DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 And a thought experiment: Is DogOnPorch marked for death? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 1 minute ago, DogOnPorch said: Your ignorance of what is actually in the Quran is not a defense for individual Muslims who actually do. It is not intended to be. I am stating that whatever is in the Quran, it is as open to interpretation as any other religious text, and any notion that the Quran itself disqualifies that fails to take humans into account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 1 minute ago, DogOnPorch said: And a thought experiment: Is DogOnPorch marked for death? You are marked for death, as am I. The question is who wants to kill us? As I said earlier, if it were all Mulsims, my bones would be in Undercliffe Cemetary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Just now, bcsapper said: It is not intended to be. I am stating that whatever is in the Quran, it is as open to interpretation as any other religious text, and any notion that the Quran itself disqualifies that fails to take humans into account. More acceptable casualties argument. Sorry. So those "few" Muslims that "misread" the Quran are all we have to worry about. That's hardly a very big pile of corpses at all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) 29 minutes ago, dialamah said: I should hate all men and hold them guilty because one of them violently raped a relative, many more of them rape other women, men and children. 90% of all rapists are men, and they rape 100s of thousands of others every year around the world; about 500 per year in Canada. If you are a man, then clearly you have the same beliefs as the men who rape and cannot be trusted to not rape at any given moment. If men truly believed rape to be wrong, they'd be condemning it a lot more, especially the guys who don't rape. If you deny anything I've said here than you sympathize with rapists and probably are one I see where you're trying to go with this, and I would agree with the statements if you were to add: 1) All men are part of a formal "group" or "religion" that says it's expected that they rape women, and 2) there were 500 rapes per year in Canada where the men stated they did it for said group/religion. Anyone agreeing with those actions actually would be sympathizing with rapists, and there would probably be a significant chance that they are also rapists. If this were the case, you probably should hate all men and hold them guilty. Edited May 23, 2017 by Hydraboss sp 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Just now, DogOnPorch said: More acceptable casualties argument. Sorry. So those "few" Muslims that "misread" the Quran are all we have to worry about. That's hardly a very big pile of corpses at all! I don't know where you get the word "acceptable". The pile of corpses is there due to those who put it there. What is acceptable about that, or the acknowledgment that not all Muslims were complicit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 2 minutes ago, Hydraboss said: I see where you're trying to go with this, and I would agree with the statements if you were to add: 1) All men are part of a formal "group" or "religion" that says it's expected that they rape women, and 2) there were 500 rapes per year in Canada where the men stated they did it for said group/religion. Anyone agreeing with those actions actually would be sympathizing with rapists, and there would probably be a significant chance that there are also rapists. If this were the case, you probably should hate all men and hold them guilty. Being a man who has never raped anyone, I would have to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Just now, bcsapper said: I don't know where you get the word "acceptable". The pile of corpses is there due to those who put it there. What is acceptable about that, or the acknowledgment that not all Muslims were complicit? Acceptable casualties sure fits so I'll use it...and continue to use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Just now, DogOnPorch said: Acceptable casualties sure fits so I'll use it...and continue to use it. But you can't actually explain it. Fair enough, you're under no obligation to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 And even Dialamah can't find any good bits in the Quran...lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Just now, bcsapper said: But you can't actually explain it. Fair enough, you're under no obligation to do so. Islamic terrorism is just part and parcel of life in the modern world. As per London's mayor... Get with der program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Does anyone on here understand the concept of the "individual"? It often seems that both sides of the Islam argument really do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Just now, bcsapper said: Does anyone on here understand the concept of the "individual"? It often seems that both sides of the Islam argument really do not. Acceptable casualties. Not all Muslims are murderous terrorist scum. Hardly any! Just look at how small that corpse pile is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Only 22 this time...perhaps a few more acceptable casualties as the severely wounded die. Mmmmmmm....kebab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Just now, DogOnPorch said: Acceptable casualties. Not all Muslims are murderous terrorist scum. Hardly any! Just look at how small that corpse pile is... Again, not bad, but no indication of what is actually meant by acceptable casualties, or your reference to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Just now, bcsapper said: Again, not bad, but no indication of what is actually meant by acceptable casualties, or your reference to it. Acceptable means exactly that, my friend. Isn't it fun defending Nazism...I mean Islam?