Oh, this is a bad idea. Clinton, Sanders and OBummer targets..

[Route 45]

Well, it started with xenophobia and identifying one religion as the source of societies evil...

There are many sources of evil in the world. Tell me....which source graces societies with the oppression of sharia law in this world? In whose name do people behead innocents for non-belief? What is the source of evil that causes frighteningly large numbers of believers in countries around the world to agree with the death penalty for insulting their religion?

The best chance for survival of cancer is early detection and treatment. No oncologist in the history of medicine has ever said, "Ah, it's just a small tumor. Don't worry about it."

 

[Jludo]

What happened 1000 years ago is less concerning to me than what happened last week. "But they did it too" sounds like a Hillary Clinton argument. And I'm pretty sure that it's quite a bit more difficult to twist the words of Jesus to justify violence than it is to "interpret" the plain speaking of a violent warlord. Do you know what the meaning of the word "is" is?

If it can all be "interpreted," then what's the point of religion? It's all based on human opinion at that point.

Hey we agree on something, there are hundreds of different sects of Christianity, it's all about your particular interpretation.

 

[Route 45]

Hey we agree on something, there are hundreds of different sects of Christianity, it's all about your particular interpretation.

Absolutely! A shame that more people don't see the implications of that truth.

 

[JettaKnight]

This isn't an inconsistency, unless you take the statements out of context and add your own meaning. I was responding to the idiocy of playing a numbers game with regards to how many people have been killed by this or that group. It wasn't a complaint. Especially since I don't believe it ever happened, but the people who love to call out Mao and Stalin sure do. It is possible to mention an "event" from long ago to argue a point, but still believe that what happened last week is more important than that event, or any event from 1000 years ago.

So you don't believe it happened, yet you're using it as a way to substantiate your argument?

Got it.

 

[JettaKnight]

There are many sources of evil in the world. Tell me....which source graces societies with the oppression of sharia law in this world? In whose name do people behead innocents for non-belief? What is the source of evil that causes frighteningly large numbers of believers in countries around the world to agree with the death penalty for insulting their religion?

The best chance for survival of cancer is early detection and treatment. No oncologist in the history of medicine has ever said, "Ah, it's just a small tumor. Don't worry about it."

I'm not saying Islam is pernicious. In fact, I would agree that many of it's teachings are of... a not so loving nature.

I'm merely pointing out the irony of you mentioning Nazism, which had the same xenophobia you espouse as one of its fundamental beliefs.


Substitute Jewish banking for Muslim Sharia Law...

I'd argue that the rise of xenophobic fascism is far more likely event in America than Sharia Law ever will be.

 

[Route 45]

So you don't believe it happened, yet you're using it as a way to substantiate your argument?

Got it.

I'm sure from the content of his other posts, that he believes that it happened. Just using an example for the sake of argument. I should know better than to argue with a brick wall like that. The idiocy of the "Stalin killed more" argument irritates me.

 

[Route 45]

I'm not saying Islam is pernicious. In fact, I would agree that many of it's teachings are of... a not so loving nature.

I'm merely pointing out the irony of you mentioning Nazism, which had the same xenophobia you espouse as one of its fundamental beliefs.


Substitute Jewish banking for Muslim Sharia Law...

I'd argue that the rise of xenophobic fascism is far more likely event in America than Sharia Law ever will be.

If you equate Jewish banking practices with Sharia law, you truly do not understand the potential threat.
You are mistaking due caution for xenophobia, much like a liberal screams "RACIST!" at anyone who disagrees with them.

Do Muslims in European countries not have a habit of demanding Sharia law once they gain sufficient numbers in population? Do a significant amount of them refuse to assimilate to their new countries? Do an alarming number of Muslims support violence towards unbelievers?

You don't have to be xenophobic to see the dangers of mass immigration of people with primitive, oppressive beliefs into a Western civilization. You only have to be observant.

 

[Tombs]

As a veteran you are fighting to protect millions of American muslims, you fight with thousands of muslims who are your brothers in arms in the US military (many who also fought during the Revolutionary War to make that country the great country that it is now) ... and you fight against crazy people who happen to be muslim as well.

Those muslim US soldiers are also fighting against evil, they are not fighting against a religion.
Some men are good, some are evil ... regardless of their religious.

You also have Chrisitan terrorists, but you wouldn't say you are fighting against Christianity when you are fighting them.

And 42 million muslims support ISIS, while (conservatively) 6,000 serve in the US armed forces.

Lets see, that's 7000:1. Meanwhile we've had an islamic US service member who turned on their own and took the lives of 13 people while injuring 33 more.

And the liberal talking point of so called "christian terrorists" comes out once again. Are you really going to go to this extent of mental gymnastics to make a completely irrelevant point? Oh hey bad people exist, woah, I guess those terrorists are the good guys now!

They have the right, that doesn't mean you should stand beside them and defend their practices, which are patently un American (discrimination based on religion)

If a religion's exercise infringes on the rights of others, it is no longer legally protected under the first amendment.

 

[foszoe]

I'm sure from the content of his other posts, that he believes that it happened. Just using an example for the sake of argument. I should know better than to argue with a brick wall like that. The idiocy of the "Stalin killed more" argument irritates me.

But....he did.

What are your estimates for world population at the time of the flood event?

