Leafless Posted February 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2006 theloniusfleabag You wrote- " It seems freedom of speech can get one into a lot of trouble" I guess it depends on HOW you deny the Holocaust and if the country your in has laws pertaining to this event. The Holocaust cannot be compared to religious believes an area, that laws of the land do not protect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 It seems freedom of speech can get one in a lot of trouble...http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4733820.stm British historian David Irving has been found guilty in Vienna of denying the Holocaust of European Jewry and sentenced to three years in prison. You mean - the lack of - freedom of speech. Quote "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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theloniusfleabag Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 Dear Argus, You mean - the lack of - freedom of speech.Looks that way. He gave a speech in 1989, recanted his claims in the meantime, yet was still arrested some 16 years later. Does Austria have no 'statute of limitations' (or equivalent)? Quote Would the Special Olympics Committee disqualify kids born with flippers from the swimming events? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 History has seen much horrible bloodshed justified in the name of Christianity, but we don't ban the religion. I don't think it's fair or logical to compare the poor behaviour of Christianity in the distant past with the poor behaviour of Islam today. All our ancestors and all our institutions behaved poorly in ancient times - by modern perceptions. We have progressed. They, unfortunately, have not. Well, shouldn't that mean that we give them time and help them to develop and progress rather than ban their ideas? No pun intended, but it gets harder and harder on this board to play Devil's Advocate because everyone seems to have so much trouble getting that you can argue a position even if it isn't the one you personally believe. FTA The problem is - how much time? Giving them time presumes some measure of progress. I don't see that progress. Are Muslims as a people - I'm not speaking of their leaders, but the "man in the street" more tolerant and sophisticated today than they were a century ago? By some measures they are actually less tolerant. So how much time do we give a people who are going nowhere fast - but into the past? Quote "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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 I don't think it's fair or logical to compare the poor behaviour of Christianity in the distant past with the poor behaviour of Islam today. All our ancestors and all our institutions behaved poorly in ancient times - by modern perceptions. We have progressed. They, unfortunately, have not. Exactly, they have not so it is indeed fair to compare the behaviors. People with poor education, that have no tradition of openness, and separation of church and state cannot be expected to act as we do. I'm not quite sure what you're saying. It appears to be that we can't expect civilized behaviour from them because they're ignorant savages - and I'm fairly confident that's not what you wanted to say. And that is exactly why we cannot lump together the fundie Muslims in the Middle East to Muslims in the west who ARE educated and open. Well, as I said above, the "fundie Muslims in the Middle East" don't believe anyone should be allowed to do anything their religion says is wrong - no matter what religion those other people belong to. As for the "educated and open" Muslims from the West - ahhh, they believe that too. BTW, a recent poll of 'educated and open Muslims" in the UK showed that 40% wanted Sharia law introduced in the UK in Muslim areas. In case you've forgotten, that's that cutting off the hands, stoning adulterous women thing that, of course, one would expect those "educated and open" Muslims to scorn. Do we lump together the Christian sects who worships rattlesnakes or practive voodoo with the Catholic schoolgirl? After all they're both believe in Christ don't they? If you're suggesting only a very, very few odd Muslims believe in a draconion view of life as based on the rigid interpretation of the Koran - well, you're flat out wrong. Quote "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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Of course it's "fair and logical" to compare the bad (not poor) behaviour of Christianity in the past with the bad behaviour of Islam today. Why? Remember the Salem witch trials conducted by Christians? Being burned alive is certainly worse than being blown up IMO. At least when yer blown to bits it's over very quickly!During the time when so-called "enlightened" Christians were burning their own people to death, Persia (now Iran) had a thriving, prosperous culture. During the time a few score people were being killed in Salem, Aurungzebe was storming through India and Afghanistan, burning Hindu and Sikh temples, imposing Sharia law on non Muslims, and slaughtering Hindus and Sikhs by the Millions in the name of Allah. Oh, and btw, one of the reasons the Persians fell apart not long after Salem was a bloody revolt by the Sunnis after the Shia tried to convert them to their brand of Islam by force. So sure, if you want to compare the past history of Christianity with the past history of Muslims, by all means do so. Quote "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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theloniusfleabag Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 I wasn't sure where to pst this, so I'll put it here...a link to the 'Holocaust jokes', plus, what Israel supposedly was going to do about them. http://www.israelnewsagency.com/iranholoca...eo48480207.html When I was a kid, we told every kind of 'racist joke' there was, but i don't think anyone ever 'believed' them, or was influenced by them. Usually, they were the kind of simple jokes where the punchline was ...