Jordan Quartey

Religious Education
Terrorism can never be justified DO YOU AGREE WITH THIS
STATEMENT
Terrorism can be described as the use of violence and intimidation in the
pursuit of political aims against civilians. Many terrorist claims that they
are fighting for the greater good or to achieve justice, victims claim that it
is an act of unlawful destruction. But can it be justified?
One point that does justify terrorism is to liberate people from corrupt
tyrannies. In some situations, peaceful and democratic methods have
effect or result in achieving justice. People believe that extreme conditions
need extreme solutions. In the case of repression or suffering due to a
corrupt government or dictatorship, it necessary to perform unjust acts.
Violence sometimes is necessary. Some Muslims often justify terrorism
because of Jihad. Jihad is often mistranslated as "holy war," literally means
"struggle. Violence can only be justified in the situation of self-defence,
strengthening Islam, protecting the freedom of Muslims to practise their
faith, protecting Muslims against oppression, which could include
overthrowing a tyrannical ruler, punishing an enemy who breaks an oath
and putting right a wrong. Many Islamists used this to this to justify the
9/11 attacks. On September the 11th, Airplane hijackings resulted in the
collapse of the World Trade Centre in New York City, damage to the
Pentagon in Arlington. Bin Laden used Islamic texts to exhort Muslims to
attack Americans; he also claimed that Muslims Scholars Have
throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an
individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries." Another
opinion that justifies terrorism is the idea that the definition of terrorism
depends very much upon your point of view this is the eye of the beholder.
A imprecise definition would say terrorism was the use of violence for
political ends by any group, under such a broad definition, Nations and
their armed forces could then be accused of terrorism. This could also
apply to many resistance groups that fight in wartime, also freedom
fighters struggling against dictatorships, as well as participants in civil.
Dont these incidences justify terrorism? Even if the definition was
changed to say that terrorism was the use of violence against innocent
civilians to achieve a political end, even this description is faulted because
even if soldiers were only killed, some the soldier may have been
conscripted, this means they were forced and are still civilians. A final
point that justifies terrorism is the prospective of a utilitarian. This is the
idea that actions are right or can be justified if they are useful or they
benefit the majority/masses. For example, in cases where terrorist try to
create a point against a tyranny to provide justice for their nation, which
could consist of 10.000 people and in their demonstration only 10 people
would die, a utilitarian would feel that this act of violence is acceptable.
On the other hand Christians would think that Terrorism can never be
justified. In the bible it says The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind
controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; the sinful mind is hostile to God.
It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so (Romans 8:6-7).
Terrorism leads to death and created from hatred. Christians believe in the
sanctity of life, which is a religious teaching that explains that all life is god
given and sacred, and we as humans have no right to take it away. Also in

the Ten Commandments it says Thou shall not kill, terrorism specifically
goes against this teaching given by God, and therefore most Christians
would never justify terrorism. An example of a Christian who followed
these teachings would be Martin Luther King. He protested peacefully with
marches and boycotts even when they enemy attacked them. Buddhists
also have similar beliefs to Christianity. Most Buddhists believe that war
can never be justified. This is because of Ahimsa. This is the Buddhist
doctrine that explains how all beings should never be harmed. Terrorism
often leads to mass murder, this is against Ahimsa and Metta, which the
idea that we should show loving kindness to all human beings. Most
Buddhist would feel that war immoral and that it can never be justified.
Another point which agrees with the statement is the idea of innocent
people suffering. Normally terrorists motives are to prove a point for
political reasons. The actions they commit are uncontrollable, the do not
always control who die. Most of the time civilians who were not targeted
have to suffer. For example, the 9/11 attacks were meant to be an attack
to warn the American government, but in result 2,996 people died and
more than 6,000 were injured. This was an unintended consequence.
In conclusion I feel that terrorism can never be justified. I believe that we
dont have the right to take away life and innocent people should never be
harmed. Someone elses opinion would be that some terrorist attack can
be justified as they are for the greater good, I would disagree with them as
innocent lives should never be taken and civilians should not be harmed in
political demonstrations.