eyeball Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 Which allies would that be? Why do you people constantly need to have long established facts repeated for you? A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
dialamah Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 I think the biggest difference between the Bible and the Quran is that most followers of the former reject the more heinous aspects of that text, while many followers of the latter clearly don't. -k If there are a total of 500,000 (a high estimate, there's a scarcity of accurate data, so I doubled what I could find) Islamic extremists out fighting the "good fight", out of 1.6 Billion Muslims worldwide, that's less than 1%. That doesn't sound like "many" to me. One could add in the number of Muslims worldwide who absolutely agree with what Daesh and other extremists groups are doing - let's double the amount of actual followers to 1 million for a total of 1.5 Million Muslims who don't reject the more 'heinous' aspects of the Koran - still at less than 1% of the total. Still not many. I don't know how many millions of Muslims worldwide would have to subscribe to the most violent of Koran teachings to constitute "many" of them, but given that we have less than 1% of active fighters, I don't think it's even close to 'many'. I don't disagree that Muslims worldwide have a more conservative approach to life, but then so do most of the Asian and South Asian immigrants who currently make their home in Canada, and who are not imposing their particular beliefs on us. I have no reason to think the Muslim population would be any different.
marcus Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 (edited) Yes, you would see the same laws in Iran as in Saudi Arabia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_of_sharia_law_by_country And, instead of defending terrorism, why not say both drone strikes and terrorism are wrong, instead of the- but, drones. When did I say "but"? I was giving you a perspective. I was pretty clear about all of it being wrong. Terrorist attacks happen in different ways. Are you one of those who thinks that these terrorists do what they do because of no reason but religion? You just posted a link to the countries that practice forms of Sharia law and it does not dispute what I said. There are different forms. Please pay attention to what you're responding to, when you do. Otherwise you are wasting people's time. Edited November 21, 2015 by marcus "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
Hal 9000 Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 I don't want to make it ONLY that, however it seems pretty clear that when the discussion is about Islamophobia, you are into that portion of the definition. Sorry, I really don't know. The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball
marcus Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 No, you don't need religion to do shitty things, but that wasn't the comparison. The comparison that I was addressing was between the bible and the quran. So you only want to discuss slaughtering people in one way and not another? Again, the results are in: People are killed because their lives are worthless by those who kill them. Do you support drone strikes that have left thousands of innocent people dead? "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
Hal 9000 Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 So you only want to discuss slaughtering people in one way and not another? Again, the results are in: People are killed because their lives are worthless by those who kill them. Do you support drone strikes that have left thousands of innocent people dead? What are we talking about , Old testament Vs. quran or terrorism Vs. drone strikes? We can talk abut the "how" or the "why", but you people keep mixing things in order to make a certain point. I'm just not sure that thousands are getting slaughtered in the name of the "old Testament" bible - maybe they are. The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball
drummindiver Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 (edited) When did I say "but"? I was giving you a perspective. I was pretty clear about all of it being wrong. Terrorist attacks happen in different ways. Are you one of those who thinks that these terrorists do what they do because of no reason but religion? You just posted a link to the countries that practice forms of Sharia law and it does not dispute what I said. There are different forms. Please pay attention to what you're responding to, when you do. Otherwise you are wasting people's time. " You don't see the same laws in Iran, as you would in Saudi Arabia." Please, pay attention and actually deny the thing you're denying. And, to be clear, I looked, and could not find one iota of you decrying terrorist attacks. Well, except for what you perceive we are doing. Oye vei. Edited November 21, 2015 by drummindiver
marcus Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 (edited) What are we talking about , Old testament Vs. quran or terrorism Vs. drone strikes? We can talk abut the "how" or the "why", but you people keep mixing things in order to make a certain point. I'm just not sure that thousands are getting slaughtered in the name of the "old Testament" bible - maybe they are. We have talked about a lot of things. Right now, we are talking about killing people and those who do it and support it. Whether they use religion to kill people or use nationalism, the end result is the same. Why is it morally okay for some people to kill by drone strikes that kills innocent people but not okay to kill innocent people by a suicide vest? Edited November 21, 2015 by marcus "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
marcus Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 " You don't see the same laws in Iran, as you would in Saudi Arabia." Please, pay attention and actually deny the thing you're denying. And, to be clear, I looked, and could not find one iota of you decrying terrorist attacks. Well, except for what you perceive we are doing. Oye vei. Let me spell it out for you then, so you're not confused: Some people, including me, fully condemn terrorist attacks by Muslims or anyone else, and at the same time we fully condemn other types of terrorist attacks, such as drone attacks that kill innocent people. Where do you stand on that? "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
dialamah Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 What are we talking about , Old testament Vs. quran or terrorism Vs. drone strikes? We can talk abut the "how" or the "why", but you people keep mixing things in order to make a certain point. I'm just not sure that thousands are getting slaughtered in the name of the "old Testament" bible - maybe they are. Most, if not all, Western Countries consider themselves based on "Christian" values. I fail to see how "Christian" values are consistent with killing innocents in other lands, any more than "Koranic" values are. Of course, we (our governments) justify this by claiming to support freedom for others, or wanting to deliver us from the evil that is "them" (or maybe they just want to make sure of access to oil), but really, in the end, what the Bible says and what our country and our "Christian" governments do are at odds.
