"Silence encourages the tormenter, never the tormented".

[guillaumeb]

From Elie Wiesel's acceptance speech after being awarded the Nobel Prize.


The quote is taken from a paragraph:

And then I explain to him how naïve we were, that the world did know and remained silent. And that is why I swore never to be silent whenever wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant. Wherever men and women are persecuted because of their race, religion, or political views, that place must – at that moment – become the center of the universe.

To read the entire speech:
http://eliewieselfoundation.org/elie-wiesel/nobelprizespeech/

I post this because, in responses to my few posts about the Chinese oppression of the Uighur Muslims in China, a few responses basically asked why I am even posting about this.

First, Wiesel says it far better than I could. We are all linked by our common humanity. What oppresses one can oppress all.

And oppression directed by atheists is equally as bad as the oppression directed by theists. It is the oppression that should be the focus.


The Chinese Government has given various excuses for their oppression, and in this case it is the Muslim Uighurs, but the Chinese Government has also tried to exercise control over other faith groups as well. It is a generalized intolerance for what they see as rivals.

[Major Nikon]

1. Still waiting on you to show that the leaders in China are atheists

But here we are in yet another thread on you pushing the same false narrative and no closer to a response.

[guillaumeb]

2. Yawn.

The Chinese Government has given various excuses for their oppression, and in this case it is the Muslim Uighurs, but the Chinese Government has also tried to exercise control over other faith groups as well. It is a generalized intolerance for what they see as rivals.

[Major Nikon]

4. Yeah, I know, it's boring to assume you'll actually support your assertions when challenged

...before repeating them ad nauseum. This is at least the 6th thread on this same topic in the last month, and if "It is a generalized intolerance for what they see as rivals" is true and several have already pointed this out, then this has exactly zero to do with religion and all you are accomplishing is shitposting.

[guillaumeb]

6. Again:

The Chinese Government has given various excuses for their oppression, and in this case it is the Muslim Uighurs, but the Chinese Government has also tried to exercise control over other faith groups as well. It is a generalized intolerance for what they see as rivals.

[MineralMan]

16. Let's look at that, but change the wording a little bit:

You wrote:

"The Chinese Government has given various excuses for their oppression, and in this case it is the Muslim Uighurs, but the Chinese Government has also tried to exercise control over other faith groups as well. It is a generalized intolerance for what they see as rivals."

I write:

"Donald Trump has given various excuses for his oppression, and in this case it is the Spanish-speaking migrants, but Donald Trump has also tried to exercise control over other ethnic and religious groups, like Muslims, as well. It is a generalized intolerance for what he sees as intruders."

In both cases, it is governments, not religions, who are doing those things. It has nothing to do with religions, but governments, instead. This is the Religion Group. we discuss religions here. We normally don't discuss governments. Governments are social structures, not religious organizations. We discuss governments in other parts of DU. We discuss religions here.

Governments are not religious organizations. They are political organizations and social structures.

[guillaumeb]

7. As to your accusation,

coming from the master of gifs, that is amusing.

[Major Nikon]

9. I support my assertions, gil

I get that you want to project your bad behavior on others, but that shit just ain't gonna fly no matter how much propulsion you add to it. Meanwhile you still have no answer to providing proof that the leaders in China actually are atheists to begin with, much less even attempting to explain what atheism has to do with any of it. Kinda ironic that you're now refusing to do so with two replies instead of one.

[guillaumeb]

10. Of course you do.

[Major Nikon]

19. Prove that I don't

And guess what, if you don’t (and we both know you can’t) that will just be more proof of you not supporting your assertions as if more were needed.

[guillaumeb]

21. Enough diversion from the actual post.

Feel free to ignore the actual post in the name of dialogue.

[Major Nikon]

22. At least you managed to prove something

[Act_of_Reparation]

3. No one asked you why you were posting these stories.

We all know why you are posting these stories. And it has very little to do with your concern for the Uyghurs.

[guillaumeb]

5. Convinced that you are a mind reader?

Fascinating.

So, are you concerned with the subject of the Chinese Government's oppression of the Uighurs?

If not, why not?

[trotsky]

12. No reading of minds is necessary.

You've made your agenda perfectly clear.

You're arguing against a claim that no one has made, namely that atheists can't be intolerant. Again, NO ONE HAS CLAIMED THIS.

What IS true, however, is that no one can use atheism as a justification for intolerance. There's nothing in the statement "I don't believe in gods" to justify it.

What is ALSO true is that there's plenty in YOUR religion, and MOST (if not all) of them, of specific edicts and teachings that can support intolerance.

You despise those facts, so instead you keep posting thread after thread of "atheist intolerance" as if that somehow proves religion is never a factor and that the intolerance just happens because we're human.

No wonder no one takes you seriously.

[guillaumeb]

13. And the 10,000 and 1 posts about priests molesting children?

What agenda is being served?

The RCC admitted that it is a huge problem. So why keep posting about individual incidents?

