Thursday, December 6, 2018

Tagged under: ,

Death By Religious Disorder

Anthony McIntyre has no sympathy for a religious group that is demanding the prosecution of natives responsible for killing a Christian Missionary who had deliberately and illegally encroached on their protected territory.




John Chau was unwell, suffering from a severe religious derangement. So severe, in fact, it cost him his life. Chau was a Christian missionary who regardless of what anybody else thought, just happened to believe he had the right to inflict his religious opinion on whoever. For years he had harboured an obsession that a reclusive group of Indian island dwellers should be pestered with tales about Jesus.

The North Sentinelese are an indigenous body of people living: 
in isolation on the remote island in the Andaman and Nicobar archipelago, protected by Indian law to maintain their way of life and protect them from modern illnesses because they lack immunity.
Despite being aware of the dangers and cognisant of the breach of Indian law that his intended visit to North Sentinel Island would constitute, Chau decided to proceed anyway. Religious insanity had rendered him indifferent to anything other than religion. While a prominent missologist has disputed the claim that he was unprepared or indifferent, this flies in the face of his stupidity right across the board. He seems to have been much less concerned with the islanders corporeal being than their celestial one. He showed scant regard for any of the illnesses he could have brought to the island with him: the natives, being undisturbed and secluded have no natural immunity against diseases such as measles or ailments like the common cold. That did not primarily matter to Chau – only Jesus mattered. On a mission from God, he decided that the natives just had to know about Jesus.

It was well known that the islanders jealously protected their territory and way of life, and with force if need be. John Chau knew the risks according to Indian police who claim:
Chau knew that the Sentinelese resisted all contact by outsiders, firing arrows and spears at passing helicopters and killing fishermen who drift onto their shore. His notes, which were reported Thursday in Indian newspapers and confirmed by police, make clear he knew he might be killed.
Nevertheless, his friend John Middleton Ramsay said:
he was someone who died out of love for these people to bring the good news of Jesus Christ but it didn't seem to frighten him … He believed he was going to heaven, going to be with God if he died.
Ramsay, apparently as much a religious whack job as Chau, claimed that both he and the late missionary "had a passion for sharing our faith with others." Which when broken down means an intolerance of what others think combined with a compulsive desire to practice religion on them.

None of this seems to figure with Covenant Journey, the Christian cult to which Chau belonged. Its chair, Mat Staver, said: "John loved people, and he loved Jesus. He was willing to give his life to share Jesus with the people on North Sentinel island." They were to have no say in the matter, just John and Jesus.

The natives, more concerned with protecting themselves than Chau was, after having chased the hymn singing intruder away twice, ambushed him with arrows and killed him before dragging his body away. 

Others who have met with the natives over the years were only allowed to do so in the sea, up to their necks in water, where they handed out coconuts. The sea was regarded by the islanders as a neutral venue, not something owned by them like the land.

Now a Christian group that ostensibly exists for the purpose of highlighting persecution of Christians wants the natives brought to their concept of justice. International Christian Concern is demanding that the natives be charged with murder.

While there is considerable persecution of Christians in India, in the case of Chau, "he wasn’t killed because he was a Christian; he was killed because he travelled to a prohibited island and endangered the locals."

People are not their to serve as target practice for religious cranks. Hard for Christian arrogance to grasp that concept.


Anthony McIntyre blogs @ The Pensive Quill.

Follow Anthony McIntyre on Twitter @AnthonyMcIntyre

34 comments :

DaithiD said...

This is a rather ugly piece Anthony, the islanders did not know his motive for being there, they killed him before they could assess that.

The contrast in the way the American opinion formers/excreters dealt with this illegal border crossing and the migrant caravan in Mexico highlights the utter hypocrisy endemic in this area, and you are firmly of that tradition in this sphere.

He was human not illegal to borrow a phrase. Isn’t diversity supposed to be our strength, and immigration a human right? He just wanted to enrich the staid homogeneity of the little islanders, a true martyr for the open borders world we are forced to endure in the West. The trope of diseased foreigners infecting natives is frowned upon in every other circumstance, yet is the center piece of this article. I can’t help but conclude your support for one set of religious whack jobs over another is the colour of their skin.

AM said...

DaithiD - deepest sympathy on the death of your fellow religious nutter!!!

frankie said...

Personally I think the islander's did the right thing.

He just wanted to enrich the staid homogeneity of the little islanders, a true martyr for the open borders world we are forced to endure in the West.,

Daithi are you taking the piss or are you serious...?



The trope of diseased foreigners infecting natives is frowned upon in every other circumstance, yet is the center piece of this article.

The center piece is Religion not wanted....

DaithiD said...

AM, are his human rights not to be respected just because the tribe didn’t subscribe to the idea? Like a Muslim woman seeking autonomy the middle east for example? You should know this, you asked me variants of this about 12 times sequentially on one thread a few months back. Given your previous positions on this, and Israeli border crossings for example, it must be hard for you to adjust. Take your time, relax, I will wait for your reply.

DaithiD said...

Frankie, close. I’m seriously taking the piss out of Anthony, you might need to have followed our previous tussles on the subject of immigration / human rights.

AM said...

DaithiD - I thought you were having a laugh, hence my comment. Never thought for a moment you might be serious. Just in case you are:

Human rights should be respected but if the body is not incorporated into the human rights regime by international agreement and consent because of the history, and the group is not coming out to attack other people but is defending what is its territory, then it can not be held accountable. There may be a case for the Indian government to explain itself but not the islanders who know nothing of human rights law.

This seems so simple to understand. The intruder was not going to the island for one reason alone - to practice his religion on the people there.

If you think this is an issue for you to vent your bigotry towards Muslims, try another point. You will have no leverage with this one.

AM said...

Frankie - of course he is taking the piss. If he isn't he is as bonkers as Chau!

DaithiD said...

AM, I am of course not serious , it’s unfortunate I have to admit this because I thought I had you on this one (for once). Regardless of what you think I feel towards Muslims, you might agree I would never defend them being executed in sight at a border.

AM said...

DaithiD - - I always have this image of you standing at the English channel with loin cloth, bow and arrow, screaming something unintelligible about "the texts" while waiting on the first Muslim to land.

DaithiD said...

AM, what colour underwear do you imagine me wearing ? Or am I being naughty and wearing none ? *blushes*

frankie said...

Anthony,


Dunno about Daithi being bonkers, I know I am. I am trying to figure out does Daithi dislike the local Taliban more than Barry dislikes anyone insulting Israel. I know both spend too much brain power defending the in-defensible at times.

AM said...

Hard to tell behind her kimono which you covered yourself in a bid to pretend you like foreigners!

DaithiD said...

Frankie, to be fair, I raised the issue of Muslim women because I think it’s directly analogous to this situation and Anthony and I differed on whether equal human rights should be expected (expected not deserved) given the vastly different traditions and starting points of the Islamic Middle East and post-Enlightenment West in philosophy and practice.

Christopher Owens said...

If it was the case that the guy had been repeatedly warned not to disturb the tribe, and was nearly killed a few times in the process, then I think he should be a contender for the 2018 Darwin Awards.

Preaching the word of a deity is one thing, but when it's clear you're not wanted, it shouldn't be a surprise the natives go all Cannibal Holocaust on you.

Barry Gilheany said...

AM

The death of Anthony Chau was a tragic waste of human life in pursuit of religious imperialism. Rather than pursuing a murder charge against the Sentinelese community; the Christian group to which we belonged should take a long hard look at how it failed in its duty of care towards him.

Frankie

I have no problem with criticisms of Israel; I count myself as a critic of the current right-wing nationalist government as I am of any movement of similar ideological hue. It is when criticism of Israel and Zionism becomes generically antisemitic in character that I feel compelled to speak out. Exactly how do I defend the indefensible?

AM said...

Daithi - human rights are for all people. There is no workable analogy between this and the Islamic cultures you refer to. Our best knowledge of these people comes from anthropologists whose best advice is that because their situation is so peculiar, the numbers so small, their susceptibility to externally induced disease so pronounced, that the most humane thing to do is leave them alone.

If any of the population there gave an indication that they wanted the same rights as you or me we would feel compelled to support it on the grounds that they are entitled to them for the same reasons we are. The same applies to Muslim women in other countries. Would you not support the right of such women to have full human treatment? That leads us into a cultural relativism which opens up the possibility for real racism and not just PC name calling racism. The practical side of it is that we might not be able to do much to make our support effective - like a TV supporter watching Barcelona - the disaster of humanitarian intervention raises a daunting spectre.

If somebody was to be as deranged as Chau and insist on marching in to explain the rights of transgender people, and got killed, I would feel exactly the same way towards them. This is a bit spiced for us giving how easy it is to laugh at people shouting Jesus at us.


AM said...

Barry - the Christian group will do no such thing. They like to take a long hard look at every body else but themselves.

Christians have as much right to speak as everybody else but people also have a right not to hear. These Christian groups think there is no such thing as a right not to hear, that the right to speak is an automatic right to be listened to.

frankie said...

Maybe the natives didn't want their kids Christmas ruined by Christians...
Children left in tears after being told 'Father Christmas isn't real'by Christian charity worker


Children as young as four were reportedly left in tears after being told Santa was 'made up' during a Christian assembly.

Pupils were then asked to smash up chocolate versions of St Nicholas and his reindeer to hammer home the point.

Some parents said they would be refusing to let their children go to any other assemblies delivered by the woman.

Another parent, Rachael Partridge, writing on a school Facebook group, said: 'My daughter came home with a smashed-up chocolate Santa in a bag and explained why. I was really annoyed at this because Christmas time is a magical time for my kids.'

