Just in case some on here might not hear about this....
- Thread starter TheCainer
- Start date
So..........
.....the fact that people threatened by the IS declare a fatwa against them means a lot to you? Why are you so desperate to defend Islam?
The Saudis crack down on jihad at home while funding it abroad. This is pure self-interest. They hope to protect themselves by fooling others into defending them. Taqiya: you're falling for it.
From the Saudi clerics:
"Terrorism is contrary to the purposes of the great religion of Islam, which came as a mercy to the world and to ensure the system of worldly coexistence."
From the Koran:
Verse (3:151)
We will put terror into the hearts of the unbelievers.-- I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their tongue.
.....the fact that people threatened by the IS declare a fatwa against them means a lot to you? Why are you so desperate to defend Islam?
The Saudis crack down on jihad at home while funding it abroad. This is pure self-interest. They hope to protect themselves by fooling others into defending them. Taqiya: you're falling for it.
From the Saudi clerics:
"Terrorism is contrary to the purposes of the great religion of Islam, which came as a mercy to the world and to ensure the system of worldly coexistence."
From the Koran:
Verse (3:151)
We will put terror into the hearts of the unbelievers.-- I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their tongue.
Re: So..........
And when the LORD thy God delivereth it into thy hand, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword;...
Howbeit of the cities of these peoples, that the LORD thy God giveth
thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth,
but thou shalt utterly destroy them: the Hittite, and the Amorite, the
Canaanite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite; as the LORD
thy God hath commanded thee;
"Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.' "
And when the LORD thy God delivereth it into thy hand, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword;...
Howbeit of the cities of these peoples, that the LORD thy God giveth
thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth,
but thou shalt utterly destroy them: the Hittite, and the Amorite, the
Canaanite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite; as the LORD
thy God hath commanded thee;
"Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.' "
Fail
1) That's not an eternal commandment. It applies to a specific time and place.
2) Would Jesus have participated? No. Christians are supposed to follow his example.
3) Are Christians worldwide doing things like this? No.
But I understand why you have to tear down Christianity. I also see you blatantly ignored the phony statements by the clerics. Anything to defend Islam in the name of Equality.
This post was edited on 9/19 8:42 AM by GMM
1) That's not an eternal commandment. It applies to a specific time and place.
2) Would Jesus have participated? No. Christians are supposed to follow his example.
3) Are Christians worldwide doing things like this? No.
But I understand why you have to tear down Christianity. I also see you blatantly ignored the phony statements by the clerics. Anything to defend Islam in the name of Equality.
This post was edited on 9/19 8:42 AM by GMM
What would Mohammed do?
Probably tryng to lead ISIS. Or Al Qaeda. Or Hamas. Or Hizballah. Or any other Islamic terrorist group there--plenty to choose from. In fact he'd probably try to join them all into one fighting force to destroy the infidels forever.
Good to see that Australia has been Strengthened By Diversity.
Well ISIS seems to take that Koran verse literally.
A lot of Muslims do. But not until 100.000000% of Muslims are blood-thirsty jihadists will some in the West acknowledge that Islam is a problem. Even then they'd still say that "real" Islam is peaceful and perfectly compatible with Western civilization. Import more!
Probably tryng to lead ISIS. Or Al Qaeda. Or Hamas. Or Hizballah. Or any other Islamic terrorist group there--plenty to choose from. In fact he'd probably try to join them all into one fighting force to destroy the infidels forever.
Good to see that Australia has been Strengthened By Diversity.
Well ISIS seems to take that Koran verse literally.
A lot of Muslims do. But not until 100.000000% of Muslims are blood-thirsty jihadists will some in the West acknowledge that Islam is a problem. Even then they'd still say that "real" Islam is peaceful and perfectly compatible with Western civilization. Import more!
lol
yes posting about violence in the Bible = "tearing down Christianity" but posting about it in the Koran is legit.
I'm not religious so I find them both equally false, that's the only equality I see. Two false beliefs, legitimately and strongly held by two very large groups of people, the vast majority of both just good folks trying to live their lives, feed their kids, and find some happiness in the world.
Are Christians worldwide killing people? Yep. A whole lot of Bosnian Muslims were killed by Christians. Plenty of places in Africa where Christians (and Muslims) are killing people. Of course their Black right so, that's a whole 'nother thing for you.
TONS of killing in the name of Christianity over the years (and every other religious and non-religious belief system).
Other than maybe the Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, Atheists, all have plenty of blood on their hands.
If you were even a moderately intelligent person you'd have to agree. You aren't of course.
yes posting about violence in the Bible = "tearing down Christianity" but posting about it in the Koran is legit.
I'm not religious so I find them both equally false, that's the only equality I see. Two false beliefs, legitimately and strongly held by two very large groups of people, the vast majority of both just good folks trying to live their lives, feed their kids, and find some happiness in the world.
Are Christians worldwide killing people? Yep. A whole lot of Bosnian Muslims were killed by Christians. Plenty of places in Africa where Christians (and Muslims) are killing people. Of course their Black right so, that's a whole 'nother thing for you.
TONS of killing in the name of Christianity over the years (and every other religious and non-religious belief system).
Other than maybe the Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, Atheists, all have plenty of blood on their hands.
If you were even a moderately intelligent person you'd have to agree. You aren't of course.
There it is again
Searching through history to find bad behavior in all groups to defend Islam today. No one today is behaving worse than Muslims. But you have to lump that into "religion" so you can make Islam look good by making other groups look bad.
yes posting about violence in the Bible = "tearing down Christianity" but posting about it in the Koran is legit.