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Just now, DogOnPorch said: Acceptable means exactly that, my friend. Isn't it fun defending Nazism...I mean Islam?? Not good enough, I'm afraid. I know what the dictionary definition is. I need to know what you mean by it, and how it applies to our argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Just now, bcsapper said: Not good enough, I'm afraid. I know what the dictionary definition is. I need to know what you mean by it, and how it applies to our argument. Are you kidding me? Islam is Peace...my mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) 1 minute ago, DogOnPorch said: Are you kidding me? Islam is Peace...my mistake. No, I'm not. I'm very serious. How does my acceptance that there are Muslims who do not kill imply my acceptance of those who do? Edited May 23, 2017 by bcsapper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 I 38 minutes ago, dialamah said: I should hate all men and hold them guilty because one of them violently raped a relative, many more of them rape other women, men and children. 90% of all rapists are men, and they rape 100s of thousands of others every year around the world; about 500 per year in Canada. If you are a man, then clearly you have the same beliefs as the men who rape and cannot be trusted to not rape at any given moment. If men truly believed rape to be wrong, they'd be condemning it a lot more, especially the guys who don't rape. If you deny anything I've said here than you sympathize with rapists and probably are one Bogus argument and not logical. All men do not claim to be followers of a holy book that tells men to rape women. That's where your argument falls flat. The fact that most Muslims do not use violence or terrorism does not negate the fact that the Quran holy book teaches violence and that a small percentage take it literally. If there are one billion Muslims in the world and a small percentage believe it literally, say for example 5% that would 5% of one billion people, which is a large number. That would be 50 million. If only 2% take it literally, that would be 20 million. Because of the large number of Muslims in the world, even a small percentage who believe jihad is a legitimate part of Islam it still a large number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 1 minute ago, bcsapper said: No, I'm not. I'm very serious. Oh well...ask those questions right up until the next attack. Perhaps then acceptable casualties will make sense. But, if you're unfamiliar with the term historically, it comes from the US Army Air Corp...more specifically from the 8th Air Force. Acceptable casualties were how many bombers you as the Allied commander could afford to lose each mission over Germany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 ...to add...it's not that the USAAC invented the words or the concept....they were the first to assign it a % number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said: Oh well...ask those questions right up until the next attack. Perhaps then acceptable casualties will make sense. But, if you're unfamiliar with the term historically, it comes from the US Army Air Corp...more specifically from the 8th Air Force. Acceptable casualties were how many bombers you as the Allied commander could afford to lose each mission over Germany. Sorry, you missed my edit. " How does my acceptance that there are Muslims who do not kill imply my acceptance of those who do?" (or their handywork, to be more precise) Your definition of acceptable casualties still has no relevance to my part in this discussion. To reiterate: Does anyone on here understand the concept of the "individual"? That said, your comments seem to imply a way forward. I'm curious as to what it is. Edited May 23, 2017 by bcsapper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 2 minutes ago, bcsapper said: Sorry, you missed my edit. " How does my acceptance that there are Muslims who do not kill imply my acceptance of those who do?" Your definition of acceptable casualties still has no relevance to my part in this discussion. To reiterate: Does anyone on here understand the concept of the "individual"? That said, your comments seem to imply a way forward. I'm curious as to what it is. Many Nazis never hurt a fly. I'm sure there were many individual cases. This I call: The Oskar Schindler was a good Nazi Argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 7 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said: That said, your comments seem to imply a way forward. I'm curious as to what it is. The way forward is just that. Growing-up, I had dreams as a kid of living on the Moon. In 1970...such things not only seemed possible but likely. I'd never have guessed that the religion described in 1001 Arabian Nights on my bookshelf would rise to hold the modern world hostage. Resentful? You bet. Vengeful? I hope not. But that wasn't my kid splattered across Ms Grande's concert. Now Islam's defenders come-up with the usual hoohaa...like Islam is the victim here...poor Islam...and such. I say FVCK Islam. It needs to be told that in uncertain terms or you might as well submit. I had my run-in with the IRA...I even know the name of the fellow who did the deed. A changed man, apparently. But he wasn't motivated by Catholicism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts