok, basically the crux of the question was "If there was a God and you totally believed in that God, 100 percent, and that God offered you heaven and all you had to do to get it was something that you know is clearly wrong, would you do it?" Does that make more sense? It's asking if your moral core is based on how you feel or how you're told to feel. Defy God and do the right thing. I don't know. I'm not the smartest person in the world, I'm sorry.

Originally posted by long pig
Ok, basically the crux of the question was "If there was a God and you totally believed in that God, 100 percent, and that God offered you heaven and all you had to do to get it was something that you know is clearly wrong, would you do it?" Does that make more sense? It's asking if your moral core is based on how you feel or how you're told to feel. Defy God and do the right thing. I don't know. I'm not the smartest person in the world, I'm sorry.

if that is the case, then no, I wouldn't, because I don't believe morality originates from God.

On the flip side, if I believed in God, I almost certainly would believe morality was from him, and therefore I would probably be a terrorist.

Originally posted by long pig
Ok, basically the crux of the question was "If there was a God and you totally believed in that God, 100 percent, and that God offered you heaven and all you had to do to get it was something that you know is clearly wrong, would you do it?" Does that make more sense? It's asking if your moral core is based on how you feel or how you're told to feel. Defy God and do the right thing. I don't know. I'm not the smartest person in the world, I'm sorry.

Well, that's not really what this example shows. What it shows is whether your moral compass includes killing for eternal happiness as justifiable or not...

To get at what you want you'd have to exclude rewards or punishment, so it is just based on authority. Though authority too is usually build on punishment and reward, so I am not sure where the authority would come from.

You got to be really brainwashed by someone to be either one of these.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Well this is a pretty strange question. It's basically "Would you be a suicide bomber if you had the mindset of a suicide bomber?" Well, yes. I don't really see how it could ever be otherwise.

Yeah, I agree with the above.

Everyone would do it cuz they think it's right. But obviously I wouldn't think of myself as a bad person terrorizing other people but a freedom fighter or someone to whom the first wrong had been done. Like the Kashmiris-they fought because their lands were taken and families perished. You don't turn into a massacring monster for no reason. there is usually if not always a complex history and personality behind it. Only a person with nothing to lose anymore would do such a thing imo.

**** yeah, I could be! I'd be the goddamn best terrorist there is, too!!!

I believe it.

Originally posted by long pig
Ok, basically the crux of the question was "If there was a God and you totally believed in that God, 100 percent, and that God offered you heaven and all you had to do to get it was something that you know is clearly wrong, would you do it?" Does that make more sense? It's asking if your moral core is based on how you feel or how you're told to feel. Defy God and do the right thing. I don't know. I'm not the smartest person in the world, I'm sorry. If you "totally believe in that god, 100 percent," Then wouldn't your moral core come from that god in the first place? This isn't making a bit of sense, I'm afraid.

The OP is a bit nonsensical. If my beliefs actually met the criteria mentioned in the OP, I wouldn't actually be me in any current context of the word. Yes, of course, if my synapses were changed in such a way that I truly believed it was right to do that, I would do that. It's almost a priori in its delivery. Anyone saying "no" is just deluding themselves into thinking that some current "them" could override the new person without having any plausible mechanism for doing so.

A few others have mentioned this, but it was my first thought.

Originally posted by Digi
The OP is a bit nonsensical. If my beliefs actually met the criteria mentioned in the OP, I wouldn't actually be me in any current context of the word. Yes, of course, if my synapses were changed in such a way that I truly believed it was right to do that, I would do that. It's almost a priori in its delivery. Anyone saying "no" is just deluding themselves into thinking that some current "them" could override the new person without having any plausible mechanism for doing so.

A few others have mentioned this, but it was my first thought.

All it takes for a mindset change like that is a cause or a loss or a betrayal.

To be sure...

the hard part is imagining myself believing that such an absurd idea was actually true

imagining myself committing mass murder somehow comes much easier