"about violence". Was it an eternal call for violence in the Bible? No. Is it in the Koran? Yes. Once again you dumb things down to defend Islam.
.... the vast majority of both just good folks trying to live their lives, feed their kids, and find some happiness in the world.
Yeah, just like most Germans, Italians, and Japanese during WW2. According to your logic we shouldn't have gone to war against those people.
TONS of killing in the name of Christianity over the years (and every other religious and non-religious belief system).
No one denies this. Its just an attempt to run interference for Islam. Who's doing the most killing today? Between the founders of both religions, which sets an example of peace and which of violence?
Other than maybe the Buddhists......
Nice ignorance on your part.
....Christians, Muslims, Atheists, all have plenty of blood on their hands.
Once again, no one denies this. Why so desperate to defend Islam?
Searching through history to find bad behavior in all groups to defend Islam today. No one today is behaving worse than Muslims. But you have to lump that into "religion" so you can make Islam look good by making other groups look bad.
yes posting about violence in the Bible = "tearing down Christianity" but posting about it in the Koran is legit.
"about violence". Was it an eternal call for violence in the Bible? No. Is it in the Koran? Yes. Once again you dumb things down to defend Islam.
.... the vast majority of both just good folks trying to live their lives, feed their kids, and find some happiness in the world.
Yeah, just like most Germans, Italians, and Japanese during WW2. According to your logic we shouldn't have gone to war against those people.
TONS of killing in the name of Christianity over the years (and every other religious and non-religious belief system).
No one denies this. Its just an attempt to run interference for Islam. Who's doing the most killing today? Between the founders of both religions, which sets an example of peace and which of violence?
Other than maybe the Buddhists......
Nice ignorance on your part.
....Christians, Muslims, Atheists, all have plenty of blood on their hands.
Once again, no one denies this. Why so desperate to defend Islam?
Re: What would Mohammed do?
Ironic to think that ISIS and other Jihadists are attempting to run out anyone who's not Sunni (or Shi'a, depending on the group), certainly not Muslim from their homeland, and you espouse the same here in the US, despite what our Constitution says about freedom of religion. It's like you are GSUS - GMM's State in the US. Interesting. You and ISIS fundamentally agree.
Congrats on that!
I guess we should all just kill ourselves, since us white folks aren't native to this land and ran people out. Diversity hasn't served the aboriginals well, either, so you're right about Australia re: diversity; Everything was just hunky-dory before the white folks showed up. A lot of Africans probably feel the same way about diversity: things were just fine until the Europeans showed up.
Ironic to think that ISIS and other Jihadists are attempting to run out anyone who's not Sunni (or Shi'a, depending on the group), certainly not Muslim from their homeland, and you espouse the same here in the US, despite what our Constitution says about freedom of religion. It's like you are GSUS - GMM's State in the US. Interesting. You and ISIS fundamentally agree.
Congrats on that!
Re: What would Mohammed do?
I guess we should all just kill ourselves, since us white folks aren't native to this land and ran people out.
So did the Indians. But the guilt trip only applies to whites.
Diversity hasn't served the aboriginals well, either.........
Really? How so?
......Everything was just hunky-dory before the white folks showed up.
Was it?
A lot of Africans probably feel the same way about diversity: things were just fine until the Europeans showed up.
I guess that's why so many Africans want to live in majority white countries. And why so few Africans leave majority white countries.
Care to denounce the Arabs for showing up in Africa?
Ironic to think that ISIS and other Jihadists are attempting to run out
anyone who's not Sunni (or Shi'a, depending on the group), certainly not
Muslim from their homeland, and you espouse the same here in the US,
despite what our Constitution says about freedom of religion.
More exaggeration. Name the post where I said Muslims should be "run out" of the US.
You and ISIS fundamentally agree.
Yeah, just like all the countries fighting each other in WWII agreed. I mean, they all wanted their side to win. Great analysis!
I guess we should all just kill ourselves, since us white folks aren't native to this land and ran people out.
So did the Indians. But the guilt trip only applies to whites.
Diversity hasn't served the aboriginals well, either.........
Really? How so?
......Everything was just hunky-dory before the white folks showed up.
Was it?
A lot of Africans probably feel the same way about diversity: things were just fine until the Europeans showed up.
I guess that's why so many Africans want to live in majority white countries. And why so few Africans leave majority white countries.
Care to denounce the Arabs for showing up in Africa?
Ironic to think that ISIS and other Jihadists are attempting to run out
anyone who's not Sunni (or Shi'a, depending on the group), certainly not
Muslim from their homeland, and you espouse the same here in the US,
despite what our Constitution says about freedom of religion.
More exaggeration. Name the post where I said Muslims should be "run out" of the US.
You and ISIS fundamentally agree.
Yeah, just like all the countries fighting each other in WWII agreed. I mean, they all wanted their side to win. Great analysis!
Re: lame cop out
I used the100 percent language to mock deniers like you. No matter how often Muslims, in the name of Islam, often quoting Koranic verses, wage violent jihad you'll deny that Islam could be a bigger problem than other religious or ideological groups. Its just like during the Cold War when the left took the side of communist dictatorships. Always running interference for them, excusing their murderous behavior, tearing America down, mocking anybody who denounced the communists, etc. Any movement that represents the destruction of Western civilization the left will protect.
Who cares if its a big number or a small number? Its obviously a big enough number to be a major problem. Its obviously a bigger number than any other religious group. But acknowledging that would be "Islamophobic" so you won't do it. Much better to denounce the uppity infidels who have the gall to notice the problem.
