You'll note the people who made the orignal smear have ignored you. It's so much easier to be a hate-mongering biggot when one is completely ignorant about the target of his hatred.
You'll note the people who made the orignal smear have ignored you. It's so much easier to be a hate-mongering biggot when one is completely ignorant about the target of his hatred.Originally posted by: magomago
Actually I find this entire thing silly xDOriginally posted by: (Several people)
[ ... More nested quotes deleted ... ]Originally posted by: Corbett
Prepare to be flamed by people who know nothing about Islam or Christianity.Originally posted by: Skoorb
Except the bible teaches that god is good, the koran doesn't, so it's hard to be true to the koran and teach peace.
Every Surah in the Quran starts out with the single sentence preface (if you don't believe me and refuse to look at a Quran yourself, ask Palehorse as he said he had read and studied the Quran) :
Bssm Allah Al Rahman al Raheem
In the name of God, the most gracious the most merciful
Then again that alone isn't an explicit "God is Good" statement...although this stuff does go hand in hand...
but if you've read the Quran there are statements near ad nauseum about how good God is.
I may not be a Christian, but I'm not delusional about how Christianity doesn't teach that God is good. And you may (well, clearly are not) a Muslim - but don't brainwash yourself to thinking that the Quran doesn't teach that God is good~
Else perhaps the "west's" (And I quote that word as those who love to emphasize that they are the west) perception of Islam is a bigger problem than previously thought, especially if they think that Muslims apparently worship a God that we are taught is not a good God...talk about satanism "to the MAX"... as well as "misunderstanding to the MAX"
I bet you're a big fan of Brown's recent directive to stop using the words "Islamic" or "Muslim" to describe the terrorists, aren't you?Originally posted by: Lemon law
I again have to disagree with Corbett----who says---As if you have offered anything important to this thread. Saying "Christians are worse" is hardly debating the subject. Let alone butting into an argument you have nothing to do with.
Anyone has the right to comment on the argument of the thread title---and you clearly are not reading what I said---I am not saying "Christians are worse"---I am saying by SOME MEASURES Christians are worse---and asking the implied question---how do you get the question beyond authority or opinion to some objective and unbiased way to measure if a religion needs reformed--or is more evil than another religion.
But I have also thought about another point worth making---namely the degree of scientific tolerance of either Christianity or Islam. Historically---the initial spread of Islam had the side effect of spreading science and a flowering of thought---and at the time of say circa 1000 AD----Islam was at the cutting edge of human knowledge and their Christian counterparts were wallowing in ignorance-----but with the rise of certain thinkers and social changes that came at the same time---you had people like Galileo---and Copernicus---and later Newton and a huge number of others that resulted in European Scientific being the new and far keener cutting edge. But especially in the early rise of European Science---it was the then totally dominant catholic church that was fighting science tooth and nail.---and now that Christianity is a more fragmented force we still have
religious elements that fight science tooth and nail----and we have sects that deny evolution and advocate the literal interpretation of the bible---and it spills out to public policy on abortion, stem cell research, denial of global warming, no third world contraception funding is allowed, and now the GWB administration even edits the findings of scientific works and committees.
But we are sure quick to condemn Islam when they have their own radical right elements---we go ballistic when they advocate Sharia law---and are also quick to condemn Islamic exploitation of females--and maybe quite properly so---but in the process we ignore the fact we have some radical elements every bit as bad---and we say our worst is not typical of us---and their worst is typical of them.
Anyone who has followed my history here at P&N will tell you that I've NEVER labeled all of Islam for the corrupt fanaticism of the few. I've gone to great lengths to recognize the majority of Muslims who are peaceful.Originally posted by: Lemon law
To palehorse74---who seems totally confused in the process of an debate---and says---I bolded the part where your entire comparison is flawed.
The point being is that no short and simple argument can be totally valid and true. But we still need ways to OBJECTIVELY MEASURE THINGS.
And I need only highlight one word to show you are full of it----and its when you use the word ENTIRE-----the point is that you want your ENTIRE viewpoint to be the ONLY measure. And rather than be willing to consider any other possible other way to look at things in a more balanced way----you say someone's entire argument is TOTALLY false.
And then you spend your time in some activated reserve unit having the local population shoot at you because your "gubment's" arrogance has alienated nearly EVERYONE.---by not only blowing up a few skyscrapers, markets , and schools--but the entire social fabric of the nation. And then you wonder why they hate you.----and if only 25 million out of 1.4 billion can totally tie you and the entire US military up trying to solve an occupation---imagine how much fun you will have trying to take on 56 times that number by reducing a large and diverse group to your version of a cartoon.----and then engage demonize the ENTIRE lot as your banner.
