Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 It seems that everyone gets from each religion what they want. You and others can look for 'peaceful' quotes from Islamic texts and try to match them with 'violent' quotes from the bible until the cows come home. It's not going to change the reality of how the followers of these two religions behave in the real world, or the types of societies which have evolved under these two very different religions. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 You may have extensive knowledge of the bible, but it's clear you have very little knowledge of the Quran. There have been a number of quotes from the Koran posted in this topic, by myself among others, which you evidently have chosen to ignore for some reason. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 I've read it -- have you? The problem with the progressives is since they don't take religion seriously they can't imagine anyone else doing so. You point out violent, intolerant quotes from the Islamic texts and they'll just shrug it off, confident Muslims won't take such things seriously - because they don't. It's a weird kind of collective ignorance from people who, while claiming they understand that other cultures are completely different, still expect all other cultures to behave and think just like they do. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 The countries that identify as primarily Christian go out and kill because we have an ideology that informs us of our superiority over these other countries. Really? Do you have examples of this happening today? Our ideology is about freedom/democracy/human rights, so we can feel morally justified. You don't think those beliefs ARE morally just? In actuality, we Christian nations pursue a much uglier ideology, focused on oil, capitalism and self-interest. As opposed to other countries? Which other countries of any religion do not focus on self-interest and self-enrichment? How is ISIS any different? Your position seems to be one of moral bankruptcy which says there is no ideology or goal which is superior to any other, and thus any attempt to defend or expand one or another is of equal moral equivalence. Under such an equivalence, the Nazis and the Allies were both equally bad since both were pushing or defending their ideology. Thus Islamists who seek to spread their political and religious ideology by force, and slaughter all who deny them are on an equal moral level with anyone who fights them. I'm beginning to suspect that your occasional expressions of disapproval for Islamist extremism is pro forma. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 Do you know what the sword that Jesus speaks of is? I strongly suspect his origin is from outside Canada, and he knows no more of the bible or Christianity than he can glean from quick google searches. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
dialamah Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 I don't think Islam is inferior. Muslims who interpret Islam to mean that they can insist that anyone other than themselves lives by the tenets of their religion are inferior. Whether it be a crowd blown up for being Shiite, an individual shot for drawing cartoons, or hacked to death for a blog, or a women forced to ask a male relative to take her shopping, anyone who doesn't restrict their religious views to themselves alone is inferior. There are only degrees. I just wanted to say that I agree here. Also, thanks for finding that BBC article. Honestly, 27,000 seemed low to me but I failed to find any sources with better numbers. And whatever the real number is, and regardless of which religion is at fault, it's heartbreaking that so many people have died in God's name.
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 Read the friggin bible and get back to us. He clearly has. And you clearly have not. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 My point was in reference to the idea that people who follow the Koran are somehow more violent than the same dolts who follow the bible. Twenty seven thousand terrorist acts committed in the name of Islam in the last fifteen years. The Muslim world is filled with religious intolerance and violence. The West - not so much. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 Yep, cherry pick all you want. Doesn't make Christianity any less violent over all. Reality just has no place in your arguments, does it? "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
dialamah Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 (edited) Twenty seven thousand terrorist acts committed in the name of Islam in the last fifteen years. Where do you get this number from? Edited December 12, 2015 by dialamah
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 Well, now, I'm curious as to how you justify thinking that somehow Christianity loses out on body count. What bodies are you counting? Starting when? Is it every body in history that was killed by someone claiming to be a Christian vs every body in history claiming to be a Muslim? If that's the case, Christians would be way ahead based on the two world wars alone. Are you counting the inquisitions? The crusades? The godless heathens that were slaughtered by Christian colonialists in the new world? You clearly know nothing whatever about the history of Muslim expansion over the centuries, and the millions who have been killed in the many wars to convert and conquer 'infidels'. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 And I seri Here's where you'll find daily tracking of LRA activities - how often do you see these stories on the evening news? The problem with this attempt to excuse Islamist terrorism is that the LRA is not a group formulated to spread or enforce the word of God as seen by Christians. Its members might be Christians of some sort, but the group's motivation is not, despite its name,religious. It does not follow any of the Christian tenets and appears to be more of a personality cult which formed out of the violence of Uganda's birth. In a speech delivered by James Alfred Obita, former secretary for external affairs and mobilisation of the Lord's Resistance Army, he adamantly denied that the LRA was "just an Acholi thing" and stated that claims made by the media and Museveni administration asserting that the LRA is a "group of Christian fundamentalists with bizarre beliefs whose aim is to topple the Museveni regime and replace it with governance based on the Bible's ten commandments" were false.[6] In the same speech, Obita also claimed that the LRA's objectives are: To fight for the immediate restoration of competitive multi-party democracy in Uganda. To see an end to gross violation of human rights and dignity of Ugandans. To ensure the restoration of peace and security in Uganda. To ensure unity, sovereignty and economic prosperity beneficial to all Ugandans. To bring to an end to the repressive policy of deliberate marginalization of groups of people who may not agree with the National Resistance Army's ideology. The original aims of the group were more closely aligned with those of its predecessor, the Holy Spirit Movement. Protection of the Acholi population was of great concern because of the reality of ethnic purges in the history of Uganda.[71] This created a great deal of concern in the Acholi community as well as a strong desire for formidable leadership and protection.[71] As the conflict has progressed, fewer and fewer Acholi offered sufficient support to the rebels in the eyes of the LRA.[72] This led to an increased amount of violence toward the non-combatant population, which in turn further alienated them from the rebels.[72] This self-perpetuating cycle led to the creation of a strict divide between Acholis and rebels, a divide that was previously not explicitly present. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord's_Resistance_Army "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Guest Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 I just wanted to say that I agree here. Also, thanks for finding that BBC article. Honestly, 27,000 seemed low to me but I failed to find any sources with better numbers. And whatever the real number is, and regardless of which religion is at fault, it's heartbreaking that so many people have died in God's name. Yes, no argument from me on that point.