I used the100 percent language to mock deniers like you. No matter how often Muslims, in the name of Islam, often quoting Koranic verses, wage violent jihad you'll deny that Islam could be a bigger problem than other religious or ideological groups. Its just like during the Cold War when the left took the side of communist dictatorships. Always running interference for them, excusing their murderous behavior, tearing America down, mocking anybody who denounced the communists, etc. Any movement that represents the destruction of Western civilization the left will protect.
Who cares if its a big number or a small number? Its obviously a big enough number to be a major problem. Its obviously a bigger number than any other religious group. But acknowledging that would be "Islamophobic" so you won't do it. Much better to denounce the uppity infidels who have the gall to notice the problem.
I guess I misinterpreted what you mean when you say certain places aren't strengthened by diversity. I take that to mean they aren't, and thus you believe we should eliminate diversity, or at least curb it to us good white folk, a couple of Orientals because they ain't done no harm, and the couple of goodly Black fellas who speak proper Queen's English and wear their pants right, or can carry a football good 'n fast.
Yeah, that seems about in line with your otherwise white supremacist views on most subjects. How could I be so narrow minded as to miss seeing the good, wholesome, inclusive person you are?
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Yeah, that seems about in line with your otherwise white supremacist views on most subjects. How could I be so narrow minded as to miss seeing the good, wholesome, inclusive person you are?
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Yeah, that seems about in line with your otherwise white supremacist views on most subjects.
Just couldn't help yourself could you? The fact that you have to resort to that means that you've run out of arguments.
When you do cite examples of diversity you acknowledge them as bad. Do you apply that as well to Western societies?
Tell us how any Western society has been strengthened by importing Islam.
Just couldn't help yourself could you? The fact that you have to resort to that means that you've run out of arguments.
When you do cite examples of diversity you acknowledge them as bad. Do you apply that as well to Western societies?
Tell us how any Western society has been strengthened by importing Islam.
Re: yes
Did they cite Bible verses to justify what they were doing? No.
Did they cite the example of Jesus to justify what they were doing? No.
Did Westerners excuse their behavior by pointing out bad things Muslims had done in the past? No.
Did Westerners denounce anybody who criticized them as "Christianophobic"? No.
Did Westerners minimize it by saying things like "But, but, but its just a tiny minority of Christians who are doing it!"? No.
Did Westerners denounce the US bombing by saying things like "You're only going to create more terrorists"? No.
There are almost no parallels between that conflict and the numerous examples of violent jihad happening all over the world right now, especially the Islamic State.
Yes, it was desperate for you to cite that example.
Did they cite Bible verses to justify what they were doing? No.
Did they cite the example of Jesus to justify what they were doing? No.
Did Westerners excuse their behavior by pointing out bad things Muslims had done in the past? No.
Did Westerners denounce anybody who criticized them as "Christianophobic"? No.
Did Westerners minimize it by saying things like "But, but, but its just a tiny minority of Christians who are doing it!"? No.
Did Westerners denounce the US bombing by saying things like "You're only going to create more terrorists"? No.
There are almost no parallels between that conflict and the numerous examples of violent jihad happening all over the world right now, especially the Islamic State.
Yes, it was desperate for you to cite that example.
Re: Fail
Don't have the time nor the desire to get into this with you but, and i assume you have an answer loaded and ready but I would still like to hear it, my question, how do the commandments of Christ fit your idea of a war against Islam? How do the commandments of Christ fit into any of your personal world view?
Commandments of Christ
Don't have the time nor the desire to get into this with you but, and i assume you have an answer loaded and ready but I would still like to hear it, my question, how do the commandments of Christ fit your idea of a war against Islam? How do the commandments of Christ fit into any of your personal world view?
Commandments of Christ
By that rationale, how has any Middle Eastern society been strengthened by importing Christianity?
So now I am confused... You don't think Islam makes anything better in the West, but you don't want it eradicated? So what the hell has all your bellyaching been about all these years? Just whining?
And yes, you are absolutely a racist as far as I am concerned. Whether I have an argument is immaterial. You aren't capable of rational discourse.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
So now I am confused... You don't think Islam makes anything better in the West, but you don't want it eradicated? So what the hell has all your bellyaching been about all these years? Just whining?
And yes, you are absolutely a racist as far as I am concerned. Whether I have an argument is immaterial. You aren't capable of rational discourse.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Re: There it is again
You post one sentence from the Quran with no supporting or contextual evidence. Qaz does the same thing with the Bible.
But you - expert on religious texts that you apparently are - just decree from the height of your arrogant ignorance that one is "eternal" and one is "tied to a certain time and place."
The fact of the matter is that, by some stroke of luck, you're actually right about the verse in the Bible - it is viewed by most scholars as a contextual command. I highly doubt, however, that you knew that beforehand; and I am absolutely certain that you are not enough of a scholar of anything, much less the Quran, to know whether the quote you gave from it is equally contextual.
In any case, that information is irrelevant. Whether they are contextual or not, there are both Christians and Muslims who believe that those commands are still operative today and who act on that belief.
Let's get one thing clear.
You post one sentence from the Quran with no supporting or contextual evidence. Qaz does the same thing with the Bible.
But you - expert on religious texts that you apparently are - just decree from the height of your arrogant ignorance that one is "eternal" and one is "tied to a certain time and place."
The fact of the matter is that, by some stroke of luck, you're actually right about the verse in the Bible - it is viewed by most scholars as a contextual command. I highly doubt, however, that you knew that beforehand; and I am absolutely certain that you are not enough of a scholar of anything, much less the Quran, to know whether the quote you gave from it is equally contextual.
In any case, that information is irrelevant. Whether they are contextual or not, there are both Christians and Muslims who believe that those commands are still operative today and who act on that belief.
