Page 3 of 6 [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

20 Mar 2009, 8:01 am

monkees4va wrote:
Henriksson wrote:
I think you can find that major religions have sprung up more as a political tool. If the emperor happened to dislike Christianity, how could Christianity ever become big? Europe would probably be under some paganistic religion instead. Everything makes sense in hindsight.

HA!
Chrisitanity is based on the pagan religion, did you not know that? I thought it was well known XD
It just evolved to worship some omnipowerful thing in the sky

Ooh, there's the pagan religion as well! :D


_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

20 Mar 2009, 8:03 am

Quote:
Muslim bashing, like any form of religious bigotry, is stupid. I might not agree with a religion's teachings, but its followers are fine by me as long as they don't take a fundamentalist view, and don't force their opinions on others.

Oh, but are they true believers, in that case? :wink:


_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

20 Mar 2009, 8:12 am

monkees4va wrote:
Henriksson wrote:
I think you can find that major religions have sprung up more as a political tool. If the emperor happened to dislike Christianity, how could Christianity ever become big? Europe would probably be under some paganistic religion instead. Everything makes sense in hindsight.

HA!
Chrisitanity is based on the pagan religion, did you not know that? I thought it was well known XD
It just evolved to worship some omnipowerful thing in the sky

You suck at history and linguistics.

The word "pagan" by definition means "non-Christian." To refer to Christianity as Pagan is just outright stupid and betrays a desire to bash Christianity which is completely devoid of any historical understanding of either Christianity or Paganism.

I know it's popular on the Internet to claim that Christianity falls under Paganism, but if you post that kind of crap in here you're likely to get called out on it, so check your facts more carefully next time.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

20 Mar 2009, 8:20 am

DrizzleMan wrote:
but its followers are fine by me as long as they don't take a fundamentalist view, and don't force their opinions on others.


Unfortunately, technically, they are instructed to do just that. To fail to do so technically is apostasy. Dont bother to look it up. It means to abandon ones faith. For the sunnis, for instance, apostasy is punishable by death. How often that is carried out, I dont know.

Which is probably why we dont hear a peep out of the more liberal Muslims when the fundamentalist crazy ones do their thing. Why would a law/Koran abiding Muslim tell another not to spread the faith? He might not agree with the means, but he agrees with the message. Spread the faith. It is the moral thing to do.


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

20 Mar 2009, 8:40 am

Fuzzy wrote:
Unfortunately, technically, they are instructed to do just that. To fail to do so technically is apostasy. Dont bother to look it up. It means to abandon ones faith. For the sunnis, for instance, apostasy is punishable by death. How often that is carried out, I dont know.

Well, given that in heavily Islamic societies, no alternate viewpoints are able to be expressed, very few people are aware that there is something they could believe other than Islam.

Quote:
Which is probably why we dont hear a peep out of the more liberal Muslims when the fundamentalist crazy ones do their thing. Why would a law/Koran abiding Muslim tell another not to spread the faith? He might not agree with the means, but he agrees with the message. Spread the faith. It is the moral thing to do.

I know some "liberal" and "moderate" Muslims. If you ever speak to them, you will not consider them such. They are only moderates by way of contrast to suicide bombers. They still view women in an inferior role to men, they still believe Israel is the incarnation of evil and supported by a massive Western conspiracy, they still have a goal of forcing Islam on the entire world.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

20 Mar 2009, 9:06 am

Orwell wrote:
I know some "liberal" and "moderate" Muslims. If you ever speak to them, you will not consider them such. They are only moderates by way of contrast to suicide bombers. They still view women in an inferior role to men, they still believe Israel is the incarnation of evil and supported by a massive Western conspiracy, they still have a goal of forcing Islam on the entire world.


Arrgghh! Smarrrt as paint ye arrrre!

ruveyn



b9
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,003
Location: australia

20 Mar 2009, 9:14 am

what at first smells like mutton... maybe islam



DrizzleMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 887

20 Mar 2009, 9:13 pm

Henriksson wrote:
Quote:
Muslim bashing, like any form of religious bigotry, is stupid. I might not agree with a religion's teachings, but its followers are fine by me as long as they don't take a fundamentalist view, and don't force their opinions on others.

