The Geek Forum
Main Forums => Political Opinions => Topic started by: 12AX7 on April 02, 2008, 10:23:19 PM
-
.
-
I've been struggling on how to respond to this. I read the Q'ran a while ago and knew that shit like that was there. There's another book to the Islam religion that's even worse, but the name escapes me at this moment.
On the other hand, there isn't a single religion out there that can't be twisted into something violent and repulsive if certain passages of their holy books are taken out of context or taken literally (or hell, just taken too seriously for that matter). Extremists always scare me.
Which brings me to my conclusion... Can religion and peace be used in the same sentence, or do they make a double negative?
-
.
-
Islam is most certainly a religion of extremes. Moderation does escape them. But you find that in all religions.
Hell, I get criticized by other pagans for not being "pagan enough", whatever the hell that means. I have difficulty coping with a religion that offers no option for moderation (Islam not standing alone, Hebrew does it as well). They make no sense, I find I am less frightened and more confused.
Why, oh why, would anyone want to be like that? It seems like a headache waiting to happen. All stressed out and no one to ra... I mean pillage... oh shit, umm... kill.
And if they were left to their own devices, it would be interesting to see what happened (scientifically speaking, I'm not actually saying I want to see it happen). Generally speaking, nature doesn't like extremist cultures, but then they do exist. Then the question rises, do they exist because we keep artifically moderating them, or would they not fizzle out on their own if the west stayed out of it? In this case, probably not, they would most likely try to expand given the nature of the religion, but still, it's an interesting question. Whether or not an outside force getting involved is just 'feeding the beast' so to speak.
-
.
-
Well, considering that they've been there, and been fighting eye for an eye since the beginning of man's time here (literally)...
Is Islam that old? I question that men were running around screaming 'Jihad' at the dawn of time. Don't give them too much credit. They've only been going at it as long as Christianity has been burning martyrs. (Then again, Christians still excel at burning martyrs, just not their own... and not literally... unless you ask them... yeah, shutting up now.)
Anyways, we're making the same point. They will always to bring it to us. But there is no question that we aren't making it any better by going over there.
-
.
-
So then its a kind of a question of do you want the turmoil here, or over there. I'd rather all the bombs and shit to fly over there certainly.
Interesting perspective, and most certainly one I understand and respect. Oh if only it worked that way and we were over there to stop the encroachment on human rights that is Jihad. Too bad that's not the reason. Then I still have to ask, what are our rights, when it comes to interferring with other people's beliefs?
<--------------Just cracked a whole new can of worms and knows it.
-
.
-
Best offense is a good defense huh?
Wait...
That's not right...
Best defense is a good offense. Yeah, better.
Anyway, I hear you. I'm really wondering at this point though, when it's okay by your opinion to abolish Islam? - Ignoring the concept of freedom of religion because that will derail the thread - I mean, should we wipe them out, or was border control ala Nazi Poland ghetto more like what you had in mind? Or, perhaps, were you thinking more like, let's just poke at them and keep them distracted as long as we can?
!!DISCLAIMER: This thread is quickly sounding anti-Islam. It is important to note that the above questions refer to other extreme organized religions that endorse violence as well!!
-
.
-
You realize that it's impossible to debate with you, right?
Goddamnitall, I was trying start something and you keep shooting it all to shit, 12.
:-P You're no fun. Where's Vespertine? :-D
-
The problem with Islam, as I see, is that it has yet to modernize. Many of the other 'established' religions have adapted to the new age and modified their doctrine accordingly. At least, they have stopped actively encouraging forced conversions. Islam will eventually undergo this type of change, but it will only happen internally and cannot be forced by outside pressure. Any outside attempts to modify Islam will most likely be viewed as acts of hostility towards all Islam and be resented.
-
.
-
The years since 9/11 happened have given me time to ponder, to shuffle loose my old beliefs and bigotries. Christian? Muslim? Good? Evil? The meaning of these words once so clear to me now blur as my eyes gaze across the boundless sea.
I know what matters.
The bananas are after me.
Perched high in their tree, they eye me with cool malevolence. And the last one I tried to eat nearly gagged me! I can almost hear it scream as I smashed it, half eaten, on sea rocks.