By that rationale, how has any Middle Eastern society been strengthened by importing Christianity?
Your rationale is hampered by Equality. Either you think Christianity is a better influence on a society or you think Islam is a better influence on a society. It should be obvious, based on history, that Christianity is better. My mocking of those who claim that Diversity Is A Strength is based on the idea that its impossible for all cultures, religions, ideologies, peoples, etc. to be equal and at the same time have a society strengthened by importing things fundamentally different. Both cannot be true.
It should also be obvious that no Western society has been helped by importing Islam. Can you really make a counter-argument to that?
So now I am confused...
I know. Cleanse your mind of Equality.
You don't think Islam makes anything better in the West......
Do you? Seriously, what do you think the net effect is of Muslim immigration to Western societies?
........but you don't want it eradicated?
Who brought up the idea "eradicating" Islam in the West? You did. I have constantly called for an end to importing Muslims. How about you?
And yes, you are absolutely a racist as far as I am concerned.
I know. I take it as a compliment.
Your rationale is hampered by Equality. Either you think Christianity is a better influence on a society or you think Islam is a better influence on a society. It should be obvious, based on history, that Christianity is better. My mocking of those who claim that Diversity Is A Strength is based on the idea that its impossible for all cultures, religions, ideologies, peoples, etc. to be equal and at the same time have a society strengthened by importing things fundamentally different. Both cannot be true.
It should also be obvious that no Western society has been helped by importing Islam. Can you really make a counter-argument to that?
So now I am confused...
I know. Cleanse your mind of Equality.
You don't think Islam makes anything better in the West......
Do you? Seriously, what do you think the net effect is of Muslim immigration to Western societies?
........but you don't want it eradicated?
Who brought up the idea "eradicating" Islam in the West? You did. I have constantly called for an end to importing Muslims. How about you?
And yes, you are absolutely a racist as far as I am concerned.
I know. I take it as a compliment.
Re: There it is again
Go ahead and put it in context. Along with all the other eternal calls for violence in the Koran. Go ahead.
The fact of the matter is that, by some stroke of luck, you're actually right about the verse in the Bible - it is viewed by most scholars as a contextual command.
Isn't it amazing?!?
Whether they are contextual or not, there are both Christians and
Muslims who believe that those commands are still operative today and
who act on that belief.
Then tally it up. Tell us how many Christians, in the name of Christianity, while citing Bible verses, have murdered, raped, bombed, and terrorized non-Christians (or other Christians for that matter) in the modern era. Then compare that to Muslims and see who's done more. Yet again you seem to think that pointing to the existence of some bad behavior by Christians proves that both belief systems are equal. No matter how often Muslims wage violent jihad you'll still cite bad things done by Christians to avoid having to make a comparison between the two. You clearly feel its your duty to defend Islam.
Go ahead and put it in context. Along with all the other eternal calls for violence in the Koran. Go ahead.
The fact of the matter is that, by some stroke of luck, you're actually right about the verse in the Bible - it is viewed by most scholars as a contextual command.
Isn't it amazing?!?
Whether they are contextual or not, there are both Christians and
Muslims who believe that those commands are still operative today and
who act on that belief.
Then tally it up. Tell us how many Christians, in the name of Christianity, while citing Bible verses, have murdered, raped, bombed, and terrorized non-Christians (or other Christians for that matter) in the modern era. Then compare that to Muslims and see who's done more. Yet again you seem to think that pointing to the existence of some bad behavior by Christians proves that both belief systems are equal. No matter how often Muslims wage violent jihad you'll still cite bad things done by Christians to avoid having to make a comparison between the two. You clearly feel its your duty to defend Islam.
Re: Fail
So now we come to the point where somebody on the left suddenly insists that the commandments of Christ must be followed to the letter. Why? To prevent Western societies from defending themselves.
how do the commandments of Christ fit your idea of a war against Islam?
They don't. But I understand why you have to exaggerate it into a "war against Islam". Gosh, I sure hope its going to be more intense than the War On Women. I have constantly called for the end of importing Muslims into Western societies. How about you?
So now we come to the point where somebody on the left suddenly insists that the commandments of Christ must be followed to the letter. Why? To prevent Western societies from defending themselves.
how do the commandments of Christ fit your idea of a war against Islam?
They don't. But I understand why you have to exaggerate it into a "war against Islam". Gosh, I sure hope its going to be more intense than the War On Women. I have constantly called for the end of importing Muslims into Western societies. How about you?
Re: Fail
Why would Western societies need to defend themselves if there is no war?
Yes, you are at war with Islam, you are struggling against a group, looking to impose your screwy views. You don't want them "imported." WTF that means. What about the ones already in "the West?" Do they get to stay, if they stay do they get to practice their religion?
I could not care less what group you are hating at the moment but please don't claim to be a Christian while spewing that hatred, its as bad as those who use Islam in an attemt to give credibility to their demented ideology/actions/view.
Why would Western societies need to defend themselves if there is no war?
Yes, you are at war with Islam, you are struggling against a group, looking to impose your screwy views. You don't want them "imported." WTF that means. What about the ones already in "the West?" Do they get to stay, if they stay do they get to practice their religion?
I could not care less what group you are hating at the moment but please don't claim to be a Christian while spewing that hatred, its as bad as those who use Islam in an attemt to give credibility to their demented ideology/actions/view.
Re: Fail
The war would be to defend our own societies. You know, from violent jihad? Not against the existence of Islam wherever it is. But as has happened before, any effort to do so would be denounced as "Islamophobia".
You what would be nice? If the entertainment industry "went to war" against Islam the same way they have against Christianity for decades.