The row comes after children as young as nine at St Cuthbert's Church of England Primary in Darwen, Lancashire, were asked to research whether Santa Claus exists as part of their homework.



(Have no fear people Santa is real...confirmed by NASA)

Niall said...

Great article....he had tried a couple of times before and had been chased off....perhaps the natives realised this annoying flea is never going to stop unless we......alas poor Yorick!

David Higgins said...

Barry- that comment to frankie made me belly laugh. Do yo know what the word critic means?

Barry Gilheany said...

David

A critic means "a person who expresses disapproval of someone or something" (OED). I express disapproval of the govt of Benjamin Netananyu and its actions just as I do of other right-wing nationalist governments like those of Putin, Trump, Orban, Italy and Poland I disapprove of what goes on the West Bank.

But criticism does not equivocate to opposition to the exsitence of the State being criticised.

A cheap shot if I may say so, David.

David Higgins said...

Barry - it's tongue in cheek. Giving me the actual definition made me chuckle. Although using your comments on here as a template you're about as critical to Israel as a hooker is to cock size. I struggle to remember a to and thro about Israel where you didn't bring up anti semitism, which for me is a seperate argument

Barry Gilheany said...

David

Criticism of Israel and antisemitism should always be separate matters. The trouble is that certain elements of the British Palestine Solidarity Campaign (I don't know about the Irish Campaign) and of Jeremy Corbyn supporters in the Labour Party have consciously or unconsciously conflated them as have the George Galloways of this world.

AM said...

Barry – is there anything whatsoever anti-Semitic in calling these two Nazis?

Barry Gilheany said...

AM

No absolutely not. Those comments are disgusting. Experience of oppression, even something as garguntian as the Shoah/Holocaust do not inoculate any race or ethnic group from the viruses of racism, fascism and chauvinist nationalism

David Higgins said...

Barry- I've got to disagree again, feel as if am on your case constantly here. I met Galloway once, he came across as pompous. He's inconsistent in his politics, to the point i would dismiss him as a careerist, but antisemitic? Let's say for arguments sake he had a hatred for Jewish people, he's far to astute to air any nonsense. So how antisemitic? I never thought I'd be defending George Galloway

David Higgins said...

Am- there's loads of comments like your link. I read an Israeli minister who called Palestinian woman snakes and said they should be killed to stop them breeding, forget her name, remember the columnist who argued for genocide as a way of dealing with the Palestinian 'problem' and yet all of this is tolerated by people who claim they're for human rights. It makes my brain hurt.

Barry Gilheany said...

AM

Did you get my reply?

If not, my answer to your question is a resounding NO. Those comments are vile.

Centuries of oppression, even events like the Shoah/Holocaust, do not inoculate any race or ethnic collectivity from the virus of racism, fascism and/or nationalist chauvinism>

frankie said...

Barry,

Is it at all possible that you could post something, anything with out mentioning the words Jews, Jewy, Shoah or Holocaust? You are starting to sound like a broken record at times.


The indomitable Frankie Boyle firing shots at the Israeli war criminal club, and their slimy, apologists.

frankie said...

Barry,

Is it at all possible that you could post something, anything with out mentioning the words Jews, Jewy, Shoah or Holocaust? You are starting to sound like a broken record at times.


The indomitable Frankie Boyle firing shots at the Israeli war criminal club, and their slimy, apologists.

Barry Gilheany said...

Frankie

Can you post something without mentioning the Rothschilds?

frankie said...

Barry,


When was the last time I mentioned the Rothy's? I am serious, I don't just think it is me, if you have a love for everything Jewish, Israeli, think Zionism is better than mom's apple pie...Best advice I can give you is find a Jewish woman, butter her up and give her one for Ulster and get it out of your system.

The Frankie Boyle jokes (I am not a great fan of Boyle) was a legit question. Personally I thought he got his points across with out being anti-Jew or anti-Semitic.


Between us Barry, I am finishing off a few pieces for TPQ and one is about the Rothchild's and their Zionist banker friends. Before I mail them I fact checking a few things and guess what Barry, I wont be using Alex Jones to source anything, but I will be directly quoting people (Zionist bankers), using their words as best as possible to back up my claims.

Barry Gilheany said...

Frankie

I am no more a philosemite than any one else.

Supporting rights for Palestinians should never be a cover for or spill into antisemitism. Unfortunately this has been happening in the Labour Party and on campus life across Britain. I will be writing a piece (maybe pieces) for TPQ on these matters sometime.

frankie said...

Barry,

Whatever is or isn't happening within the British Labour Party or any political party. It goes out my left ear as quicker than it entered my right ear.


You for whatever reason that very few TPQ-ers can get their heads around never critic Israel. Have you ever called for a boycott of anything Israeli....? Does Zionism in all it's forms sit easy with you?