Republican wants the US to be more like Saudi Arabia

[Guest TrueMetis]

Amen to that, and the proof is in this very thread: here. TrueMetis says that all religions think those with different beliefs are going to go to hell, and not a peep. I, however, and raked through the coals for saying it about Islam. Also, not one word of objection to what I said about Catholicism or my own religion, but boy-oh-boy, how dare I say anything about Islam.

And again, these people think they are the tolerant ones.

The problem with what you are saying here is we pointed out this is true of all religion, while you decided to focus on one specifically.

Edited August 6, 2010 by TrueMetis

[Guest American Woman]

The problem with what you are saying here is we pointed out this is true of all religion, while you decided to focus on one specifically.

This thread is about Islam, and the comments I'm responding to are about Islam, so of course I "decided" to "focus on one," though not "specifically" as you claim; I clearly said I believe there are aspects of other religions that suck, too, but no one really gave a damn ie: criticized me for that, so that was the end of my "focusing" on other religions. Or maybe I should have just kept posting to myself?

:rolleyes:

[Guest TrueMetis]

This thread is about Islam, and the comments I'm responding to are about Islam, so of course I "decided" to "focus on one," though not "specifically" as you claim; I clearly said I believe there are aspects of other religions that suck, too, but no one really gave a damn ie: criticized me for that, so that was the end of my "focusing" on other religions. Or maybe I should have just kept posting to myself?

:rolleyes:

That may be a good idea.

[WIP]

Amen to that, and the proof is in this very thread: here. TrueMetis says that all religions believe that they are the only ones that are going to go to heaven, and not a peep. I, however, and raked through the coals for saying it about Islam. Also, not one word of objection to what I said about Catholicism or my own religion, but boy-oh-boy, how dare I say anything about Islam.

And again, these people think they are the tolerant ones.

Yes, it was only a matter of time before you played the victim card!

I challenged your attacks against Catholicism and blanket condemnation of religion in general also, on the basis that a religion's doctrines does not inform about how the adherents understand the teachings....but unfortunately that was probably on a post that 'you read no further.' As for your friends DOP and Bonam, they won't or cannot back up what they say, and just carry on hurling abuse...so there is nowhere to go with them either.

And, for the record, I wasn't happy that some who I generally agree with like Bloodyminded, also joined in on this stupid, immature "all religions suck" meme, but I'm going to drop out of this thread anyway, because I don't see anything to gain by discussing religion and belief systems on this board.

[DogOnPorch]

WIP: And, for the record, I wasn't happy that some who I generally agree with like Bloodyminded, also joined in on this stupid, immature "all religions suck" meme, but I'm going to drop out of this thread anyway, because I don't see anything to gain by discussing religion and belief systems on this board.

Oh well...

Edited August 6, 2010 by DogOnPorch

[Guest American Woman]

That may be a good idea.

If I want to engage in intelligent discussion, it may be the only solution.

[Guest American Woman]

Oddly, it's not myself or Bonam or AW that are starting all these religious-based threads.

Exactly. But don't expect them to get it.

[DogOnPorch]

Well to be fair...you did start one...lol.

[Bonam]

As for your friends DOP and Bonam, they won't or cannot back up what they say, and just carry on hurling abuse...so there is nowhere to go with them either.

I back up what I say, if it needs backing up.

[DogOnPorch]

I back up what I say, if it needs backing up.

I count myself in here. Ditto...

[Sir Bandelot]

Yes, it was only a matter of time before you played the victim card!

I challenged your attacks against Catholicism and blanket condemnation of religion in general also, on the basis that a religion's doctrines does not inform about how the adherents understand the teachings....but unfortunately that was probably on a post that 'you read no further.'

I would have joined you in that, WIP, but I was not wearing my rubber boots and did not care to wade into such filth, with no hope of getting anywhere. But for the record now, I don't consider telling someone their religion "sucks" to be in any way tolerant or respectful.

[DogOnPorch]

I would have joined you in that, WIP, but I was not wearing my rubber boots and did not care to wade into such filth, with no hope of getting anywhere. But for the record now, I don't consider telling someone their religion "sucks" to be in any way tolerant or respectful.

Freedom of religion includes my right to say your religion sucks eggs.

[kimmy]

That's correct.

After a few centuries have passed, are you trying to say that Muslims are being "insensitive" to Christians for wounds committed so long ago?

Because no Christians are sensitive to such a thing. People bring it up as further excuse to demonize Muslims. That's it. The idea that the namne is "insensitive" is a preposterous pretence.

The claim was not that the name was insensitive, the claim was that the name carries symbolism.

Look: if a bunch of angry Anglos burn down some building in Old Quebec, and me and some of my dirty Alberta oil money friends buy the site to build a headquarters for our English language-rights advocacy group, we'd have to be pretty stupid to name it Place James Wolfe.

-k

[bloodyminded]

The claim was not that the name was insensitive, the claim was that the name carries symbolism.

Most names carry symbolism, either explicitly or metaphorically.

But if it's not insensitive, then there is no issue.

Look: if a bunch of angry Anglos burn down some building in Old Quebec, and me and some of my dirty Alberta oil money friends buy the site to build a headquarters for our English language-rights advocacy group, we'd have to be pretty stupid to name it Place James Wolfe.

If the name raised outrage, then yes, a poor decision.

"Cordoba house" is not raising outrage. A few conservative commentators desperate for a shotgun blast in the dark, and that's it. I daresay New Yorkers are not up in arms about the name, know nothing of its symbolism, and couldn't care less.

So, not an issue.

Edited August 12, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Sir Bandelot]

Freedom of religion includes my right to say your religion sucks eggs.

We know. The discussion was whether that is considered tolerant or respectful.