You don't want them "imported." WTF that means.
You can't be this dumb. You know what it means.
What about the ones already in "the West?" Do they get to stay, if they stay do they get to practice their religion?
Have I ever said otherwise? No. But you need to exaggerate it to the level of mass deportations so you can more easily handle the subject at hand.
I could not care less what group you are hating at the
moment but please don't claim to be a Christian while spewing that
hatred, its as bad as those who use Islam in an attemt to give
credibility to their demented ideology/actions/view.
There it is again. Yeah, I'm just as bad as Hamas, Hizballah, the Taliban, the Islamic State, Al Qaeda, The Muslim Brotherhood, the Al Nusra Front, or Mohammed himself. You are a perfect example what's wrong with too many Westerner's minds.
The war would be to defend our own societies. You know, from violent jihad? Not against the existence of Islam wherever it is. But as has happened before, any effort to do so would be denounced as "Islamophobia".
You what would be nice? If the entertainment industry "went to war" against Islam the same way they have against Christianity for decades.
You don't want them "imported." WTF that means.
You can't be this dumb. You know what it means.
What about the ones already in "the West?" Do they get to stay, if they stay do they get to practice their religion?
Have I ever said otherwise? No. But you need to exaggerate it to the level of mass deportations so you can more easily handle the subject at hand.
I could not care less what group you are hating at the
moment but please don't claim to be a Christian while spewing that
hatred, its as bad as those who use Islam in an attemt to give
credibility to their demented ideology/actions/view.
There it is again. Yeah, I'm just as bad as Hamas, Hizballah, the Taliban, the Islamic State, Al Qaeda, The Muslim Brotherhood, the Al Nusra Front, or Mohammed himself. You are a perfect example what's wrong with too many Westerner's minds.
Re: Fail
You just like to spew BS, it's the anger and the hate that this about for you. You jump back and forth, bob and weave and play your little rhetorical games.
So you're now saying there is a war with Islam, Islam being the aggressor and Western societies are defending themselves.
Import implies we are actively bringing Muslims, Islam... whatever else you roll up into it, into the West. They aren't choosing to immigrate to the West looking for a better life, we are "importing" them.
So the only bad Muslims in your view are those looking to come into the West, those already here pose no threat, and you have a live and let live approach to them? I'm confused though, if it is the religion and the Koran that are flawed aren't they just as flawed for those already in the West as those who wish to move to the West? Or did I misunderstand you and you actually feel that just a select group Muslims are a threat?
Really, I exaggerate?
You just like to spew BS, it's the anger and the hate that this about for you. You jump back and forth, bob and weave and play your little rhetorical games.
So you're now saying there is a war with Islam, Islam being the aggressor and Western societies are defending themselves.
Import implies we are actively bringing Muslims, Islam... whatever else you roll up into it, into the West. They aren't choosing to immigrate to the West looking for a better life, we are "importing" them.
So the only bad Muslims in your view are those looking to come into the West, those already here pose no threat, and you have a live and let live approach to them? I'm confused though, if it is the religion and the Koran that are flawed aren't they just as flawed for those already in the West as those who wish to move to the West? Or did I misunderstand you and you actually feel that just a select group Muslims are a threat?
Really, I exaggerate?
Re: There it is again
See, there you go moving the target again.
It's now the "modern era" that we're talking about. Of course, you don't bother to define what you mean by that so that, whatever I can say, you can come back with "No, I mean ____ as the 'modern era.'"
Here's the things you're ignoring.
1. ALL of the evidence for Christian against non-Christian violence.
2. The fact that much of that violence has been under-reported until recent years.
Much of the violence against the Native Americans was done in the name of both God and country. One of the most infamous massacres - that of Sand Creek - was led by a Methodist preacher (to the shame of my denomination). In addition, you keep ignoring the killing of Bosnian Muslims by Christians. Many of the people involved in the Holocaust claimed to be Christian as well. (And I'll preempt your counterargument: you'll say that those people weren't true Christians. You'd be right. Just as many of the Muslims who commit atrocities are not true Muslims).
You seem to be operating according to a mentality that, if perversion of Islam has resulted in more casualties than perversion of Christianity, then Islam is terrible and Christianity is good. I operate on the mentality that all casualties wrought by the perversion of religion are unfortunate and saddening.
And I don't feel it is my duty to defend Islam so much as it is to defend critical thought and logic.
See, there you go moving the target again.
It's now the "modern era" that we're talking about. Of course, you don't bother to define what you mean by that so that, whatever I can say, you can come back with "No, I mean ____ as the 'modern era.'"
Here's the things you're ignoring.
1. ALL of the evidence for Christian against non-Christian violence.
2. The fact that much of that violence has been under-reported until recent years.
Much of the violence against the Native Americans was done in the name of both God and country. One of the most infamous massacres - that of Sand Creek - was led by a Methodist preacher (to the shame of my denomination). In addition, you keep ignoring the killing of Bosnian Muslims by Christians. Many of the people involved in the Holocaust claimed to be Christian as well. (And I'll preempt your counterargument: you'll say that those people weren't true Christians. You'd be right. Just as many of the Muslims who commit atrocities are not true Muslims).
You seem to be operating according to a mentality that, if perversion of Islam has resulted in more casualties than perversion of Christianity, then Islam is terrible and Christianity is good. I operate on the mentality that all casualties wrought by the perversion of religion are unfortunate and saddening.
And I don't feel it is my duty to defend Islam so much as it is to defend critical thought and logic.
Re: Fail
So you're now saying there is a war with Islam, Islam being the aggressor and Western societies are defending themselves.
You doubt that Islam is being the aggressor? If so, what would they have to do to convince you?