drummindiver Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 (edited) "Are you one of those who thinks that these terrorists do what they do because of no reason but religion?No, I'm one of those who thinks Islam is an ideology that incorporates politics, religion, law, land acquisition, and perpetrates terror for any and all these reasons. And more. Kidnapping young ladies and forcing them to become sexual slaves is for personal gratification. Edited November 21, 2015 by drummindiver
drummindiver Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 Let me spell it out for you then, so you're not confused: Some people, including me, fully condemn terrorist attacks by Muslims or anyone else, and at the same time we fully condemn other types of terrorist attacks, such as drone attacks that kill innocent people. Where do you stand on that? Drone attacks against terrorists are needed. Will there be civilian casualties? Maybe.
marcus Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 . Are you one of those who thinks that these terrorists do what they do because of no reason but religion? No, I'm one of those who thinks Islam is an ideology that incorporates politics, religion, law, land acquisition, and perpetrates terror for any and all these reasons. And more. Kidnapping young ladies and forcing them to become sexual slaves is for personal gratification. Besides ISIS and Boko Harem (or a couple of other groups), which other so-called Muslims have kidnapped women and used them for sexual slaves? You have a disease that will go away once you're able to recognize it. You generalize because you don't think. "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
marcus Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 Drone attacks against terrorists are needed. Will there be civilian casualties? Maybe. Way to 'splain that one: 41 men targeted but 1,147 people killed: US drone strikes You are no different than the fanatics who support the killing done by Muslim terrorists or any other terrorists. "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
dialamah Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 (edited) Drone attacks against terrorists are needed. Will there be civilian casualties? Maybe. So yesterday on reading a summary of a study of Muslims attitudes toward violence, it was pointed out that it was Americans/Westerners who were most likely to believe that civilian causalities were 'acceptable'. To me, you are at the same moral level as any ISIS sympathizer or supporter. Edited November 21, 2015 by dialamah
Darkling Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 Besides ISIS and Boko Harem (or a couple of other groups), which other so-called Muslims have kidnapped women and used them for sexual slaves?Muhammed, peace be upon Him.
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 (edited) So yesterday on reading a summary of a study of Muslims attitudes toward violence, it was pointed out that it was Americans/Westerners who were most likely to believe that civilian causalities were 'acceptable'. To me, you are at the same moral level as any ISIS sympathizer or supporter. Americans are "Westerners"....why make the distinction ? Or why not Canadians/Westerners (see topic title) ? Either way, it is true because the beliefs and policies have nothing to do with "morals". Edited November 21, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 Americans are "Westerners"....why make the distinction ? Or why not Canadians/Westerners ? Either way, it is true because the beliefs and policies have nothing to do with "morals". Maybe because Canadians have different moral standards?
dialamah Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 Maybe because Canadians have different moral standards? No, they don't unfortunately. It's a war thing: civilian casualties are unavoidable. Canadian authorities ignore/downplay their bombing raids that are reported to have injured non-combatants, just as every Western country does. Apparently, however, we think it's more "ok" than Muslims do.
marcus Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 (edited) I find many verses and quotes in the Old, New and the Quran despicable. Why are we seeing this selectiveness by the Islamophobes, like it doesn't happen in other books and teachings? The Bible says a man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and screws them!: When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) Any more man-written text we want to examine? This is how you get a male Hebrew slave to become a permanent slave by keeping his wife and children hostage until he says he wants to become a permanent slave. If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT) Edited November 21, 2015 by marcus "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
eyeball Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 Maybe because Canadians have different moral standards? No. I think that argument can easily be dismissed by our actions. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 No, they don't unfortunately. It's a war thing: civilian casualties are unavoidable. Canadian authorities ignore/downplay their bombing raids that are reported to have injured non-combatants, just as every Western country does. Apparently, however, we think it's more "ok" than Muslims do. Apparently not, as some Muslims clearly have no difficulty with "civilian casualities", as that is often the explicit goal, even against far more, fellow Muslims. There are other legal and liability differences having nothing to do with "morals". Economics trumps Virtue.
socialist Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 Apparently not, as some Muslims clearly have no difficulty with "civilian casualities", as that is often the explicit goal, even against far more, fellow Muslims. There are other legal and liability differences having nothing to do with "morals". Do you think the UK parliament will vote to bomb Syria next week? Thankful to have become a free thinker.
drummindiver Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 Besides ISIS and Boko Harem (or a couple of other groups), which other so-called Muslims have kidnapped women and used them for sexual slaves? You have a disease that will go away once you're able to recognize it. You generalize because you don't think. Well, starting with the first muslim, lots.. You know, Mohammad, with his 9 year old bride. And millions since then. But you go ahead and make excuses for that. I'll just sit over here and not think with my similarly aged partner.
drummindiver Posted November 21, 2015 Report Posted November 21, 2015 No, they don't unfortunately. It's a war thing: civilian casualties are unavoidable. Canadian authorities ignore/downplay their bombing raids that are reported to have injured non-combatants, just as every Western country does. Apparently, however, we think it's more "ok" than Muslims do. Bullshit. Canadians aren't out targeting civilians.
Recommended Posts