Get a clue---they have their own religious jerks--and saints--and we have our own Christian jerks--and saints----and we need to learn to live together rather than engage in always trying to call them names.
Of the following, which religion currently has a violent, fanatical, growing minority, that is threatening the lives of every American man, woman, and child?
A) Islam
B) Christianity
C) Buddhism
D) none of the above because I refuse to admit that someone besides Bush is to blame for the problems in the world.
Originally posted by: Lemon law
The whole central idea of this thread is totally bogus---the whole idea of violence and terrorism being the face of Islam is a total myth only neocons need to shout from the rooftops. The vast bulk of the world's 1.4 billion Moslem's manage to live even more peacefully than their Christian counterparts.
And a major Islamic shakeup is now as likely as a Christian shakeup because Christians have a few bad apples like Pat Robertson. No matter what religion you want to talk about, you always find a few nuts totally misusing that religion for their own ends. And by ascribing all the legitimate, semi legitimate, and bogus grievances of some violent sorts to just the teachings of their religion is a very deceptive way to ignore the fact that some of their grievances are legitimate---and if we did something to reduce these offenses---we would have less violence.----but if you can convince everyone its just 100% Islamic religious insanity driving it---we can avoid confronting our own behavior.
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: Lemon law
The whole central idea of this thread is totally bogus---the whole idea of violence and terrorism being the face of Islam is a total myth only neocons need to shout from the rooftops. The vast bulk of the world's 1.4 billion Moslem's manage to live even more peacefully than their Christian counterparts.
And a major Islamic shakeup is now as likely as a Christian shakeup because Christians have a few bad apples like Pat Robertson. No matter what religion you want to talk about, you always find a few nuts totally misusing that religion for their own ends. And by ascribing all the legitimate, semi legitimate, and bogus grievances of some violent sorts to just the teachings of their religion is a very deceptive way to ignore the fact that some of their grievances are legitimate---and if we did something to reduce these offenses---we would have less violence.----but if you can convince everyone its just 100% Islamic religious insanity driving it---we can avoid confronting our own behavior.
Once a modern international Christian organization receives funding from multiple states for the sole purpose of killing other people of other religion you can compare the two. Yes, it is a small percentage of the Muslim community, but alas that is all it takes. Comparing the two is apples and oranges.
This is something that will have to be dealt with rather than the typical 'its not happening" we get so often from those in power. Sadly, due to that mindset, when it is dealt with, we will likely see the deterioration of what we had that we though made us civilized. That is a price we will have to pay though if we continue to allow our future leaders to take the mindset of nothing is happening.
Originally posted by: magomago
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: Lemon law
The whole central idea of this thread is totally bogus---the whole idea of violence and terrorism being the face of Islam is a total myth only neocons need to shout from the rooftops. The vast bulk of the world's 1.4 billion Moslem's manage to live even more peacefully than their Christian counterparts.
And a major Islamic shakeup is now as likely as a Christian shakeup because Christians have a few bad apples like Pat Robertson. No matter what religion you want to talk about, you always find a few nuts totally misusing that religion for their own ends. And by ascribing all the legitimate, semi legitimate, and bogus grievances of some violent sorts to just the teachings of their religion is a very deceptive way to ignore the fact that some of their grievances are legitimate---and if we did something to reduce these offenses---we would have less violence.----but if you can convince everyone its just 100% Islamic religious insanity driving it---we can avoid confronting our own behavior.
Once a modern international Christian organization receives funding from multiple states for the sole purpose of killing other people of other religion you can compare the two. Yes, it is a small percentage of the Muslim community, but alas that is all it takes. Comparing the two is apples and oranges.
This is something that will have to be dealt with rather than the typical 'its not happening" we get so often from those in power. Sadly, due to that mindset, when it is dealt with, we will likely see the deterioration of what we had that we though made us civilized. That is a price we will have to pay though if we continue to allow our future leaders to take the mindset of nothing is happening.
Whoa whoa, what group exists exists whose sole purpose is to kill those of the other religion - and is NOT tied to some kind of political struggle ? (I know you want to say Hamas or Hizbollah, but I'm pretty sure they are out for "Jew Blood" because they are Jews and nothing else). You really have twisted that statement
holy rambling incoherent nonsense Batman!Originally posted by: Lemon law
To RichardE---who writes---Once a modern international Christian organization receives funding from multiple states for the sole purpose of killing other people of other religion you can compare the two. Yes, it is a small percentage of the Muslim community, but alas that is all it takes. Comparing the two is apples and oranges.