It's war, and I will win it.
-
.
-
Go banana!
-
Go banana!
Sorry, you can't repeat a karma action without waiting 1 hours. :-D
-
I know I will probably take some flack for this and be quoted many other passages so I can be proven wrong in my own light but:
Ecclesiastes 7:15-18
15 In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these:
a righteous man perishing in his righteousness,
and a wicked man living long in his wickedness.
16 Do not be overrighteous,
neither be overwise—
why destroy yourself?
17 Do not be overwicked,
and do not be a fool—
why die before your time?
18 It is good to grasp the one
and not let go of the other.
The man who fears God will avoid all extremes.
This has been one of my favourite passages for a long time. We can be lead to extremes of Zealotry for good and for evil, but we are reminded in the Good book itself that moderation is the key.
-
...the Good book itself...
The only flack your catching from me is for this phrase. And only because I'm in the mood to nit-pick.
*throws flack
-
Ye can't get ye flack.
-
A book cannot be good or evil. That's just silly.
-
A book cannot be good or evil. That's just silly.
Of course it is, but just last week I read the Great book. It had much more material than the Good book and the Better book combined. Although, I'm not sure how it stacks up against the Best book.
-
IT'S A COOKBOOK! :-o
-
Ah yes. A woman with a cookbook is a great thing. Didn't I read about that one of those Good Books somewhere?
-
Here we go. Someone brought up "the good book".
Gothic athiests who live in their parents' basement will flock to this thread in 3... 2... 1...
-
I think it's time I bust out a very old set of sig/av images...
-
No one said anything about Islam being a religion of peace. They quite clearly said peas and then everyone got it all messed up!
-
Huh. Must've been the accent.
-
All religions have three stages.
1. The Infant stage
This is where everyone tries as hard as they can to beat up the religion, (i.e Christians in ancient Rome or Scientology in Tom Cruises spare room).
2.The Teenager stage
This is where that religion goes out and destroys everything that pisses it off, (i.e Christians in the Holy Crusades or Islam today).
3.The Elderly stage
This is where they are too old and lazy to kick religious ass anymore, (i.e. The Pope)
-
Your powers of observation are astounding. Thank you for shaing with us the depth of your profound wisdom, but please, I am simple and poor, and therefor ignorant.
What are your opinions about Islam claiming itself a religion of peace?
Do you agree with Lacerda and believe that they said peas and, like 12 mentioned, it was the accent that fucked it up?
If so, what are your feelings on Islam being a religion of peas? Do peas vary in their religions? Are they more prone to highly spiritualized concepts, like Islam, or do they more readily accept scientific views? I have witnessed my sweet-peas develop a world-domination complex. Do you feel that Islam would appeal to my sweet-peas? Is it possible my sweet-peas were Islamic already? Do you think that snow-peas would be less likely to accept the Islamic religion than snap-peas? Why or why not?
EDIT: On a side note, I'm afraid my pole beans this year are Catholic. They keep trying to reach out and touch the seedling tomatoes. I'm not sure how to handle the situation.
-
Muslims practically invented science, so there's really no merit in trying to say that Islam in general is against education or new ideas in general. Now whether there is a strain that is popular today, or at least is being reported as such, that doesn't share this "intellectualism"... there is probably not much of a debate about that. Religion has always been a tool to some extent, and this one happens to have a buttload of poor, un(der)educated, justly pissed off people available to support it.
Name a religion (besides Buddhism) and I can probably give you an example of epic douchebaggery perpetrated in their name. It's not really fair to single out this one because it happens to be fashionable.
-
What are your opinions about Islam claiming itself a religion of peace?
Do you agree with Lacerda and believe that they said peas and, like 12 mentioned, it was the accent that fucked it up?
This ones easy. They were never peas as it is common knowledge that peas live in a highly developed community based on using logic instead of morals. The Great Prophet Isaiah simply used to use a small empty section of the Koran as a groceries list.
You obviously never read The Courgette Code.
-
...peas live in a highly developed community based on using logic ...
That does explain my sweet peas attempting to utilize my car for their own transportation.