Import implies we are actively bringing Muslims, Islam... whatever else
you roll up into it, into the West. They aren't choosing to immigrate to
the West looking for a better life, we are "importing" them.
And you accuse me of playing rhetorical games? Would it really have been better if I had, every single time, used the more wordy "allow the emigration into this country"?
I'm confused though, if it is the religion and the Koran that are flawed
aren't they just as flawed for those already in the West as those who
wish to move to the West?
Yes, they are. But you can't help yourself from exaggerating this into the demands for deportation. I've never called for that. Got it?
Really, I exaggerate?
Yes, you do. You have to because you can't deal with the issue as it is. Still haven't heard if you're for or against......here it comes.........allowing the emigration into this country......of more Muslims.
So you're now saying there is a war with Islam, Islam being the aggressor and Western societies are defending themselves.
You doubt that Islam is being the aggressor? If so, what would they have to do to convince you?
Import implies we are actively bringing Muslims, Islam... whatever else
you roll up into it, into the West. They aren't choosing to immigrate to
the West looking for a better life, we are "importing" them.
And you accuse me of playing rhetorical games? Would it really have been better if I had, every single time, used the more wordy "allow the emigration into this country"?
I'm confused though, if it is the religion and the Koran that are flawed
aren't they just as flawed for those already in the West as those who
wish to move to the West?
Yes, they are. But you can't help yourself from exaggerating this into the demands for deportation. I've never called for that. Got it?
Really, I exaggerate?
Yes, you do. You have to because you can't deal with the issue as it is. Still haven't heard if you're for or against......here it comes.........allowing the emigration into this country......of more Muslims.
Re: There it is again
It's now the "modern era" that we're talking about. Of course, you don't bother to define what you mean by that so that, whatever I can say, you can come back with "No, I mean ____ as the 'modern era.'"
Fercryingoutloud. What happened 500 years ago just isn't nearly as relevant as what is happening now. Wouldn't you agree? If you want to fight the battles of the past then go ahead. In our time, aka the modern era, we are threatened by Islam. But, if YOU want to define the modern era then I'll go ahead and agree with it. You'd still find that Islam produces more violence. So, go ahead and define it. We'll see what YOU call the modern era. We'll see how far back you go just so you can make Christianity look bad.
Here's the things you're ignoring.
1. ALL of the evidence for Christian against non-Christian violence.
2. The fact that much of that violence has been under-reported until recent years.
No, I haven't ignored any of those things. Since humans are imperfect you can ALWAYS find evidence of bad behavior in any group. Which is why its pointless to bring it up. Just because I'm not racked with Western/white guilt like you are does not mean I don't acknowledge that every group has its imperfections. The question is which group has more and why that is so.
You seem to be operating according to a mentality that, if perversion of
Islam has resulted in more casualties than perversion of Christianity,
then Islam is terrible and Christianity is good. I operate on the
mentality that all casualties wrought by the perversion of religion are
unfortunate and saddening.
No, YOU are operating on the idea that Islam has been perverted. Tell me, would you say that Mohammed wasn't a true Muslim?
It's now the "modern era" that we're talking about. Of course, you don't bother to define what you mean by that so that, whatever I can say, you can come back with "No, I mean ____ as the 'modern era.'"
Fercryingoutloud. What happened 500 years ago just isn't nearly as relevant as what is happening now. Wouldn't you agree? If you want to fight the battles of the past then go ahead. In our time, aka the modern era, we are threatened by Islam. But, if YOU want to define the modern era then I'll go ahead and agree with it. You'd still find that Islam produces more violence. So, go ahead and define it. We'll see what YOU call the modern era. We'll see how far back you go just so you can make Christianity look bad.
Here's the things you're ignoring.
1. ALL of the evidence for Christian against non-Christian violence.
2. The fact that much of that violence has been under-reported until recent years.
No, I haven't ignored any of those things. Since humans are imperfect you can ALWAYS find evidence of bad behavior in any group. Which is why its pointless to bring it up. Just because I'm not racked with Western/white guilt like you are does not mean I don't acknowledge that every group has its imperfections. The question is which group has more and why that is so.
You seem to be operating according to a mentality that, if perversion of
Islam has resulted in more casualties than perversion of Christianity,
then Islam is terrible and Christianity is good. I operate on the
mentality that all casualties wrought by the perversion of religion are
unfortunate and saddening.
No, YOU are operating on the idea that Islam has been perverted. Tell me, would you say that Mohammed wasn't a true Muslim?
Re: There it is again
Tell me, have you ever spoken to a Muslim? All vitriol and rhetoric aside, have you ever considered asking an actual Muslim to explain how some Muslims interpret the Quran to call for violence, and what percentage of Muslims feel that way? It might be a helpful conversation.
I have had variations of that conversation with Muslims from several ethnic backgrounds, and every single one of them categorically rejected the actions of "Muslims" who participate in terrorism as being outside the boundaries of true Islam.
Tell me, have you ever spoken to a Muslim? All vitriol and rhetoric aside, have you ever considered asking an actual Muslim to explain how some Muslims interpret the Quran to call for violence, and what percentage of Muslims feel that way? It might be a helpful conversation.
I have had variations of that conversation with Muslims from several ethnic backgrounds, and every single one of them categorically rejected the actions of "Muslims" who participate in terrorism as being outside the boundaries of true Islam.
Re: Fail
Okay, this is real simple, answer the question, is this a war, or if you're uncomfortable with that word then the "west" defending itself, against all Islam, extremest/fundamentalist Islam, certain sects in Islam... who exactly is the aggressor? I'm not doubting or saying anything just asking you to use your words.