Well, it seems to me that GWB&co is precisely just that Christian entity that extorts funds from me and everyone else to wage wars of aggression against largely Islamic nations.
And the total saddest part--is that it just creates more angry Islamists---so the cycle is self-perpetuating.
But Jesus is reported to have said---"Let those without sin cast the first stone." And many of us see that 911 was not that first cast stone and in fact was just a part of a progression of stones that had been cast between Christians and Muslims over a period of uncounted centuries. But the immediate causal links of 911 may well be traced back to Ronald Reagan's decision to arm terrorists in Afghanistan and in his decision to use Saddam as a counterforce against Iran after the Shah fell. Even if the same actions had been pursued, had we in the United States better followed up and been less manipulative, 911 may well have not have happened.
But even today we refuse to acknowledge that we have done much to deserve Iranian hostility---and continue to drive them away with a diplomacy of sharp sticks.
And totally seem to forget the legacy of our wiser leaders who fought the second world war---a war not of their making---but in victory---they had a different policy---and through using far different reasoning than seems to rule us today---converted our former enemies into allies. And partly because their previous generation had tried the kick your enemy when he is down trick after the first world war-----they ended up to fight the second world war that policy--now back in vogue today--caused.
I can't help but make that distinction----but war begets war---and I hope I advocate the thinking of understanding and world peace.
But every time we listen to anyone who later earns the judgment of history as a warmonger---they always say they are not war mongers and that the war was forced on them
by the evil thinking of their enemy---and rather than wait to be actually attacked---they use any provocation as an excuse to invade.
that's because you are wrong.Originally posted by: Lemon law
even when you are told---you reject and ridicule.
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: magomago
Originally posted by: RichardE
Originally posted by: Lemon law
The whole central idea of this thread is totally bogus---the whole idea of violence and terrorism being the face of Islam is a total myth only neocons need to shout from the rooftops. The vast bulk of the world's 1.4 billion Moslem's manage to live even more peacefully than their Christian counterparts.
And a major Islamic shakeup is now as likely as a Christian shakeup because Christians have a few bad apples like Pat Robertson. No matter what religion you want to talk about, you always find a few nuts totally misusing that religion for their own ends. And by ascribing all the legitimate, semi legitimate, and bogus grievances of some violent sorts to just the teachings of their religion is a very deceptive way to ignore the fact that some of their grievances are legitimate---and if we did something to reduce these offenses---we would have less violence.----but if you can convince everyone its just 100% Islamic religious insanity driving it---we can avoid confronting our own behavior.
Once a modern international Christian organization receives funding from multiple states for the sole purpose of killing other people of other religion you can compare the two. Yes, it is a small percentage of the Muslim community, but alas that is all it takes. Comparing the two is apples and oranges.
This is something that will have to be dealt with rather than the typical 'its not happening" we get so often from those in power. Sadly, due to that mindset, when it is dealt with, we will likely see the deterioration of what we had that we though made us civilized. That is a price we will have to pay though if we continue to allow our future leaders to take the mindset of nothing is happening.
Whoa whoa, what group exists exists whose sole purpose is to kill those of the other religion - and is NOT tied to some kind of political struggle ? (I know you want to say Hamas or Hizbollah, but I'm pretty sure they are out for "Jew Blood" because they are Jews and nothing else). You really have twisted that statement
Though, I won't say those two, since they are a typical answer, they would be included. Muslim groups can come together and use Islam as a reason to kill others and bind together under an umbrella organization to further there means (Much as the PLO use to be (not as much anymore). The point is, it is multiple religious groups of one religion who bind together under the umbrellas of a single organization who received funding from multiple states for the sole purpose of furthering there cause which is to kill infidels, invaders, westerners, or simply, Christians and Jews. These group of people belong to a single religion and that is Islam. So yes, Muslims must be dealt with, and they must deal with it themselves. Now, that will require time, I am not someone who expects things to change overnight, and I truly believe that it will happen, but sticking your head in the sand and denying there is a problem will only further cause the rift between Muslims and the rest of the world to widen.
Originally posted by: palehorse74
that's because you are wrong.Originally posted by: Lemon law
even when you are told---you reject and ridicule.
Turning Iraq into a democratic US ally is exactly our current objective, and my personal mission, in Iraq.Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: palehorse74
that's because you are wrong.Originally posted by: Lemon law
even when you are told---you reject and ridicule.