-
Muslims practically invented science, so there's really no merit in trying to say that Islam in general is against education or new ideas in general. Now whether there is a strain that is popular today, or at least is being reported as such, that doesn't share this "intellectualism"... there is probably not much of a debate about that. Religion has always been a tool to some extent, and this one happens to have a buttload of poor, un(der)educated, justly pissed off people available to support it.
Name a religion (besides Buddhism) and I can probably give you an example of epic douchebaggery perpetrated in their name. It's not really fair to single out this one because it happens to be fashionable.
I think I've got to go with Joe on this one. I've been following this thread for awhile now, and intentionally staying out of it. I'm not trying to be intentionally provocative, but I find the general theme of this thread to be borderline bigoted. I've known far too many "middle of the road" Muslims to buy into the idea that Islam and its followers desire to wipe out all non-believers. It's no different than bitching about the evil behemoth of "communist China". There is a minority that perpetrate horrible acts in the name of the ideology, but the remaining majority shouldn't be lumped into that category.
-
.
-
.
-
Name a religion (besides Buddhism) and I can probably give you an example of epic douchebaggery perpetrated in their name.
http://www.daytondailynews.com/search/content/oh/story/business/2008/04/14/ddn041408churchbarweb.html
I might just convert.
-
So where is this "majority" of middle of the road Muslims (its funny how everyone knows a bunch of middle of the road Muslims) and why are they so silent when such acts are perpetrated in their name?
The difference between China and Islamic fundamentalists is China isn't planning to kill you and "wipe out" your way of living. And you don't have to "buy into it". Just read the damn text, and listen to WHAT THE FUCK THEY ARE SAYING THAT THEY ARE PLANNING TO DO. GOD DAMN.
Have you not heard the threats? So what are you "buying into"? You think I just made all this shit up?
Embarassment. The so-called "middle of the road Muslims" that I have spoken with react with embarassment. I would imagine it is the same embarassment a "middle of the road Catholic" would have had during the Spanish Inquisition.
I will not argue that Islam the religion has some disturbing principles and that it encourages, promotes, and even sets out guidelines for the distruction of other races and beliefs. But you seem to be lumping Muslims the people into one giant swarmy group. This is about the same as me saying that Christians are Bible-toting sermon-whores who are going to try and convert me in order to secure their place in heaven. If I read certain passages in the Bible I will find that it encourages and support evangelism, perhaps a more passive version than the afore mentioned, but I could always chop some stuff out context to make it sound much more disturbing. Taking a religion or belief system and forcing anyone who associates themselves with it into the strict box that is extremism is a bit of a bigot statement. I know a few reasonable people who just happen to atheists just as I know a few reasonable people who just happen to be Muslim.
Also, just because I see their belief system as an out of control balistic missile, written by a guy who seemed to be writing more with his pants than his head, doesn't make it so. My perspective is that of someone who was raised in a certain culture surrounded by certain other beliefs. If I were raised in a different environment with a different perspective perhaps it would make more sense to me. As it is, the Q'uran read to me as a bunch of angry teenagers screaming about how much they hate the world and are going to destroy it. It all sounded very childish. But it is a book, and saying that people who read it are also very childish would be walking on eggshells.
I guess, essentially, what I'm getting at is that I would prefer it if this were a debate about a theology and not a people, since each person is going to comprehend a theology differently and therefor there is no way to say that a group of people does this or does that solely based on their belief in a theology.
-
.
-
And how the FUCK is it bigoted to talk about a group who proclaim OUT FUCKING LOUD that they're goal is to wipe out non-believers?
Define they, please.
I may not fully agree with V, but I can see her point. I'm guilty of it as well in a couple places. I don't think it was ever out-right stated but in a few places it was inferred, mostly in tiny grammatical instances that give rise to a tone that the reader might take as bigoted.
I didn't write that article, not did I interview the guy in the video, nor did I make any of this up.
No one is saying you did. That's kind of what I think several people have been trying to point out. The article may have been a tad flawed.
On the other hand, there isn't a single religion out there that can't be twisted into something violent and repulsive if certain passages of their holy books are taken out of context or taken literally (or hell, just taken too seriously for that matter).
2.The Teenager stage
This is where that religion goes out and destroys everything that pisses it off, (i.e Christians in the Holy Crusades or Islam today).
