dialamah

There has been all that in the past. Didn't call it those names, perhaps due to lack of internet, but the attitudes were the same.

This is a pretty small forum. I think FB, reddit, twitter and sites with a lot of commentators would serve them better.

Thankfully, not all Christians subscribe to Betsy's belief. As far as I'm concerned, she is from that subgroup of Christians who give Christianity a bad name as they support and condone terrible and even deadly actions in the name of their God.

Assumption: I would refuse to read anything critical of Islam. I read things critical of Islam, often. I've even posted some of what I read here. Just because I've objected to over-the-top anti-Islam rhetoric and pointed out where posted stories are either outright false, very exaggerated or disputed by people who are directly affected by such stories doesn't mean I think Islam or any religion is above criticism. It's not wrong-headed of me to think Bawer critical of Islam, given that both his detractors and supporters agree that he is. One side thinks he goes too far. I'm not highly critical of him but I'm certainly not ready to assume he doesn't have an agenda or that he's a fair or unbiased commentator. Yes Wikipedia has its limitations but I think for the purpose of learning a little bit about an author, it does well enough.

Why would I read a book described as "racism as criticism" whose "hyperventilated rhetoric tips from actual critique into Islamophobia" merely because you claim its fair? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Bawer

Only going by what others have said about him. He has written books that are critical of Islam and Christianity and some people have thought they were great and others have thought they were biased and inaccurate. Is that not what "controversial" means? And since you only post book excerpts that criticize Islam or Muslims, how am I to know that this one is "fair" and not just supportive of your negative view of Islam?

I see. Perhaps it happened long enough ago that it doesn't show up in any news stories. I looked up Bruce Bawer, it seems he's made a career of writing books that criticize and are controversial. He doesn't seem to like religion much, that's for sure.

I tried to find a story about that but was unsuccessful. Can you provide a cite? Thanks.

The other thread is not answering the question of why a self-styled Christian would support a public figure who lies, is a bigot, who is an adulterer and who has defrauded others.

I use this one: https://www.privateinternetaccess.com. $40.00 a year, five devices and I haven't had any problems in the year and a half I've been using it.

You start a topic expounding on your personal opinion about what an unverified historical figure meant when he said certain things, and demand that people not contradict your personal opinion with their own? This is oddly similar behavior to our resident religious teenager.

This is what all religious people say when interpreting their religious books.

Thanks so much for telling me who I am, what I should do and what I don't understand. Thank you for saving me from thinking outside the ideological box you've decided I belong in.

This is merely your interpretation. I've Christian friends who believe tolerance and acceptance includes everyone, not just other Christians and that compassion for the world requires more than just praying. But thanks for providing insight into how the Bible can be interpreted to support your political ideology.

Here, let me simplify it for you: 1. I haven't read all of your posts, just a few here and there. 2. I felt I understood the ones I read well enough, and had nothing to add - so I didn't address you. 3. Your comment about the brilliant scientist and two years of his life makes no sense to me, so I have nothing to say about that. 4. I find you less appealing on closer acquaintance and am thinking I should avoid reading any more of your posts at all. 5. Over and out.

Sorry, I've no idea what you are talking about. It just so happens that I don't read every single post on here, so perhaps I missed some key information. Anyway, this is getting far off-topic and I don't want to get swatted again today.

Address you? You mean, using H.E. instead of Hot Enough? Probably because I have RSI and like to take typing shortcuts whenever I think I can and still be understood.

Perhaps H.E. is DoP's alter-ego. I guess the point might be that the West's actions don't get discussed to the degree that Muslim terror attacks get discussed. Why is an attack in which 5 people were killed rate a thread here, but an attack in which 200 were killed does not? Are the 200 Muslims caught by a coalition bombing raid of less importance than the 5 people in the UK? We're told it was because of a truck left full of explosives by the bad guys that was really why those people were killed, but who knows for sure? Certainly I don't. I find the whole situation quite disheartening whether it's yet another terror attack or wondering if my 'side' is lying to me about the people they are targeting and killing. But I guess I'll soon be swatted for off-topic, so I'll end this tangent now. And yes, it's really too bad about your English. I have always envied people who can speak multiple languages; it seems to me that learning a foreign language gives you unique insight into a different world, especially if you are fluent enough to understand their jokes and innuendos.

I see from a reply to HE that Altai has said something ridiculous about trashing the quran is equivalent to murdering people ... Don't bother looking it up for me. But I disagree with that completely, FWIW. Perhaps this is true " I now visualize a teenager pounding away on a keyboard, being as outrageous as possible in what she posts."

I draw the line where someone feels threatened or where physical assault occurs. If someone rips apart a Quran at a meeting, that is violent but not threatening. Ripping up a Quran on a Muslim family's front walk would be violent and harassing, and possibly threatening. I don't agree with Altai that the act of ripping up a Quran should result in jail. I believe I understand what H.E. is trying to say: Altai's cultural norms are different than ours and we are only too happy to criticize and condemn her just as we (or some of us, anyway) do Muslims generally. At the same time, we ignore our own culture's acts of violence and inhumanity because we so firmly believe we are in the right. The innocent victims of our violence are not comforted because we aren't Daesh; they are just as injured or dead as they would be if Daesh were their attacker. But most people in the West ignore or are unaware of the actual extent of our collateral damage, partly because our kills don"t get the exposure Daesh kills get; our governments certainly aren't forthcoming about this issue and the media reports on it are often ignored, downplayed or disputed. It helps that we are so certain of our moral high ground that we simply discount the reality of the horror our military interventions impose on the people in the countries we are "helping". And I'm not pointing fingers either; I do exactly the same thing. In my heart I know Daesh is evil but its only in my head that I understand that the States and Canada and all our allies together have killed as many or perhaps more innocent people than has Daesh. I don't believe that either Altai or H.E. think tearing up a Quran is as bad as killing 100 people. But I haven't read every post on this thread so if they said that somewhere please do quote it for me, if you want.

It's still a violent action. A non-violent way of expressing great frustration would be to say "I'm very frustrated". Breaking things, wrecking things and throwing things are still violent, even if they aren't directed at a person. Just ask anyone who lives with a person who uses those tactics during an argument.

What freedoms is the Government of Canada withholding from you?

Yeah, the Supreme Court might, unless they find it against US law.

Hmmm... But if he also isn't able to get the travel ban past the courts and fails to build the wall ...

Why do you think that?