Okay, again, use your words, import has a meaning, is the "West" seeking out Muslims, i.e importing them, or are they simply emigrating? Use your words.
I have never said you did, got it, I'm asking you why are Muslims already in the "West" not a threat, a part of the aggression, but those looking to be "imported" are?
I can deal with the issue, you just can't seem to articulate what you think the issue is.
Okay, this is real simple, answer the question, is this a war, or if you're uncomfortable with that word then the "west" defending itself, against all Islam, extremest/fundamentalist Islam, certain sects in Islam... who exactly is the aggressor? I'm not doubting or saying anything just asking you to use your words.
Okay, again, use your words, import has a meaning, is the "West" seeking out Muslims, i.e importing them, or are they simply emigrating? Use your words.
I have never said you did, got it, I'm asking you why are Muslims already in the "West" not a threat, a part of the aggression, but those looking to be "imported" are?
I can deal with the issue, you just can't seem to articulate what you think the issue is.
Re: Fail
Okay, this is real simple, answer the question, is this a war, or if
you're uncomfortable with that word then the "west" defending itself,
against all Islam, extremest/fundamentalist Islam, certain sects in
Islam... who exactly is the aggressor? I'm not doubting or saying
anything just asking you to use your words.
Islam is the aggressor. As called for in the Koran, following in the footsteps of The Perfect Muslim.
Okay, again, use your words, import has a meaning, is the "West" seeking
out Muslims, i.e importing them......
We certainly shouldn't be. Some in the West want us to be. Why? Because they're hostile to the West.
.......or are they simply emigrating? Use
your words.
Fine, they're "emigrating". You happy now?
I'm asking you why are Muslims already in the "West" not a threat, a part of the aggression.......
They are a threat. Are you unaware of all the attempted or successful jihad attacks? How did they happen? Because Muslims had previously "emigrated" (feel better?) to Western societies.
........but those looking to be "imported" are?
They're a threat too. What do Muslims have to do to convince you that they are a threat? Apparently, all the terror attacks so far aren't enough.
I can deal with the issue, you just can't seem to articulate what you think the issue is.
The issue is Islam and the refusal by too many Westerners to acknowledge it for the threat that it is.
Okay, this is real simple, answer the question, is this a war, or if
you're uncomfortable with that word then the "west" defending itself,
against all Islam, extremest/fundamentalist Islam, certain sects in
Islam... who exactly is the aggressor? I'm not doubting or saying
anything just asking you to use your words.
Islam is the aggressor. As called for in the Koran, following in the footsteps of The Perfect Muslim.
Okay, again, use your words, import has a meaning, is the "West" seeking
out Muslims, i.e importing them......
We certainly shouldn't be. Some in the West want us to be. Why? Because they're hostile to the West.
.......or are they simply emigrating? Use
your words.
Fine, they're "emigrating". You happy now?
I'm asking you why are Muslims already in the "West" not a threat, a part of the aggression.......
They are a threat. Are you unaware of all the attempted or successful jihad attacks? How did they happen? Because Muslims had previously "emigrated" (feel better?) to Western societies.
........but those looking to be "imported" are?
They're a threat too. What do Muslims have to do to convince you that they are a threat? Apparently, all the terror attacks so far aren't enough.
I can deal with the issue, you just can't seem to articulate what you think the issue is.
The issue is Islam and the refusal by too many Westerners to acknowledge it for the threat that it is.
Re: There it is again
Tell me, have you ever spoken to a Muslim? All vitriol and rhetoric
aside, have you ever considered asking an actual Muslim to explain how
some Muslims interpret the Quran to call for violence, and what
percentage of Muslims feel that way? It might be a helpful
conversation.
As if this would deny the reality of the thousands and thousands of jihad attacks and the millions and millions of Muslims cheering them on. I'm not seeking soothing words of taqiya so I can cling to the falsehoods of Equality.
I have had variations of that conversation with Muslims from several
ethnic backgrounds, and every single one of them categorically rejected
the actions of "Muslims" who participate in terrorism as being outside
the boundaries of true Islam.
Yeah, just like Saudi clerics. You're a "mark". They know you seek their soothing words.
I noticed you didn't answer my question about Mohammed. What are you afraid of?
Tell me, have you ever spoken to a Muslim? All vitriol and rhetoric
aside, have you ever considered asking an actual Muslim to explain how
some Muslims interpret the Quran to call for violence, and what
percentage of Muslims feel that way? It might be a helpful
conversation.
As if this would deny the reality of the thousands and thousands of jihad attacks and the millions and millions of Muslims cheering them on. I'm not seeking soothing words of taqiya so I can cling to the falsehoods of Equality.
I have had variations of that conversation with Muslims from several
ethnic backgrounds, and every single one of them categorically rejected
the actions of "Muslims" who participate in terrorism as being outside
the boundaries of true Islam.
Yeah, just like Saudi clerics. You're a "mark". They know you seek their soothing words.
I noticed you didn't answer my question about Mohammed. What are you afraid of?
Re: There it is again
You have chosen your position and, rather than critically engage with it, you choose to simply deny the existence of any other valid position. Any evidence to the contrary is dismissed as irrelevant.
You'll notice I didn't suggest that having a conversation with actual Muslims would necessarily change your mind. It almost certainly won't. However, if you have built a view of an entire group of people based on views/interpretations of that people by outsiders, don't you think that's a bit questionable? Besides, part of critical engagement is being able to put our own positions to the test and, if necessary, modify them in the face of new evidence.