Muslims practically invented science, so there's really no merit in trying to say that Islam in general is against education or new ideas in general. Now whether there is a strain that is popular today, or at least is being reported as such, that doesn't share this "intellectualism"... there is probably not much of a debate about that. Religion has always been a tool to some extent, and this one happens to have a buttload of poor, un(der)educated, justly pissed off people available to support it.
Name a religion (besides Buddhism) and I can probably give you an example of epic douchebaggery perpetrated in their name. It's not really fair to single out this one because it happens to be fashionable.
I think the general theme here is that any religion can be warped into a seething pile of hatred and malfunction. That doesn't make it so, it just makes it the general perception. And, as history has proven, the general perception is almost always flawed.
I don't think you're making any of this up, but I do think the person who wrote the article and took the interview was little biased to his own perspective. (Who isn't?) That bias (as well as his elementary technique) is something that should be taken into consideration since anyone could do what he did with any obscure holy book and one really passionate extremist of that chosen religion.
-
Define they, please.
HAHA! Got me. I fixed it. :-)
-
ok. I was under the impression you guys had READ the thread, and what I actually POSTED. To save you some time, Im going to quote them here.
You're out of line. You know damn good and well that I read this thread, because I said, "I've been following this thread for awhile now...".
...So show me. Im waiting.
Thanks, but I think I'll pass. I don't respond well to commands, to insults, to the implication that (because I don't agree with you) my priorities are fucked up, or to profanity being hurled my way as a counter-argument in a dialogue.
-
.
-
You're out of line. You know damn
to insults, to the implication that (because I don't agree with you) my priorities are fucked up, or to profanity being hurled my way as a counter-argument in a dialogue.
pot . kettle. black.
-
No. The general theme was supposed to have been that moderate muslims are so quiet about the extremists;
Okay, I was talking about the quotes I presented and not the thread.
Define they, please.
HAHA! Got me. I fixed it. :-)
Actually I was kind of pointing out that "they" isn't a defined group, but rather a suggested group. I'm guilty of doing this alot and tend to get scored badly in essays because of it. It's what makes a listener/reader interpret a statement different than the speaker's/writer's intention. I only noticed it because someone reading over my shoulder pointed it out to me. By not defining "they" the reader is forced to make an assumption.
When I went back and re-read the thread I realized there was a lot left open to interpretation, a lot I didn't mean to be. It does sound a little piggish if read from certain perspective. It wasn't meant that way.
As for the "where are the moderates" question you asked, I have a found an answer. They’re in St. Petersburg, Florida. (http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/015541.php)
In a cruel irony, attempts by hard-liners to silence these reformers have often received more attention than the reformers themselves.
(The article isn't completely on-topic but it might answer a few questions. There are moderates out there, they're just getting less publicity than non-reformists.)
-
.
-
I know, but I was already mad, and looking at it my way made me feel better.
I'm glad it made you feel better. For a minute there it seemed you were going to send yourself into a false molt. There were going to be little 12 feathers everywhere.
-
.
-
(The article isn't completely on-topic but it might answer a few questions. There are moderates out there, they're just getting less publicity than non-reformists.)
When was the last time moderates of any sort got any publicity?
Germans are all Nazis.
Priests are all child molesters.
And Muslims all have bombs strapped to their waists.
The media's trying to sell papers. Maybe moderate Muslims don't talk about extremists because they feel the same way about them as an "average" citizen of the western world would.
-
And actually, the group 'they' is defined it the same sentence.
And how the FUCK is it bigoted to talk about a group who proclaim OUT FUCKING LOUD that their goal is to wipe out non-believers?
I knew what you were referring to, but try reading it as "a group" = Muslims not "a group" = radical Muslims. That's how it was pointed out to me. I'm not arguing, I'm just saying I can see how it may have been misinterpreted.
When was the last time moderates of any sort got any publicity?
Sound point. Moderation doesn't sell, big guns and screaming idiots do.
-
.
-
Did you just call yourself an idiot?
Or are you just trying to get attention again?
... and now that we covered the religion of peas, what is the religion of cucumbers (generally speaking, of course)?
