Thank you saintfletcher for bringing a bit of perspective to the 'debate'. Boaz-David, in your last few posts in this string, you are sinking to new depths in your mad crusade. You are fast becoming a self-parody. One thing OLO does not need is a frequent poster who is too mad and obsessed to engage in debate. Watch that you don't get to that point. Temper your posts with a few moments of reflection.

BD you are mistaking criticism for denigration. I criticise you for your patriarchal stance, your constant vilification of Muslims and your hypocritical quoting of the bible while never applying JC’s wise words to yourself on this forum.

You denigrate by calling people liars or evil. You denigrate by searching the internet for every bad thing you can find attributable to Muslims. Anyone can do the same and find appalling behaviour by christians - and that would also be denigration.

When you claim ‘falsehood’ in relation to Islam, you apparently lack the wit to know that the Koran shares the same roots as the bible – both have their foundation in the old testament. Are you claiming that the bible is false also? Logic would indicate that that is what you are saying even though you are oblivious to this.

Again I state: Jesus promoted love, you foster fear.

Part 1

"What's going on here guys?" asks PK after stating an argument of sweeping generalisation referring to history and his perceived violence of men. An argument well off topic, despite the sexist intonation of the title. Perhaps PK only read the title and not the article, which never even hinted at any sexist generalisations of that kind.

Then we have 3 reasoned responses to PK's question by Realist, Boaz_David and plerdsus, but PK was not persuaded by their arguments. Nope. He says of them, respectively, "you are hiding from the truth"; "you [sic] post does not begin to answer my question" and; "just another copout". It is clear that PK is interested in one answer and only one answer here - men as a class are violent oppressors. Later he makes this point, "We are a very long way off seeing a genuine gender balance within power structures that would give us an opportunity to analyse that. For the moment though, war and violence is a male thing".

So, one might ask, why did he ask the question when he already knew the answer? Was he really interested in what other people thought? He certainly dismissed other people's views very promptly.

However, he found agreement with Scout. "Scout, I agree with your post," he said.

And PK went on. "Perhaps women, if given more leadership opportunities, will exhibit a similar level of warlike tendencies as shown in the history of male leadership. If so, that may be because women will have to play by male-dominated rules." Here again, PK makes the assertion that women as an oppressed underclass will be forced to comply with the rules of men's oppressing overclass.

Having made the point and having established an ally in Scout, both PK and Scout then proceed to denigrate Boaz_David with personal slights relating to the state of his sanity.

Continued...

Part 2

Scout said to Boaz_David, "Ever thought of seeking some pyschological [sic] assistance with these fears? Oh, right, you're scared of psychologists too."

PK said, "Boaz-David, in your last few posts in this string, you are sinking to new depths in your mad crusade. You are fast becoming a self-parody. One thing OLO does not need is a frequent poster who is too mad and obsessed to engage in debate." This despite the fact that Boaz_David has engaged competently in debate on a vast number of topics over time.

It is interesting to note how this little dance took place. First pose a question to which the answer is already known. Sort correct and wrong answers to establish friend from foe. Next make personal attacks against those who don't agree with you and slander their sanity.

This technique has a long and sordid history and gives new meaning to the paragraph quoted from this very article "Power makes men mad" - "Instead of putting their formidable power to work reducing tensions and resolving conflicts - as they should be doing - they go about stoking the fires of anger and hate, apparently unaware that the destabilisation they cause must in due course engulf them too." And so too, just as presented here on this page of comments by PK and Scout, Dr Patrick Seale in his article appears to be conducting an example of the same simple, old-fashioned kettle and pot calling.

saintfletcher, you made some excellent points.

As well demonstrating passionate intolerance of others with different beliefs, the “Ku-Klux-Khristians” more frequently argue among themselves. If it’s not white it must be black – no shades of grey are permitted in their bitter, narrow view of the world.

They are no different from Jewish and Muslim zealots - they just have different marketing strategies.

Yesterday I saw photos of a distraught man in the Middle East collecting his son's body from the road - with a shovel. Does it really matter what the nationality or religion of this man is?

I don’t know who Jesus would bomb but He obviously wants you to be rich and have lots of lovely oil and doesn’t care how you get it.

This (very good) article clearly shows the effect of religious fundamentalism on world politics - on both sides.

In these cases there can never be an mutually acceptable solution, or even a truce.

Even the worst periods of the Cold War were far less threatening than the growing madness we face today.

Maximus, your very lengthy two posts can be summarised as "I agree with Boaz-David, and I do not agree with PK and Scout" but without much substance of your own. Dumping on Scout and me from a position of appearing to be above the fray hasn't worked I am afraid, as all you have really done is recount the thread from your biased standpoint. I think you can assume that most visitors can read and interpret for themselves.

This is a site where some strong views are exchanged, and if it sometimes seems to get personal, the anonymity should be a buffer against any offence being taken. Long term posters like B-D can look after themselves, you needn't be concerned. And, your faith in the soundness of B-D's stream of evangelical posts over many months has been misplaced. Time and again, he has been bested by many other contributors to the site. That is probably not surprising when you consider that B-D approaches every topic with the old 'Jesus saves' line, full of Bible quotes. Scout's posts about B-D's contributions to this string nailed him quite well. Your two verbose posts have quite failed to undo that. But if you are a like mind to B-D, you obviously won't see it that way.