As someone who just called what I said incoherent nonsense---its time to ask exactly what part of the facts I presented do you deny---and what parts of the fact that the USA, and its former enemies of Japan, Germany, and Italy are now allies do you call incoherent nonsense?
And wrong.
But I am somewhat confident that if you had been around just after ww2 was won---you would have vigorously opposed the policy of letting our former enemies up gently.
And have said that's because that policy is wrong!
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Turning Iraq into a democratic US ally is exactly our current objective, and my personal mission, in Iraq.Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: palehorse74
that's because you are wrong.Originally posted by: Lemon law
even when you are told---you reject and ridicule.
As someone who just called what I said incoherent nonsense---its time to ask exactly what part of the facts I presented do you deny---and what parts of the fact that the USA, and its former enemies of Japan, Germany, and Italy are now allies do you call incoherent nonsense?
And wrong.
But I am somewhat confident that if you had been around just after ww2 was won---you would have vigorously opposed the policy of letting our former enemies up gently.
And have said that's because that policy is wrong!
imagine that!
Originally posted by: palehorse74
true enough, but "reputations" are a funny thing. In this case, if more Muslims spoke as this man does in this editorial, then Islam's reputation would most certainly improve.Originally posted by: Lemon law
The whole central idea of this thread is totally bogus---the whole idea of violence and terrorism being the face of Islam is a total myth only neocons need to shout from the rooftops. The vast bulk of the world's 1.4 billion Moslem's manage to live even more peacefully than their Christian counterparts.
I don't recall Pat Robertson encouraging his followers to blow anything up.And a major Islamic shakeup is now as likely as a Christian shakeup because Christians have a few bad apples like Pat Robertson. No matter what religion you want to talk about, you always find a few nuts totally misusing that religion for their own ends. And by ascribing all the legitimate, semi legitimate, and bogus grievances of some violent sorts to just the teachings of their religion is a very deceptive way to ignore the fact that some of their grievances are legitimate---and if we did something to reduce these offenses---we would have less violence.----but if you can convince everyone its just 100% Islamic religious insanity driving it---we can avoid confronting our own behavior.
How can you sit there, with a straight face, and equate modern Christianity with modern Islam!? Fact is, it has taken the world hundreds of years to clean up Christianity and have it result in a much more civilized religion. Islam must go through the same changes and reform itself and conform with modern civilized standards.
There are far more than "a few bad apples" in Islam at the moment. While it's true that the vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving decent citizens, it is also true that members of their religion are the focal point of modern global terrorism - and the number of bad apples is growing, exponentially, every day!
Ignoring that fact, or downplaying the problem to one of mere annoyance, is about the most fatal mistake the civilized world could make during the 21st century.
You can continue to bury your head in the sand all you like, but the rest of us will be out here actually paying attention and trying to effect positive change in the world. Islam needs to undergo a few hundred years of reform in the next few decades, or the problem of fanatical Islamic terror will only get worse. We absolutely must come up with a solution to the spreading virus before it infects the entire host - and authors such the man in the OP are the key to the entire mess.
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Lemon law
JD50 is somewhat correct to state---Funny thing is, Corbett did exactly what you said, he stated his opinion and then defended his position.
But I think also largely wrong----in five very long posts in the past two pages consisting of little more than a personal feud with another poster---and his opponent lack of willingness to post their academic credentials---only a tiny tiny percentage of the total verbiage had a single thing to do with the topic at hand.---and everything to do with crying personal attack in a running feud with another poster all too typical in these forums.
At a certain point--its childish---when the real other implied question of this thread is---how do you logically and in an unbiased fashion compare the Christian and Islamic faith to obtain some sort of peacefulness index.
And sadly---someone like the pope--who might be the best qualified catholic source authority---is almost certain to be biased on the subject---as will be an Islamic cleric. So I for one say religious scholarship may well be the last criteria we should look for in getting a logical and unbiased answer.
As if you have offered anything important to this thread. Saying "Christians are worse" is hardly debating the subject. Let alone butting into an argument you have nothing to do with.
Originally posted by: zinfamous
I hope you both realize how childish you look arguing about this BS...
Originally posted by: zinfamous
what you're missing in Lemon Law's statement is that the violent extremists who use Islam don't use it because of their religion. They use the religion to rile up impoverished, disenfranchised, uneducated outcasts to sacrifice themselves against what they see as an invading, and increasingly tyranical culture (the West). It is not religion that spurns them to terrorize, but what they see as a final, desperate attempt to preserve their identity. That, is the cold-hard truth.