-
Cucumbers are just vegetables?
ZING
-
Cucumbers are just vegetables?
ZING
Actually, they're fruits.
*blows raspberry
-
Actually, they're fruits.
*blows raspberry
No.
Fruit - Grow on trees.
Vegetables - Grow in the dirt.
Raspberries on the other hand are predominantly Irish Catholic.
-
Sooooooo... what's up with my pole beans frisking my seedlings?(I moved the tomatoes away and they (the beans) turned on the carrots) So far, the Calendula and Sage are acting as buffers and it's working. I know for a fact that Sage is agnostic. But what about pole beans and Calendula?
-
No.
Fruit - Grow on trees.
Vegetables - Grow in the dirt.
Raspberries on the other hand are predominantly Irish Catholic.
If only it were that simple.
The word "vegetable" is a culinary term, not a botanical term.
-
If only it were that simple.
The word "vegetable" is a culinary term, not a botanical term.
Besides that, trees also grow in the dirt. Infact, I'm pretty sure the only things that don't grow in the dirt are orchids, which means everything except orchids are vegetables. (Excluding hydroponics because I don't know any examples of it happening in nature. If it does, then by this method there are vegetables, orchids, and hydroponics.) Since this would be completely illogical and so is the statement about raspberries having a religion, I'm going to say it was sarcasm. God I hope it was sarcasm. I took it as sarcasm, anyway.
EDIT: Seaweed is an example of natural hydroponics, so you do have vegetables, orchids, and hydroponics. Fruit is a figment of your imagination.
-
Fruit is a figment of your imagination.
So all this time Xolly has been a figment of my imagination. Not that theres anything wrong with that.
Sorry xolik it was the first thing that popped in my head.
-
Do you get extremist vegetables that give other fruit a bad name?
If so why doesn't the moderate vegetables speak up against them?
-
I would say the peas are speaking up agaisnt them, but actually, they're designing a bigger, better bomb so that they have something to threaten the world with when they launch their take-over plan, thus making them extremists.
I would say the same thing about the raspberries, but the raspberries are too busy trying to martyr themselves on the 'religious intolerence' sword.
The sage would be speaking up but a law is about to pass making it legal to teach "gardenerism" as a fact in seedling schools.
The pole-beans are doing something, but I'm not sure it's helping.
The mushrooms have rallies every third Tuesday of the month, but no one comes to them.
The asparagus try to speak up but everyone is hushing them because their still too young to have an opinion worth listening to.
The calendula see what's happening but don't give shit because it doesn't affect them.
The tomatoes send out a monthly newsletter, but they don't like offending anyone so they only send it to you if you request it. There are 2 vegetables on their mailing list so far.
The cabbages sit around smoking cigars and cracking jokes about humans having religions, because they already came up with a solution to the problem, but intend on telling no one.
The corn started a meeting on whether or not they should speak up two years ago, the meeting still isn't over and the matter hasn't been decided on yet, because the legistation can't be agreed upon.
The melons launched an all-out offensive without consulting anyone, pissing off everyone, especially the corn, and now they're are in deep cotton and no one is willing to bail them out. The corn is still waiting to see the request forms.
The cotton is the offending party.
The artichokes think the whole matter should be dropped and more attention should be paid to the plotting peas.
The eggplant just wants everyone to hold hands and sing "kum-bi-a".
The marigolds want everyone to shut-up and the melons to come back and they can reinforce the borders.
The basil and rosemary are busy lobbying for better soil.
The mints would go the mushroom's meetings, but they have religious meetings that conflict with the scheduling.
And finally the squash mope around their vines feeling very sorry for themselves and mumbling about how no one ever sees it from their point of view.
Does that help answer your question?
(Did I leave anyone out?)
-
Who's talking about the high teenage suicide and pregnancy death rates of water-melons?
-
.
-
Who's talking about the high teenage suicide and pregnancy death rates of water-melons?
The lettuces were talking about it but then the whole melon family went to war suddenly interest in that topic died. Now the lettuce are more concerned that the okras may resort to terrorism to gain attention, much like the cotton.
-
.
-
<off topic
When I was little I equated okra to 'biological warfare' and hurled them across the table at my sister when my parents weren't looking.
