Multiple dead in shootings at multiple mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand

[T.Lex]

Are you suggesting that one cannot have ****ing empathy AND be cautious based on ideological facts?

I'm saying that ideology and empathy for those who do not share one's ideology rarely intersect.

 

[Ziggidy]

I'm saying that ideology and empathy for those who do not share one's ideology rarely intersect.

I totally disagree. I feel for the lost, I feel for the inflicted, I feel for hurting and such; regardless if they believe in what I do. Your comment adds to the difficulties we have in this world (not you, but that statement). We all have labels. We either put them on ourselves or others put them on us. All of us have many labels; however, under those labels are hearts. These hearts are no different than ours (mine) and we all can empathize with those hurting hearts....even when we despise the label.

 

[2A-Hoosier23]

I maintain that judging people foremostly on their group identity is dangerous and should be seriously thought about before making vast generalizations such as "I don't trust anyone who follows Islam". I am confused how you can say you don't trust anyone who follows Islam but you just said "All of us have many labels; however, under those labels are hearts. These hearts are no different than ours (mine)." Maybe I'm misunderstanding it but aren't you basically refuting your own stance of not trusting Muslims (indeed, a label)?

 

[T.Lex]

I totally disagree. I feel for the lost, I feel for the inflicted, I feel for hurting and such; regardless if they believe in what I do. Your comment adds to the difficulties we have in this world (not you, but that statement). We all have labels. We either put them on ourselves or others put them on us. All of us have many labels; however, under those labels are hearts. These hearts are no different than ours (mine) and we all can empathize with those hurting hearts....even when we despise the label.

Your expressed attitude toward Islam and Muslims doesn't just add to the difficulties, it is part and parcel of them.

Being muslim isn't a label for the people of Islam, no more than being "Christian" is a label for me. It is part of identity.

Not the new "identity politics" type identity, but actual identity. Part of who I am.

Dismiss that kind of "label" and you dismiss that kind of person.

 

[BugI02]

Pretty much. I'm sure some have some great insight into other people's souls though that allows them to know what a person really thinks. And that is easily extrapolated to more than 1 billion people, because obviously they all believe whatever is being attributed to that group. Isn't it obvious that all Muslims hold the same exact beliefs, all Christians hold the same exact beliefs, all atheists hold the same exact beliefs, etc.

You mean like the insight into other people's souls that allows people here on INGO to tell me what Trump really thinks, and to extrapolate that to more than 62,980,000 people - because obviously we all believe whatever is attributed to our group. Isn't it obvious that all deplorables hold the same exact beliefs, etc

You mean you think that's bad? Good to know

 

[Denny347]

Nah. I know the difference between annoying and dangerous. I know what team I'm joining when Call of Duty - SHTF happens.

My statement was absurd. Just as absurd as many of our outgroup biases have become. There are many threads that criticize identity politics of certain groups yet embrace them for others. Lots of double standards going on.

 

[KLB]

You mean like the insight into other people's souls that allows people here on INGO to tell me what Trump really thinks, and to extrapolate that to more than 62,980,000 people - because obviously we all believe whatever is attributed to our group. Isn't it obvious that all deplorables hold the same exact beliefs, etc

You mean you think that's bad? Good to know

I don't remember doing that. And yes, I do think that is bad. I try not to make blanket statements about large groups.

I don't like or agree with some things the President does, and I will say so. I like some things he does, and I will say so.

 

[Brad69]

About the Death Cult of Cthulhu

Does anyone have pamphlets or more information?

 

[Route 45]

My statement was absurd. Just as absurd as many of our outgroup biases have become. There are many threads that criticize identity politics of certain groups yet embrace them for others. Lots of double standards going on.

There is no double standard. You consider each group as it presents itself, with regards to groups based on ideology. Judging on race or similar immutable traits is absurd, because those things do not imply ideology. What is absurd is the notion that claiming to have the backing of an invisible, omnipotent being automatically lends legitimacy to a set of ideals. And the absurdity is supercharged when you go a step further and give equal deference to all of these beliefs, regardless of the differences between them.

 

[printcraft]

About the Death Cult of Cthulhu

Does anyone have pamphlets or more information?

First United Church of Cthulhu: Certificate of Ordination


https://www.facebook.com/fucc9/

 

[jbombelli]

About the Death Cult of Cthulhu

Does anyone have pamphlets or more information?

Yes. I recommend the writings of the Holy Prophet Lovecraft.

 

[jamil]

Because it seems like the direction the conversation has been swaying... We've got a great thread over here:

Civil Religious Discussion: All Things Islam - INGunOwners

Ain’t no ****ing way.

 

[7.62]

I do not trust anyone who follows Islam. I have associates and co-workers who I get along with well, however; I would not depend on or trust anyone who follows Islam when the SHF. We see this happening right before our eyes, as we spot here; in our own government. US Reps are opening lying to the people even after making bold statements, they deny their intent; yet it continues.

I guess I hold this same position, only I just don't really trust anyone if SHTF. Doesn't matter to me their religion though. Just humans in general. It is hard to find someone you can really trust nowadays, sadly.