Oh, but are they true believers, in that case? :wink:

Those who follow the spirit of the law are truer believers than those who follow only the letter.


_________________
The plural of platypus.


ZEGH8578
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,532

20 Mar 2009, 10:09 pm

to the GUYS here, who keep spouting moralistic bs about muslim's treatment of women

as if you wouldnt want a submissive woman 8)

your just jealous :]

when i get a gf, we're both converting. "fix me a sandwich b***h!! !"


_________________
''In the world I see - you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center.''


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

20 Mar 2009, 10:15 pm

ZEGH8578 wrote:
to the GUYS here, who keep spouting moralistic bs about muslim's treatment of women

as if you wouldnt want a submissive woman 8)

your just jealous :]

when i get a gf, we're both converting. "fix me a sandwich b***h!! !"


Obviously no sane intellectually competent and fully capable woman wants to enslave herself to a testosterone driven dictatorial jerk and why would any compassionate intelligent male infused with decency want a woman he merely uses to relieve his sex drive?



Dussel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,788
Location: London (UK)

21 Mar 2009, 1:27 am

EnglishLulu wrote:
I'm now a bit confused about what we're arguing about.

What I'm saying is that it's perfectly acceptable to disagree with someone, in a polite and courteous way, say if you don't believe in creationism, you might say that you don't share their beliefs and you believe in Darwinist style evolutionary theory, as you believe this has a basis in evidence that can be scientifically proven.

I'm not saying that you can't or shouldn't disagree with people. But what I am saying is that hate speech isn't the same as polite disagreement, or 'agreeing to disagree'.

Personally speaking, I thought ruyveyn's comments - and I paraphrase here - about 'should have nuked them' (referring to muslims/Iraqis) was abhorrent. And it's indicative of the Islamophobia that some people on WP seem to find acceptable. I actually find things like that to be offensive. Because it's not saying, ok, you have your beliefs, and I have mine, and we may disagree, and we can have a polite and courteous disagreement. It's wishing death and destruction on other people. It's arguably incitement to racial and religious hatred. And there have been quite a few anti-Islam/anti-muslim comments that amount to just abuse, instead of trying to engage and discuss and reason, and to 'agree to disagree'.


The question is what is respect - I do not have any respect for superstition, neither Christian, Islamic or otherwise. I think such superstition is in the modern world a threat to our survival. Bronze age idea, slightly recooked in centuries to follow, and technology of the 21th century just do not fit.

I do not that we shall "nuke", that's utterly nonsense, but, I also do not accept that their world view is any way in pair with the world view developed out of Antiquity, recovered and reinstated in Renaissance and the Enlightenment; a world view which made more progress for the god of humanity than all religions together,

We can't afford to be tolerant to any kind of intolerance - No Freedom for the Enemies of Freedom!



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

21 Mar 2009, 5:57 am

Dussel wrote:

I do not that we shall "nuke", that's utterly nonsense, but, I also do not accept that their world view is any way in pair with the world view developed out of Antiquity, recovered and reinstated in Renaissance and the Enlightenment; a world view which made more progress for the god of humanity than all religions together,

We can't afford to be tolerant to any kind of intolerance - No Freedom for the Enemies of Freedom!


And if the Hajis and Jihadists come to bomb the underground and kill a thousand the next time they try it, what do you propose?

Since there is no litmus test for "reasonableness" there is no ready way to distinguish a Muslim who is willing to kill and die for Allah, from a Muslim who has a decent respect for the lives and property of kaffirs.

At the very least, Muslims should be deported from Britain. They are a troublesome lot, are they not?

Deporting the lot has the virtue of simplicity and directness even if it lacks the virtue of justice.

Once deported they can be conveniently deposited on a "killing ground". Even if they are not killed their, at least they are out of your hair.