Later, I learned to appreciate them for their culinary value and I love them deep fried with tartar sauce.
-
.
-
That boiled mass of slime does wonders in soups, stews, sauces, and gumbo. But they should have given the sliced pieces a nice long bath, then throughly dried them before cooking, if they were going to serve it straight like that.
Okra is a naturally very tense, stressed out vegetable. Heat makes it explode into a massive mental breakdown and then it gets all weepy and weird. You have to calm it down first if you want to avoid the loads of emotional hysteria.
-
.
-
To get slightly back on topic for this one post:
I think basing your behaviour on a document that was written thousands of years ago in a completely different world is a bad idea; this is why all religions need a total re-write of their holy books and I suggest that I'm just the guy(?) to do it.
Bible 2.0 - Y2K Compliant (now with Stylesheets!)
The Qur'an, Revised Version with new Introduction by Cat Stevens
Torah, Torah, Torah - You Know the Rules, but Here are Some Morah
-
Not all religions are based on antiquated texts. Take, for instance, Buddhism. It accentuates the self – and your own attainment of nirvana – not what you can do for the religion, but what you can do for yourself.
That said – I’d like to read Lacerda’s 21st Century texts – with stylesheets.
-
Bible 2.0 - Y2K Compliant (now with Stylesheets!)
Commandment 11. Thou shalt not pour hot wax over the bottom of a 12 year old boy.
-
Didn't read the last ~2 pages, but if I was a moderate (read: reasonable) Muslim who was going to get my fucking head cut off and dumped in a ditch for speaking up against a small percentage of religion-hijacking cockbags, I just might be a little tempted to keep my mouth shut. Hm?
-
Commandment 11. Thou shalt not pour hot wax over the bottom of a 12 year old boy.
Ha. You don't know Lacerda very well, do you?
-
The 3rd Beatitude in the book of Lacerda:
Blessed are the carrots; for they shall inherit the earth.
The 7th:
Blessed are the peas-makers; for they shall be called children of the Gardener.
-
.
-
Then who is supposed to do it? Hm?
The ones who don't care if they get their fucking head cut off and dumped in a ditch for speaking up against a small percentage of religion-hijacking cockbags.
Hey! You don't seem to have a problem with it! Maybe you should!
-
.
-
How much money do want to put down on me being facetious at that moment?
-
$5,000.
But that's only because I owe the lettuce money.
-
$5,000.
But that's only because I owe the lettuce money.
:-o
Holy radish monks, man! How'd that happen?
-
Then who is supposed to do it? Hm?
Seems to be the American military at the moment.
-
God bless the Pax Americana.
-
I really hate it when an entire religon is portrayed by whever has the bigger microphone. I know a lot of muslims who hold a passion for their religon but also a good deal of intelligence when it comes to what having a passion for your religon means. When it gets down to it its really just a lot of politics. Even within holy books its still just politics. If anyone ends up watching the current political violence exhibited by muslims on the part of their religon, just find a nice place to sit for awhile and read as much of the new testament as you can get through. if testaments isnt your thing then go to "your local library and pick up a book about the time period in which the Islam, Judaism, and Christianity arose. No matter which way you put it you are dealing with politics, and as we know, Politics sucks. it takes good people and turns them bad and gives the bad too much power.
-
Try reading this - Link (http://www.amazon.com/Reconciliation-Islam-Democracy-Benazir-Bhutto/dp/0061567582/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213441297&sr=8-1)
This is a simplification, but Benazir Bhutto argues that militant aggression is due to a misinterpretation of the Qur'an. All believers in monotheism, Jews, Christians, and followers of Islam are all Muslims ('Muslim' meaning "one who submits" to God). All follow the same god, but the message the Jews received is suppsedly distorted, and the Christians messed up too. Islam is an attempt to create a definitive message from god by putting it into Arabic and keeping it that way.
As has been said, all religions are capable of putting out violent fanatics. Why should Islam be singled out?
-
.
-
.
-
okay, by alot i meant two families. i didnt mean that i had access to the majority of muslim population but i felt that i knew enough to hope that there are others like them out there that take pride in their religon without beating others over the head with it.