I don't particularly care if you change your mind and I'm certainly not "afraid" of you (whatever that question was meant to insinuate). My intent here - as it is in every conversation on this topic - is to unmask you as helplessly biased, willfully ignorant, and completely unwilling to critically evaluate your own position.
To answer your question with the answer you're looking for, of course Mohammed is considered to be a true Muslim. Now you can quote something about Mohammed did something violent. After which, I will deconstruct that argument as easily as all of your others, with two realities:
1. Joshua is considered by Jews and Christians to be a true follower of God, but he did some very violent things.
2. Earlier, you made a point of saying that things that happened 500+ years ago are not germane to the conversation. Since Mohammed lived before the modern era, his actions must be irrelevant.
You are a textbook case of confirmation bias in action.
You have chosen your position and, rather than critically engage with it, you choose to simply deny the existence of any other valid position. Any evidence to the contrary is dismissed as irrelevant.
You'll notice I didn't suggest that having a conversation with actual Muslims would necessarily change your mind. It almost certainly won't. However, if you have built a view of an entire group of people based on views/interpretations of that people by outsiders, don't you think that's a bit questionable? Besides, part of critical engagement is being able to put our own positions to the test and, if necessary, modify them in the face of new evidence.
I don't particularly care if you change your mind and I'm certainly not "afraid" of you (whatever that question was meant to insinuate). My intent here - as it is in every conversation on this topic - is to unmask you as helplessly biased, willfully ignorant, and completely unwilling to critically evaluate your own position.
To answer your question with the answer you're looking for, of course Mohammed is considered to be a true Muslim. Now you can quote something about Mohammed did something violent. After which, I will deconstruct that argument as easily as all of your others, with two realities:
1. Joshua is considered by Jews and Christians to be a true follower of God, but he did some very violent things.
2. Earlier, you made a point of saying that things that happened 500+ years ago are not germane to the conversation. Since Mohammed lived before the modern era, his actions must be irrelevant.
Re: There it is again
1. Joshua is considered by Jews and Christians to be a true follower of God, but he did some very violent things.
Is he considered to be the role model for all Christians to pattern their lives after? No.
2. Earlier, you made a point of saying that things that happened 500+
years ago are not germane to the conversation. Since Mohammed lived
before the modern era, his actions must be irrelevant.
Is he considered to be the role model for all Muslims to pattern their lives after? Yes. So he is indeed relevant.
Now, if he was just some random Muslim who lived 500+ years ago and did bad things then what he did would be irrelevant to prove that Islam is inherently more violent than other belief systems. Every group has people who today, or in the past, do/did bad things. Therefore its irrelevant to point out such things because it proves nothing. But if somebody from the past, like Jesus or Mohammed, is considered TODAY to be a role model then what they did in the past is relevant. If you can point to consistently bad behavior, in larger proportions, in one group compared to others then it might be relevant. Especially if its happening in..........the modern era.
Your "deconstruction" has failed. Muslims today who wage violent jihad are doing what Mohammed did. That's why Islam produces so much violence. Christians, or members of other religious groups, aren't anywhere near as violent. Probably has something to do with the inherent nature of those religions.
But you'll do anything to defend Islam. Anything to avoid making a comparison between Christianity and Islam. Strange thing to do for an alleged Christian pastor. But not for a dutiful progressive.
1. Joshua is considered by Jews and Christians to be a true follower of God, but he did some very violent things.
Is he considered to be the role model for all Christians to pattern their lives after? No.
2. Earlier, you made a point of saying that things that happened 500+
years ago are not germane to the conversation. Since Mohammed lived
before the modern era, his actions must be irrelevant.
Is he considered to be the role model for all Muslims to pattern their lives after? Yes. So he is indeed relevant.
Now, if he was just some random Muslim who lived 500+ years ago and did bad things then what he did would be irrelevant to prove that Islam is inherently more violent than other belief systems. Every group has people who today, or in the past, do/did bad things. Therefore its irrelevant to point out such things because it proves nothing. But if somebody from the past, like Jesus or Mohammed, is considered TODAY to be a role model then what they did in the past is relevant. If you can point to consistently bad behavior, in larger proportions, in one group compared to others then it might be relevant. Especially if its happening in..........the modern era.
Your "deconstruction" has failed. Muslims today who wage violent jihad are doing what Mohammed did. That's why Islam produces so much violence. Christians, or members of other religious groups, aren't anywhere near as violent. Probably has something to do with the inherent nature of those religions.
But you'll do anything to defend Islam. Anything to avoid making a comparison between Christianity and Islam. Strange thing to do for an alleged Christian pastor. But not for a dutiful progressive.
lol
so they have to actually cite bible verses to count huh? So if a Christian kills a Muslim, because they are a Muslim, for religious reasons, but doesn't actually cite a bible verse, then that doesnt count right?
That's hilarious.
thousands and thousands of Bosnia Muslims were killed by Christians during the Bosnian massacres (plural). Islamic terrorists have killed a little over 5000 from the early 80s to today when they have done the bulk of their terrorism. Similar time-frames, similar numbers.
Of course, if Christians killed twice as many it would be idiotic to play a numbers game and assert Christians were more violent than Muslims.
so they have to actually cite bible verses to count huh? So if a Christian kills a Muslim, because they are a Muslim, for religious reasons, but doesn't actually cite a bible verse, then that doesnt count right?
That's hilarious.
thousands and thousands of Bosnia Muslims were killed by Christians during the Bosnian massacres (plural). Islamic terrorists have killed a little over 5000 from the early 80s to today when they have done the bulk of their terrorism. Similar time-frames, similar numbers.
Of course, if Christians killed twice as many it would be idiotic to play a numbers game and assert Christians were more violent than Muslims.
