Comments on: NZ at War: Killing in the Name of Religion

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 01:47:12 +0000

Hi Cameron, thanks for your comment. My apologies for getting your first name wrong. I’ve corrected it in the post. On your other points:

Point 2: I’m definitely not disputing the quality of the sights but I am disputing the bible references. The NZ Defence Force has raised the issue with the supplier and the supplier is providing new sights with no references so clearly it’s not a big issue to remove them. If the guy who founded the company was Islamic and put Islamic references on them, would you still be happy? You’re assuming that 100% of NZ soldiers are Christian.

Point 3: It sounds like we both understand the need to kill the enemy in order to prevent extreme abuse and further loss of life. If we have to do this then yes, I absolutely believe we should do it without adding further insult! Is your argument that we should kill them AND insult them??? And you’re saying my argument is stupid?

Point 4: Of course there’s outrage. There’s outrage by peaceful Islamic people who are angry that these extremists are representing their religion on an international stage through acts of violence. And I still don’t understand your “Well they’re doing it so why can’t we?” attitude. Do you really need someone to explain why that approach to war won’t end in a peaceful outcome?

By: Whaleoil

Whaleoil — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 09:57:17 +0000

Point one, my name is Cameron Slater not Christian Slater. Christian Slater is an actor.

Point 2: There isn’t any pushing religion with a serial number on a rifle sight that happen to include a reference to the Bible. Those sight are simply the best available, it also happens that the owner of Trijicon is a christian and like to show that by making serial numbers with bible references in them.

Point 3: It seems that you are ok with killing the enemy, just that we don’t insult them while we are doing it by having a little piece of writing on their rifle sights. Can you see the stupidity of your argument?

Point 4: I wonder why there isn’t outrage at the Islamic and Koranic verses inscribed coverings on the preferred weapon of choice of the terrorist, the suicide bomber?

By: Tweets that mention NZ at War: Killing in the Name of Religion - New Zealand News and Opinion -- Topsy.com

Fri, 22 Jan 2010 01:13:45 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by marklincoln, Mark @ NZ:RAW. Mark @ NZ:RAW said: NZ at War. My opinion on the biblical references on gun-sights supplied to the NZDF http://bit.ly/65a5TJ [...]

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:45:13 +0000

Thanks for your comments fellas and well said, both of you!

By: Flux

Flux — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:18:34 +0000

Brilliant – why not make every war a holy war? Because the Crusades were known for their restraint and didn’t drag on at all… Thanks, blinkered defense contractors!

Also, I’m no Christian, but surely Jesus would have a problem with this too. As a man of peace, the dude never bore a weapon, and now we’re carving his words on ours? It seems a bit like branding your livestock with the PETA logo…

By: BlakJak

BlakJak — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:02:19 +0000

Yeah, have to say you’ve nailed this one.
But that’s strictly my _personal_ view on this subject.
I was a military brat and as the child of a serviceman, I guess I have my own set of biases in favour of neutral, objective and plain old ‘fair’ use of military forces to keep the peace and defend the innocent victims, etc. A bit romantic, perhaps, but I do feel that Religion should not be a crutch.