Articulation of taqiyya

According to the authoritative Arabic text, Al-Taqiyya Fi Al-Islam: "Taqiyya [deception] is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it. We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream...Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era.​

Taqiyya is a practice of Shia Muslims. Shia Muslims make up only about 10% of the population of all the Muslims in the world. The "Practically every Islamic sect agrees to and practices it" is completely false. In fact Sunni Muslims make up 90% +/- of the worlds Muslims and Taqiyya is largely denounced in that sect. Keep in mind there are many sub-sects of Shia Muslims so if, for example, There are 10+ sects of Shia Muslims and they all agree on this practice against Sunni Muslims then 10/11 sects agree to and practice it. So in this way the statement is true, but misleading. Because regardless of how many sects agree to it they still make up 10% or less of the total Muslim population. Not sure where you copied and pasted this from but the source is either uneducated about this subject or intentionally misleading its audience.​

​

"The primary Quranic verse sanctioning deception with respect to non-Muslims states: "Let believers not take for friends and allies infidels instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah – unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions." (Quran 3:28; see also 2:173; 2:185; 4:29; 22:78; 40:28.)Al-Tabari's (838-923 AD) Tafsir, or Quranic exegeses, is essentially a standard reference in the entire Muslim world.​

A Muslim, is permitted to tell a lie or hide his religion if he fears harm may be caused to him by professing his beliefs. An example would be if a gunman entered a Mosque and told him that if he denounced Islam his life would be spared. As long as in his heart he still believed. There is a lot of evidence of this in the Quran and Hadith that it is ONLY to be done as a last resort and to avoid harm or prosecution. Sunni leaders and religious scholars all pretty much agree on this fact. Also, the rest of the text in the Quran dealing with this subject is globally agreed upon what context it was written in. That context is the war the Muslims were in the the mid 600's. This verse came from God and delivered to Muhammad by the Angel Gabriel. It was guidance to the Muslims that may be captured or facing prosecution by other means of how they could avoid harm.

​

In such a scenario, let them act friendly towards them."Regarding 3:28, the Islamic scholar Ibn Kathir (1301-1373) wrote: "Whoever at any time or place fears their [infidels'] evil, may protect himself through outward show."As proof of this, he quotes Muhammad's companions. Abu Darda said: "Let us smile to the face of some people while our hearts curse them."

Al-Hassan said: "Doing taqiyya is acceptable till the day of judgment [in perpetuity]."Other prominent ulema, such as al- Qurtubi , al-Razi, and al-Arabi have extended taqiyya to cover deeds.​

The first quote is from a historian (Ibn Kathir) that lived in year 1301. This doesn't come from the Quran or Hadith. Even still its just confirming the protecting ones self if you feel harmed. The next quote of Abu Dara was recorded by Al-Bukhari was again in reference to being under persecution or potential harm from your enemy. Al-Hassan's quote confirms that until the day of judgement Taqiyya is permissible but only if it follows the criteria already established by the Quran and Hadith. Historian/Scholars Al-Qurtubi, Al-Razi. and Al-Arabi (all three live between year 900-1200ish) are not legit sources of Islamic guidelines. They wrote nothing that Islam is based on. They just studied stuff and made opinions on it. Would be like me studying Christianity and adding an 11th commandment I, nor them are in a position to change the word of God.


My point to all of this is that there are so many websites that pull together this stuff and use it out of context or out and out lie about what is said in hopes someone will believe it, and copy and paste it and get others to believe it as well. Unfortunately, its working! They are winning. Much like the liberal media is winning with the brainwashing of people, especially the younger generation, into believing guns kill people magically by themselves. ​

​

 

[7.62]

Ain’t no ****ing way.

I agree! If my memory serves me right that thread went off the deep in a long time ago. Don't think I have been back since.

 

[churchmouse]

I agree! If my memory serves me right that thread went off the deep in a long time ago. Don't think I have been back since.

Well you and everyone else. No posts since mid December 18

 

[Denny347]

What is absurd is the notion that claiming to have the backing of an invisible, omnipotent being automatically lends legitimacy to a set of ideals.

 

[M67]

https://www.foxnews.com/world/new-z...le-semi-automatic-weapons-after-mosque-attack

NZ working on banning "military style semi automatic" weapons

 

[Sylvain]

And here goes the little freedom they had left ...
I'm sure the military and police will also get rid of those evil guns and their high-cap mags (whatever that is).

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47648549

New Zealand will ban all types of semi-automatic weapons used in the Christchurch attacks, PM Jacinda Ardern has said.The country's gun laws have been in the spotlight since a gunman killed 50 people at two mosques last Friday.
Ms Ardern said she expected new legislation to be in place by 11 April.
She said a buy-back scheme would be set up for banned weapons, and that measures would be imposed to prevent a run on buying before the law comes in.
"Now, six days after this attack, we are announcing a ban on all military style semi-automatics (MSSA) and assault rifles in New Zealand," the prime minister said.
"Related parts used to convert these guns into MSSAs are also being banned, along with all high-capacity magazines."

I'm sure after the next car accident they will ban all cars.

 

[Ark]

So, yeah, this is why you don't take a gun-grabber's word when they say they'll "allow" you to keep a damn thing. As soon as they have the political cover, they'll unilaterally curb stomp your rights and come to your door to take your ****. No democratic process, no appeals, and oh yeah you won't be able to debate or organize against it because the government will scrub all your discussions from the internet.

New Zealand is officially a China-grade authoritarian ****hole country.

 

[Brad69]

Well thanks to jbombelli and printcraft I have joined a cult!

I am going to attempt a Martin Luthier type reform and institute a mandatory uniform of a cape and a tentacle hat!