 

[Jludo]

And 42 million muslims support ISIS, while (conservatively) 6,000 serve in the US armed forces.

Lets see, that's 7000:1. Meanwhile we've had an islamic US service member who turned on their own and took the lives of 13 people while injuring 33 more.

And the liberal talking point of so called "christian terrorists" comes out once again. Are you really going to go to this extent of mental gymnastics to make a completely irrelevant point? Oh hey bad people exist, woah, I guess those terrorists are the good guys now!



If a religion's exercise infringes on the rights of others, it is no longer legally protected under the first amendment.

Practising Islam inherently infringes on your rights?

 

[Tombs]

Practising Islam inherently infringes on your rights?

If you water it down enough, sure it doesn't.

If you practice it fundamentally, yes, it most certainly does.

But, if you're going to water down a religion to the point of being nearly pointless, then what's the point of even practicing the faith in the first place?

 

[Route 45]

Dalai Lama gets it....

Dalai Lama Warns Against Taking Too Many Migrants, Arab Domination: 'Migrants Should Return'

 

[Cygnus]

Dalai Lama gets it....

Dalai Lama Warns Against Taking Too Many Migrants, Arab Domination: 'Migrants Should Return'

Wow. Does the left know Dalai is racist now? What will Richard Gere think????

 

[Tombs]

Wow. Does the left know Dalai is racist now? What will Richard Gere think????

They've been shouting him down as a racist since he made those remarks.

 

[Jludo]

If you water it down enough, sure it doesn't.

If you practice it fundamentally, yes, it most certainly does.

But, if you're going to water down a religion to the point of being nearly pointless, then what's the point of even practicing the faith in the first place?

I agree there's no point in practicing then but what religion isn't watered down? A nation of Christians here certainly don't follow Jesus' example.

I'm not sure why you'd have any qualms about Islam being watered down to 'nearly pointless' it just joins the ranks of dozens of other harmless religions at that point, which I'd think you'd encourage, not lambaste.

 

[printcraft]

Practising Islam inherently infringes on your rights?

Have you looked at Sweden lately?

Here's a story... https://www.rt.com/op-edge/345086-sweden-swimming-pools-segregation/


Seems pretty petty right?

 

[Route 45]

I agree there's no point in practicing then but what religion isn't watered down? A nation of Christians here certainly don't follow Jesus' example.

I'm not sure why you'd have any qualms about Islam being watered down to 'nearly pointless' it just joins the ranks of dozens of other harmless religions at that point, which I'd think you'd encourage, not lambaste.

If modern day Christianity was comparable to modern day Islam with respect to the destruction caused, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. The plain spoken commands to kill unbelievers in the Islamic text does not lend itself to being watered down. One may rightfully argue that the terrorists are actually the true adherents to the word, with all other Muslims simply ignoring the parts of the Quran that make them uncomfortable. This can, of course, be said of other religions. Many Christians do indeed cherry-pick the bible to match their own comfort level. But Jesus wasn't a violent warlord.

 

[indiucky]

A nation of Christians here certainly don't follow Jesus' example.

That's a broad of a brush you are painting with there jludo....I am not a Muslim so I tend to back away from generalizations of Muslims or Atheists...Do you know why???? Because I hate to generalize about something I am not a participant in....

I would never say something like "All Atheists are closed minded, science hating, pretentious, pseudo intellectuals who read a Krauss, Dawkins, Sagan or Hawking book and think they have suddenly solved the age old mystery of why we are here...A philosophical question they are naively looking for the answer to from physicists and biologists..."

No...Because that would make me look like a pretentious *********...And I respect others enough to not generalize something of which I am not a part of....

Which is why some of my closest INGO friends include a liberal, two Atheists, and a Muslim.....If it bothers you when folks generalize about Muslims you should not do the same to Christians...That is called hypocrisy and inconsistency...You have enough good ideas and thoughts that you post that should be taken seriously to say something that will just make you no different than those you rail against...

IMHO....

 

[Jludo]

If modern day Christianity was comparable to modern day Islam with respect to the destruction caused, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. The plain spoken commands to kill unbelievers in the Islamic text does not lend itself to being watered down. One may rightfully argue that the terrorists are actually the true adherents to the word, with all other Muslims simply ignoring the parts of the Quran that make them uncomfortable. This can, of course, be said of other religions. Many Christians do indeed cherry-pick the bible to match their own comfort level. But Jesus wasn't a violent warlord.

In the bible god gives commands to kill non believers based solely on their non belief. You're right Jesus was morally superior to muhammad in his teachings but either book can be used to justify whatever message you want to spread. There's no reason we can't allow a moderate Islam to exist alongside other religions, even if you think the moderate Muslim isn't being a genuine adherent to their ideology as you interpret it.

 

[Route 45]

In the bible god gives commands to kill non believers based solely on their non belief. You're right Jesus was morally superior to muhammad in his teachings but either book can be used to justify whatever message you want to spread. There's no reason we can't allow a moderate Islam to exist alongside other religions, even if you think the moderate Muslim isn't being a genuine adherent to their ideology as you interpret it.

There is that word again. "Interpret". Plain spoken commands from your prophet do not need interpretations.
If I make the statement, "The sky is blue," how would you interpret that?
Words have meanings. Period.