Don't worry, no one wants to take away your right to misbehave.

[DogOnPorch]

We know. The discussion was whether that is considered tolerant or respectful.

Don't worry, no one wants to take away your right to misbehave.

It's as respectful as religion deserves. Just because you worship an invisible being doesn't mean I'm going to. Likewise jumping under a bus.

[Guest American Woman]

Most names carry symbolism, either explicitly or metaphorically.

But if it's not insensitive, then there is no issue.

If the name raised outrage, then yes, a poor decision.

"Cordoba house" is not raising outrage. A few conservative commentators desperate for a shotgun blast in the dark, and that's it. I daresay New Yorkers are not up in arms about the name, know nothing of its symbolism, and couldn't care less.

So, not an issue.

Yes, the original name was an issue, and not just to "a few conservative commentators desperate for a shotgun blast in the dark."

According to Former Muslim Walid Shoebat, who knows what the name means to Muslims/Islam, the name was "changed for political reasons;" the name originally given, Cordoba House, meant that "Muslims had conquered America."

link

You keep repeating that not all Muslims are extremists, but it's as if you just dismiss the fact that conversely, not all Muslims are moderates.

[bloodyminded]

Yes, the original name was an issue, and not just to "a few conservative commentators desperate for a shotgun blast in the dark."

According to Former Muslim Walid Shoebat, who knows what the name means to Muslims/Islam, the name was "changed for political reasons;" the name originally given, Cordoba House, meant that "Muslims had conquered America."

link

You keep repeating that not all Muslims are extremists, but it's as if you just dismiss the fact that conversely, not all Muslims are moderates.

I'm not dismissing it at all.

I'm just refusing to assume anyone is an extremist without good evidence.

That's just elementary logic...and has a basis in elementary morality.

[Guest American Woman]

I'm not dismissing it at all.

I'm just refusing to assume anyone is an extremist without good evidence.

That's just elementary logic...and has a basis in elementary morality.

No one is assuming anything about individuals. This issue isn't about individual Muslims. It's about the mosque/project, all of Islam, and that includes extremists.

[bloodyminded]

No one is assuming anything about individuals. This issue isn't about individual Muslims. It's about the mosque/project, all of Islam, and that includes extremists.

Well, by your formulation, it also includes non-extremists...a lot more than extremists.

[Guest American Woman]

Well, by your formulation, it also includes non-extremists...a lot more than extremists.

So what's your point? The two can't be separated, so some refuse to accept the extremists in this situation under the circumstances, especially since the original name meant "Muslims conquered America." Here's the thing; Islam being what it is right now, and that includes extremists, needs to recognize that non-Muslims aren't obligated to be the only ones understanding and accepting and tolerating. It's a two way street. There are times when Muslims have to be the ones who are understanding and accepting and tolerating. Of where non-Muslims are coming from. And this is one of those times.

[bloodyminded]

So what's your point? The two can't be separated, so some refuse to accept the extremists in this situation under the circumstances, especially since the original name meant "Muslims conquered America." Here's the thing; Islam being what it is right now, and that includes extremists, needs to recognize that non-Muslims aren't obligated to be the only ones understanding and accepting and tolerating. It's a two way street. There are times when Muslims have to be the ones who are understanding and accepting and tolerating. Of where non-Muslims are coming from. And this is one of those times.

That's part of the point of the centre.

And no, according to your link, Cordoba" doesn't mean that at all; it has nothing to do with America, and in fact pre-dates the United States by a long shot.

Edited August 12, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Guest American Woman]

That's part of the point of the centre.

And no, according to your link, Cordoba" doesn't mean that at all; it has nothing to do with America, and in fact pre-dates the United States by a long shot.

Did you listen to the man speak? I quoted him. He said that the name Cordoba, the context of how it is now used and understood in Islam, meant "Muslims have conquered America;" which most definitely has everything to do with America. He's talking about the name, giving that name to the project. Not the original definition of the name way back when. Obviously that had nothing to do with America, and obviously everyone here referring to it realizes that.

Edited August 12, 2010 by American Woman

[bloodyminded]

Did you listen to the man speak? I quoted him. He said that the name Cordoba, the context of how it is now used and understood in Islam, meant "Muslims have conquered America;" which most definitely has everything to do with America.

Now you're backtracking. First you state that "the original name meant that 'Muslims conquered America.'"

Now (correctly) you point out that it's one man's opinion; and that he's a Muslim does not grant him supreme auhtority on the matter, since surely other Muslims, of even more moderate cast, would no doubt disagree with him. Hell, he usues "Islamic" and "Islamist" interchangeably in his talk. Perhaps he does in fact consider them interchangeable....but lots would disgaree, of course.

[Guest American Woman]

Now you're backtracking. First you state that "the original name meant that 'Muslims conquered America.'"

Now (correctly) you point out that it's one man's opinion; and that he's a Muslim does not grant him supreme auhtority on the matter, since surely other Muslims, of even more moderate cast, would no doubt disagree with him. Hell, he usues "Islamic" and "Islamist" interchangeably in his talk. Perhaps he does in fact consider them interchangeable....but lots would disgaree, of course.

I'm not backtracking at all. I was referring to what the name originally given to this project meant in regards to this project; the context of it in regards to this project.

Furthermore, I obviously pointed out in my original post that it was one man's opinion as I clearly named him in my post with the quote and the link I provided.

As I said, it's not just nuts, as you claimed, who feel this name was deliberately chosen.

This is someone who is very aware of what the name means in Islam, so I find it odd that you so easily and completely dismiss what he has to say, knowing nothing about it yourself. The name WAS changed. That's a fact.

Edited August 12, 2010 by American Woman