-
If you were on a bus with a Christian, a Jew, and a jihadist Muslim; which do YOU think is most likely to blow the fucking bus up?
Is it going to a Planned Parenthood clinic?
-
touché
-
.
-
It might be; but you know the jihadist is the only one with the balls to blow himself up to get the others. The militant christians are too cowardly; they set up us the bomb in the clinic and leave.
It's either balls or lack of brain power. Haven't quite figured out which.
-
.
-
If you were on a bus with a Christian, a Jew, and a jihadist Muslim; which do YOU think is most likely to blow the fucking bus up? Nobody is "singling out" Islam but radicals themselves. That's not enough to take them seriously?
A loaded question and a poor one. Jihad doesn't mean to go out and slaughter Christians. Some people take it to mean that and they end up being the ones who get the press. I wonder why? :roll: If you'd asked "If you were on a bus with a Christian, a Jew, and follower of Islam; which do YOU think is most likely to blow the fucking bus up?" I'd say that all are equally capable. The militant groups that attack in Islam's name aren't true followers. They're idiots.
To start with; there are many other threads here discussing the shortcomings of other religions besides Islam (mainly Christianity), so I fail to see how you gather that Islam is being 'singled out'. Secondly, violence IS the concern most non-Muslims have against Islamist extremist; there aren't many reports of casualties from Christian or Jewish suicide bombers or militias, or Christian or Jewish training camps teaching the how-to's of violence and war.
I'm sorry. I've been here for a whole ten minutes. I haven't gotten around to every thread on the boards. I know there is concern over "Islamist extremists." I didn't grow up fearing commies. I grew up fearing those freedom hating terrorists.
Also, Islam is the only religion (that Im aware of) that still - today in 2008 - openly says non-believers should be killed; and follows through on their beliefs.
That was the point I was trying to make in my last post. Christians and Jews ARE believers. They believe in ONE god (minus that who trinity thing some Christians go on about). True Islam leaves room for tolerance. Jews have historically lived better under Islamic rule than Christian rule.
So, just because other religions are capable of putting out violent fanatics; we should just leave the militants alone to kill us in peace? Is that what you're saying?
That's exactly what I'm saying. You read me like a book, but you missed the part where I tried to point out that Islam and terrorism aren't the same thing. Extremists exist and just because they get the spotlight doesn't mean all followers should get a bad name. Extremist misrepresent the message in a horrible way.
-
You keep arguing from the point of view that someone said Muslims = terrorists. It has been said (over and over again) that I, personally, am talking about EXTREMISTS. And this day and age the ones who are actively pursuing harm to myself and way of life are MUSLIM FUNDAMENTALISTS; whether you "determine" they are right or wrong about their religion is pretty much irrelevant.
At any rate, your post is prime example of why it's pretty much pointless to try to seriously discuss anything here. After a 6-page thread; you STILL think you should "point out" that "Islam and terrorism aren't the same thing".
-
So, just because other religions are capable of putting out violent fanatics; we should just leave the militants alone to kill us in peace? Is that what you're saying?
That's exactly what I'm saying.
Only an American would say something like this.
-
I'm converting to Xolikism.
-
Vive la Xolikstan!!
-
Vive la Xolikstan!!
I kill you! *BOOM*
-
You keep arguing from the point of view that someone said Muslims = terrorists. It has been said (over and over again) that I, personally, am talking about EXTREMISTS. And this day and age the ones who are actively pursuing harm to myself and way of life are MUSLIM FUNDAMENTALISTS; whether you "determine" they are right or wrong about their religion is pretty much irrelevant.
At any rate, your post is prime example of why it's pretty much pointless to try to seriously discuss anything here. After a 6-page thread; you STILL think you should "point out" that "Islam and terrorism aren't the same thing".
This thread is about pigeon-holing all Muslims as terrorists. On the one hand you seem to be saying that no, you don't think all muslims hold these beliefs (although you wish they'd speak up a bit). On the other hand, hardline fundamentalists are the most vocal faction, and even if they're not all terrorists they are at least sympathizers and so also happen to be a threat to your personal safety in some vague, intangible way. Therefore, all Muslims should be treated like potential terrorists anyway. Am I understanding you correctly?