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 (edited) Where do you get this number from? http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks Edited December 12, 2015 by Argus "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Smallc Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 You and others can look for 'peaceful' quotes from Islamic texts and try to match them with 'violent' quotes from the bible until the cows come home. It's not going to change the reality of how the followers of these two religions behave in the real world, or the types of societies which have evolved under these two very different religions. But that was exactly my point....
Smallc Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 There have been a number of quotes from the Koran posted in this topic, by myself among others, which you evidently have chosen to ignore for some reason. Both books (the Bible and Quran) are full of hate whilst preaching peace at the end of it all. As you have already said, it's the followers of Islam, as modern day Stone Age dwellers (not always in technology, but almost always in their minds) that are the problem. Islam very well could be a religion of peace. That's not relevant to the current context.
GostHacked Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 The countries that identify as primarily Christian go out and kill because we have an ideology that informs us of our superiority over these other countries. Our ideology is about freedom/democracy/human rights, so we can feel morally justified. In actuality, we Christian nations pursue a much uglier ideology, focused on oil, capitalism and self-interest. How is ISIS any different? They cloak their ugly ideology in one of moral superiority and deal out death and destruction as a result. That seems to be a good summary of my thoughts.
GostHacked Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 Drone attacks are not designed to terrorize a populace or get it to change its mind or to get some institution or agency or government to change its policies. They are designed to target those who are planning and carrying out violence against Western interests. Tell that to the victims of drone attacks. You know, the collateral damage we all see where more innocents are killed just to get a suspected (not even verified) terrorist. The ratio of terrorists killed to civilians is actually quite low. The civilians are taking the brunt of it all.
On Guard for Thee Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 Reality just has no place in your arguments, does it?No, it's bigotry that has no place.
Argus Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 Tell that to the victims of drone attacks. You know, the collateral damage we all see where more innocents are killed just to get a suspected (not even verified) terrorist. The ratio of terrorists killed to civilians is actually quite low. The civilians are taking the brunt of it all. No, the ratio of civilians to combatants is very low from the perspective of allied attacks, though very high from the other side, as they deliberately target civilians. Further, no one would argue that motive was not a central factor in determining culpability in any crime. Someone who kills an innocent person without intending to do so cannot be equated with someone who deliberately targets and kills an innocent person. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Michael Hardner Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 No, the ratio of civilians to combatants is very low from the perspective of allied attacks Are you talking about drone attacks or bombings in general ? Do you have a cite ? Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
On Guard for Thee Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 No, the ratio of civilians to combatants is very low from the perspective of allied attacks, though very high from the other side, as they deliberately target civilians. Further, no one would argue that motive was not a central factor in determining culpability in any crime. Someone who kills an innocent person without intending to do so cannot be equated with someone who deliberately targets and kills an innocent person. When you fire a hellfire missile at a car because you think there is someone in it that's on your hit list, the other pax. in the vehicle you kill are homicides.
dialamah Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 No, the ratio of civilians to combatants is very low from the perspective of allied attacks, It does help that Western allies tend to ignore/discount reports of civilian casualties. The Pentagon review, conducted in December, looked at a joint Canadian-Australian bombing raid on a "suspected weapons factory" in Fallujah, Iraq, on Dec. 21 in which a woman and a child were seen on video emerging from the site after the airstrike. The child was picked up by someone on a motorcycle and transported to hospital. The woman lay down on the side of the road, according to an internal Pentagon report obtained by the fifth estate. [ ] That was pointed out to Brig.-Gen. Bourgon, during the fifth estateinterview. "Well, again, I'll go back," she said. "I'm not aware of any other allegation of civilian casualties." "The fact that the commander on the ground was oblivious to potential Canadian involvement is deeply troubling," says Chris Woods with Airwars, an independent group of journalists that monitors civilian casualty allegations in this conflict. Or the Canadian response to a Pentagon report of up to 27 civilians killed by Canadian airstrike: Didn't happen. We really have little interest in or information about the civilian casualties in the wars we conduct in other countries, it seems.
ReeferMadness Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 You clearly know nothing whatever about the history of Muslim expansion over the centuries, and the millions who have been killed in the many wars to convert and conquer 'infidels'. What I understand very clearly is that you and others around here have some pathological need for Christianity to be somehow morally superior to other religions. So, I'll leave you to your fantasy. Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
ReeferMadness Posted December 12, 2015 Report Posted December 12, 2015 You're free to support Islam. I won't even call you a bigot or a racist or for doing so. Not supporting any religion leaves me free to stand back and objectively assess what's going on. Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Recommended Posts