"God wills it" was the battle cry of the Crusaders. It was often shouted at their enemies. Write an informative Blog about who commanded the crusades, who went and why. Then compare it to this quote: from BALIEN (in speech to Jerusalem): Which is more holy? The wall? The mosque? The sepulcher? Who has claim? Find what references is making, and which religions is he making references to? Compare this idea of one god willing a religious war compared to the idea that all of these religions have claim to the Holy City.

If you were alive during the Crusades, you would hear the phrase "God wills it" a lot. This is because this war was a "holy war". In 1095, Pope Urban II called for a war against the Muslim rulers of Jerusalem. This was the First Crusade. Over the next two centuries, Christian armies from Europe fought more crusades, but none was successful. Almost every man that was able to fight became a crusader because it was said that if you fight in the Crusades your sin will be forgiven. Old and young men and even peasants participated in the Crusades to have their sin forgiven. One man Balian of Ibelin was an important noble that basically commanded the Christian troops in the second crusade. He made any man capable of bearing arms a knight. In one of Balian's speeches to Jerusalem he says "Which is more holy? The wall? The mosque? The sepulcher? Who has claim? No one has claim. All have claim". When he says "the wall" he is referring to the Western Wall  in Jerusalem. This wall pertains to the Jewish religion. On certain occasions, this is where Jews assemble for prayer and lamentation. It is traditionally  believed to be the remains of the Western Wall of Herod's temple, which was destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70. It is also called Wailing Wall. When Balian says "the mosque" he is referring to the Dome of Rock located in Jerusalem. The wall pertains to the Muslim religion. The Dome of Rock is a shrine in Jerusalem at the site from which Muhammad ascended through the seven heavens to the throne of God. It was built on the site of the Jewish temple. When Balian says "the sepulcher" he is referring to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. This sepulchre pertains to the Christian religion. This sepulchre is the place where Jesus was crucified and is also said to contain the place where Jesus was buried. The church has been a paramount pilgrimage destination since at least the 4th century. This quote, I feel was necessary. The fact that someone wanted to own everything, was a major factor that led to the downfall of Jerusalem. The problem all began in 1071 when a group of fanatical Muslims captured Jerusalem. They wouldn't tolerate Christians and began to treat the cruelly. Pope Urban then called for a crusade. The Turks that ill treated them, in a way, started the Crusades. I think humans, in our natural state, want to live in peace. Balian says that everyone has equal claim. You can't say one god is greater than the other or that one place is more holy than the other. The Crusades weren't necessary. So many people were killed, even innocent little kids were killed. All of these lives should not have been lost because someone wanted to have more control over Jerusalem.

     

Was a Quarantine Necessary? Can you hold people against their will?

In August of 2009 Ziketan, with 10,000 people, was quarantined after three deaths from the pneumonic plague. Three people died and nine people were sickened during the course of the plague. The bacterium responsible for this plague is the same bacteria that caused the bubonic plague. This plague is basically the bubonic plague in the lungs. This quarantine, in my opinion, was not necessary because, as stated in the article, this disease can be treated with antibiotics. Quarantining the town was a bit extreme. They could’ve treated the people that had the disease and/or the people that show any symptoms of the plague. Towns should only be quarantined when there is an infectious disease that isn’t curable or any disease for which no treatment has been discovered.

People should not be held against their will, especially these people because they weren’t any threat to the health of other people. The people could of been treated with antibiotics instead of putting the entire town under quarantine. It would be different if the person had a disease that was deadly, then they should be quarantined even against their will.
This extreme action to the situation was not necessary. They did this out of fear because when you hear the word "plague" you automatically think of the Black Death which over a five year period from 1347 to 1352, 25 million people died due to it. One-third to one-half of the European population was wiped out! There may be some fear that arises from that but, no decision should be based off of fear. In this situation fear outweighs reason. A little like Lord of the Flies when the boy were so terrified they began doing their "dance" and out of fear, when they see Simon they attack thinking that he is the beast. This is a moment where fear has outweighed reason. The entire situation should've been handled a different and more reasonable way.

Is our value of "freedom of speech" more important than the Global considerations of other countries? Or should other countries recognize our values too?

On September 11, 2012 the assaults against the United States from the Arabian world took a turn for the worst. The mobs were set off by Egyptian media reports about the 14 minute trailer for the video, called "Innocence of Muslims", that was released on YouTube. Basically, this movie depicts the Prophet Muhammad as a womanizer, a homosexual, child molester and a greedy thug. Three Americans have been murdered, one was an American ambassador, American franchises & American flags are being burned all over the Middle East.
I don't believe that our value of freedom of speech is more important the Global considerations of other countries but, other countries need to recognize our value as well. The United States government should have  taken this trailer down as soon as they discovered it. If we want people to respect our values than we must also respect theirs. But, the way that the Arabian/ Islamic world has approached the situation is irrational and irresponsible. Instead of resorting to acts of violence they could have simply talked to us and made some sort of agreement for the US to ban the movie. "Three people were killed on Friday - two in Tunisia and one in Egypt- as protesters battle with police armed with tear gas and rubber bullet and who sometimes fired into the air to try ward off the demonstrators from American embassies." The fact that these people have resorted to murdering innocent people, to me, is outrageous  If they should be going after anyone it should be the people behind the film not people that had nothing to do with it. They ESPECIALLY should not kill people that serve this country. Because of the way they approached it I don't believe that the US should give them their way. They need to understand that the US didn't encourage the movie to be made, some disrespectful people made it. We should also find the people behind the murder of these innocent Americans and bring them to justice and make them realize what they have done. The US is the the only that needs to act upon this issue. The leaders of Arabia, or whomever is participating in this, should get the protesters to stop and then come make peace with the leaders of the US. I believe that the US should not stop protecting itself and its people. We should fight until these people reach some sense and act in the correct and humane way.

The picture below shows that this child's mind is being corrupt being corrupt by a stereotype that Americans don't like or don't respect the Islamic way of life. But, this is a lie because the freedom of religion is something that this country believes in. Its like raising an American child to believe that all Muslims are terrorists. It isn't right. These children have an innocence that should be kept for as long as possible.

Prompt 11.07.12

I do believe that the right man, Obama, won. There are many reasons that I believe this. The first reason is because Obama focuses a lot on education. To him education is important. On the other hand Romney said “If you can’t afford college, college isn’t for you.” I strongly disagree with this because someone may be smart and determined to go to college but not have the money for it, that doesn’t necessarily mean that college isn’t for them. Another thing I like about Obama is that he believes in equality of everyone. He believes that same sex marriage should be legalized. Obama said “No one in America should ever be afraid to walk down the street holding hands with the person they love.” I STRONGLY agree with this statement. Overall Obama thinks more about the people and what they want. He thinks more about the equality of everyone more than Romney does.