-
This thread is about pigeon-holing all Muslims as terrorists.
No it isn't.
This thread as I started it was about moderates being so quiet about the violent fundamentalists; and me wondering why.
No matter how hard you try, you can't change what I intended it to be. You can claim whatever bullshit you want; that doesn't have anything to do with my actual ideas and thoughts on the subject, nor my posts. If you see something as anti-muslim, maybe something is clouding your view.
On the one hand you seem to be saying that no, you don't think all muslims hold these beliefs (although you wish they'd speak up a bit).
Yes.
On the other hand, hardline fundamentalists are the most vocal faction,
Yes.
and even if they're not all terrorists they are at least sympathizers and so also happen to be a threat to your personal safety in some vague, intangible way.
Therefore, all Muslims should be treated like potential terrorists anyway.
What? Where does that part come from? I believe you just made that part up totally. Which doesn't lend to your credibility.
-
Moderates are speaking up - Link (http://www.amazon.com/Reconciliation-Islam-Democracy-Benazir-Bhutto/dp/0061567582/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213441297&sr=8-1) - Happy yet?
-
I kill you! *BOOM*
Ah yes! The traditional grenade up your ass ritual.
-
What? Where does that part come from? I believe you just made that part up totally. Which doesn't lend to your credibility.
You are insinuating that the lack of Muslim uprise against this sort of behavior is tacit approval of it. Maybe I'm wrong, which is why I asked.
-
You are insinuating that the lack of Muslim uprise against this sort of behavior is tacit approval of it. Maybe I'm wrong, which is why I asked.
Whoa whoa whoa! Careful there guys, you're in danger of actually having a serious discussion there.
</Joey></Keanu>
-
If you were on a bus with a Christian, a Jew, and a jihadist Muslim; which do YOU think is most likely to blow the fucking bus up?
Me.
You are insinuating that the lack of Muslim uprise against this sort of behavior is tacit approval of it.
I think he was insinuating that the lack of Muslim uprise agaisnt this sort of behavior is tacit cowardess.
-
I think he was insinuating that the lack of Muslim uprise agaisnt this sort of behavior is tacit cowardess.
Let's see here....the guys in charge use any slight criticism as an excuse to start lopping off heads because apparently to them "Hey guys, could you knock it off with the killings?" = "GRAVE INSULT TO MUSLIMS EVERYWHERE! WE MUST JIHAD!"
Yeah, I'll speak out against violent acts done in the name of Islam and have a fatwa placed on my ass for it, sure. On second thought, think I'm just gonna sit down here and watch the paint dry.
Sadly, I've just been informed that this post has been declared as an insult to Islam, and even as we speak riots are breaking out all over Sheepfuckistan.
-
Let's see here....the guys in charge use any slight criticism as an excuse to start lopping off heads because apparently to them "Hey guys, could you knock it off with the killings?" = "GRAVE INSULT TO MUSLIMS EVERYWHERE! WE MUST JIHAD!"
Yeah, I'll speak out against violent acts done in the name of Islam and have a fatwa placed on my ass for it, sure. On second thought, think I'm just gonna sit down here and watch the paint dry.
Sadly, I've just been informed that this post has been declared as an insult to Islam, and even as we speak riots are breaking out all over Sheepfuckistan.
That was an intelligent, well reasoned post, and I salute you, sir. (http://"http://www.geekforum.org/index.php/topic,5680.msg95754.html#msg95754")
:D
-
I wanna move to Sheepfuckistan!
-
I wanna move to Sheepfuckistan!
Here we call it "College Station".
-
.
-
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07012008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/al_qaedas_plan_b_117936.htm?page=0 (http://www.nypost.com/seven/07012008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/al_qaedas_plan_b_117936.htm?page=0)
oh yeah, well CRUSADES CRUSADES CRUSADES CRUSADES so there.
-
.
-
Yeh, whatever. I'm so old, I was in on the Crusades AND owned slaves.
Kinky old bastard.
-
Kinky old bastard.
That's me.
-
That's me.
There should really be a term similar to "jailbait" that applies to the other end of the spectrum.
-
Crooked little kitten?