One of my favorite quotes from the Babylonian Talmud.

Sanhedrin 72a -Eem yavoah l'hargetcha, haskeem l'hargo. Translation: If he is coming to kill you, rise up early and slay him first.

Good advice from the Jewish survival manual.

ruveyn



NEWater
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 64
Location: Singapore

21 Mar 2009, 6:00 am

Sand wrote:
ZEGH8578 wrote:
to the GUYS here, who keep spouting moralistic bs about muslim's treatment of women

as if you wouldnt want a submissive woman 8)

your just jealous :]

when i get a gf, we're both converting. "fix me a sandwich b***h!! !"


Obviously no sane intellectually competent and fully capable woman wants to enslave herself to a testosterone driven dictatorial jerk and why would any compassionate intelligent male infused with decency want a woman he merely uses to relieve his sex drive?


I'm going off tangent from this topic here, but do you really want to discover the fetishes that are out there amongst the BDSM spectrum? ;)



Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

21 Mar 2009, 6:22 am

DrizzleMan wrote:
Henriksson wrote:
Quote:
Muslim bashing, like any form of religious bigotry, is stupid. I might not agree with a religion's teachings, but its followers are fine by me as long as they don't take a fundamentalist view, and don't force their opinions on others.

Oh, but are they true believers, in that case? :wink:

Those who follow the spirit of the law are truer believers than those who follow only the letter.

OK, I think the spirit of what you just wrote is that those follow only by the letter are the true believers. :wink:


_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


Dussel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,788
Location: London (UK)

21 Mar 2009, 6:41 am

ruveyn wrote:
Dussel wrote:

I do not that we shall "nuke", that's utterly nonsense, but, I also do not accept that their world view is any way in pair with the world view developed out of Antiquity, recovered and reinstated in Renaissance and the Enlightenment; a world view which made more progress for the god of humanity than all religions together,

We can't afford to be tolerant to any kind of intolerance - No Freedom for the Enemies of Freedom!


And if the Hajis and Jihadists come to bomb the underground and kill a thousand the next time they try it, what do you propose?


It is not really a danger: The IRA was (is?) a much more deadly danger and I am quite certain that other fouls are also around. We had to live with a certain amount of such danger.

I think the policy Sir Francis Walsingham imposed to fight those with police and intelligence on the one side and to insulate those on the political side is still the best one. Each person they kill make their goals more unlikely.

ruveyn wrote:
Since there is no litmus test for "reasonableness" there is no ready way to distinguish a Muslim who is willing to kill and die for Allah, from a Muslim who has a decent respect for the lives and property of kaffirs.


If the UK would use such a idea in the fight with the IRA Chicago with its Irish population, of which some openly supported the IRA, would be the victim of British nuclear bomb a long time ago; or perhaps just Dublin.

ruveyn wrote:
At the very least, Muslims should be deported from Britain.


Also: Britain has with such questions longer experience. Catholics were tolerated, even long after the Bull "Regnans in Excelsis" of Pope Pius V 1570, insofar they accepted the Queen's supremacy. The change of this policy, provoked partly by Catholics - partly to please more radical Protestant lead finally to Gun Powder Plot. "Remember , remember the fifth of November" has much more teachings than the most realize.

I don't see a point in repeating the harmful accepts of late Elizabethan and early Stuart politics, especially without the need which was in this time well to argue.

ruveyn wrote:
Deporting the lot has the virtue of simplicity and directness even if it lacks the virtue of justice.


This would destroy the west in its very foundations more than any idiot, of which believe system ever, could do. We German have here our experiences and moved back to older and better pattern.

ruveyn wrote:
One of my favorite quotes from the Babylonian Talmud.


What about Emperor Ferdinant I: "Fiat iustitia aut pereat mundus" - Justice had to be done, otherwise the world will decay.

(often wrongly quoted "Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus" - Let there be justice, though the world perish)



b9
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,003
Location: australia

21 Mar 2009, 6:56 am

on islam the door i-slam.

(just a word play and not an opinion)