What agenda is being served.
What meme is being promoted?

No wonder there is no dialogue, when one side is determined to frame religion as a negative.

[trotsky]

14. 10,000 and 1, huh?

Surely you can prove that claim.

But I doubt the number is that large. I think you are exaggerating. I.e., lying. Right? You are, because you can't provide 10,001 links to separate threads.

So now that we agree the actual number of posts is much smaller, how many posts about the RCC's abuse problem is too many, gil? What is an acceptable count before you will want to censor people?

No wonder no one takes you seriously.

[guillaumeb]

18. Again with ad hominem and misframing.

You called me a liar. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the word hyperbole, and its uses.

And again with the claim of censorship.

And your final meme, conflating a tiny group with "no one".

Well done, and typical.

PS.
The bit about "well done" was sarcasm.

[Major Nikon]

23. Metaphor

[MineralMan]

15. How many, Guy? 10,001? Really?

Perhaps you exaggerate. In fact, certainly you exaggerate. To what end?

This group is about Religion, so you're going to see posts about the evil religious people do in this group. I guarantee it. And why would people not post about the continuing hypocrisy and the continuing wrongdoing that hypocrisy produces? This is the Religion Group. The topic here is religion. And not just nice things about religion, but the evil deeds done in the name of religion, as well.

Resign yourself to it. When religion causes evil, that will be discussed here. When priests and pastors sexually assault children in the name of God, we'll bring the stories here to shine a bright light on the hypocrisy of that.

It is not religion, per se, that we oppose. It is wrongdoing in the name of religion. You don't get that, apparently.

What agenda? The agenda of good deeds. The agenda of equal rights. The agenda of not supporting evildoing. And so on.

What meme? There is no meme, Guy. That exists only in your imagination.

Dialogue? It's present in every thread. Most people who are active in this group are eager discussers of things. Only a couple of people here avoid the discussions though whataboutism and diversions. There used to be more such people, but they have gone elsewhere or have been asked to leave.

You want discussion? Then, I suggest you participate in actual discussion. Answer questions with answers, not questions designed to divert. If you do that, you might learn who the people here are and what they stand for.

[guillaumeb]

20. Hyperbole. Look it up.

As to discussion, it mainly takes the form of a very few agreeing with each other.

As to diversion, one can look at my posts about the Chinese Government to find plenty of diversion and avoidance in the replies.

But that contradicts the meme. I understand.

[Major Nikon]

24. You mean the ones where you keep claiming their leaders are atheists?

And refused to answer why you think atheism is relevant?

Yeah, quite a bit of avoidance and diversion to be found in those.

[guillaumeb]

26. No, that is not hyperbole.

Look up the word.

[Major Nikon]

27. I didn't say it was

Pro-tip: proofread for obvious comprehension errors before questioning someone’s literacy to avoid unnecessary embarrassment.

[Lordquinton]

28. You mean those posts you go to great lengths to silence?

Every 10001 of them?

In fact these current posts about China are an attempt to deflect away from the scandal unfolding in real time, here in the USA wholly by the RCC, with no ambiguity in it. Priests are abusing religion to rape children. It's not about power, it's using their divine master to scare children from telling on them. Using their protected status to shield rapists. Using people's good faith that men of good could never act like that.

But you'd prefer silence about it.

[guillaumeb]

30. Do you even care about what is happening in China?

Your response reveals your obvious desire, which is that the Religion Group be devoted to negative news about theists.

We all understand that.

As to the real time scandal, what is happening in China, the war on theism, is happening today.

And perhaps this war on theism is something that you prefer to silence because it does not fit with your preferred narrative.

[Major Nikon]

8. It's the latest bright shiny object

Followed by dozens of other posts trying to convince us atheism was responsible for Hitler's genocide, as if that nonsense hasn't been debunked before.

Meanwhile we must be content in the knowledge that the motivation behind religion based human rights abuses is meaningless, as if that's supposed to be consolation to those who are adversely affected by it.

[guillaumeb]

11. More strawmen accusations?

Feel free to prove your assertions.

[Act_of_Reparation]

17. It's obviously trolling.

He's presenting as clear a composition fallacy as one can make. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming he knows that, but is making the argument anyway just to elicit a reaction for his "audience".

You know, the four or five people who can't post here anymore because they don't know how to behave like adults.

[guillaumeb]

25. And this is called dialogue?

calling someone a troll?

[Act_of_Reparation]

29. If you were half as interested in dialogue as you are with appearing to appeal for dialogue...

...we wouldn't be having this conversation right now.

[guillaumeb]

31. Look in a mirror and tell yourself what you just wrote.

[Act_of_Reparation]

32. Argumentum ad Pee Wee Herman

Well played, Billy.

[guillaumeb]

33. You set the bar.

And I understand why some here refuse to talk about China because it does not fit the preferred narrative. Demonstrating the limits of empathy?

[Act_of_Reparation]

34. No, you set the bar.