(insert race here)... It used to be that it wasn't too important what you said, it was more important how you acted, and that was almost always according to what you believed. Quote Would the Special Olympics Committee disqualify kids born with flippers from the swimming events? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drea Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 We have a secular (non-believing, non-worshipping) society that keeps our religious nuts in check. Sadly, they don't have a large population of non-believers to keep their religious nuts in check. It's not about Christians are "nicer" (or less savage, or more civilized) than muslims. It's about each given society as a whole. We don't want Catholic "law" crammed down our throats, nor do we want "Sharia law" crammed down our throats. Our society has managed, quite successfully (until lately) seperate politics and religion. Their society has not. Why? Because they are not allowed to be non-believers, they are not allowed to let common sense rule. Thankfully in our civilized, western societies we have many many people who do "question" the religious dogma. If the Renaisance (sp) didn't happen we'd still be burning people at the stake. Thank God for the non-believers! FYI, My friend in Iran -- her entire life revolves around Allah. Everything, literally everything, is done with Allah on the mind -- even peeing probably -- thank Allah for the relief of peeing. Quote ...jealous much? Booga Booga! Hee Hee Hee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerrySeinfeld Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 We have a secular (non-believing, non-worshipping) society that keeps our religious nuts in check.Sadly, they don't have a large population of non-believers to keep their religious nuts in check. It's not about Christians are "nicer" (or less savage, or more civilized) than muslims. It's about each given society as a whole. We don't want Catholic "law" crammed down our throats, nor do we want "Sharia law" crammed down our throats. Our society has managed, quite successfully (until lately) seperate politics and religion. Their society has not. Why? Because they are not allowed to be non-believers, they are not allowed to let common sense rule. Thankfully in our civilized, western societies we have many many people who do "question" the religious dogma. If the Renaisance (sp) didn't happen we'd still be burning people at the stake. Thank God for the non-believers! FYI, My friend in Iran -- her entire life revolves around Allah. Everything, literally everything, is done with Allah on the mind -- even peeing probably -- thank Allah for the relief of peeing. YES! i'm glad this cartoon came about. it proves that publishing the cartoons is not just a stunt, but a serious political point. and muslims in protest have helped to prove the point: in a free society you can express your point of view, but you can't shut others up just because you disagree with them. We don't live in a muslim theocratic state.......yet........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted March 2, 2006 Report Share Posted March 2, 2006 We have a secular (non-believing, non-worshipping) society that keeps our religious nuts in check.Sadly, they don't have a large population of non-believers to keep their religious nuts in check. It's not about Christians are "nicer" (or less savage, or more civilized) than muslims. It's about each given society as a whole. We don't want Catholic "law" crammed down our throats, nor do we want "Sharia law" crammed down our throats. Our society has managed, quite successfully (until lately) seperate politics and religion. Their society has not. Why? Because they are not allowed to be non-believers, they are not allowed to let common sense rule. Thankfully in our civilized, western societies we have many many people who do "question" the religious dogma. If the Renaisance (sp) didn't happen we'd still be burning people at the stake. Thank God for the non-believers! FYI, My friend in Iran -- her entire life revolves around Allah. Everything, literally everything, is done with Allah on the mind -- even peeing probably -- thank Allah for the relief of peeing. Somewhat right. Catholic law wouldn't be much different then what we've got now. Just no abortions, no sodomy and less heretical crap. If your generally an average person in Canada, you'd never even know. Sharia law on the other hand. All women covered head to toe, stonings, executions for infidelity, polygamy. There is definitely a civilized and uncivilized aspect to these two areas. Not that I support invoking Cannon law, just saying Christians are generally way more reasonable people then Muslims. We've left the middle ages, they haven't quite yet. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.