Stop saying Islam is a religion of peace: Taslima Nasreen

[agent00f]

I think in your own misguided way, you are trying to say that the lancet paper cannot be wrong because it was an Epidemiology study. That is to say the data is what told the story, and not the researcher. This is speculation though, because you will not explain yourself and deflect.

But, if that is your premise, then the issue is the data that the study looked at. Again, the author was unwilling to show his data which is the foundation. If the data cannot be verified, then the credibility of the paper is questioned. In science, if something cannot be verified, then you do not believe it.

Would you like to explain, or are you going to hold off? I would bet that you dont explain yourself because if you do, I will further discredit you.

No, I'm trying to say if you're in any position to grasp what peer review meant, it should be obvious that relevant sophisticated expertise is necessary to accurately evaluate these rather complex papers.

The problems is you've never known what expertise implies, and thus can't understand why that is. For example to your crowd, some chemist/geologist/engineer denying AGW is just a good as those actually in the field.

Also, the authors in this case answer to their reviewers/peers & such, not some rando journalist presumably on your level.

 

[MajinCry]

Just stop and consider the possibility for a moment that what I'm saying to you is true...that you need to make an effort to educate yourself assuming that you actually value knowledge over ignorance.

Chrisianity 101...the very basis of Christianity is the New Covenant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Covenant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_the_Old_Covenant

Oh, the new covenant. The thing outlined in Jeremiah 31:31-34, where everybody must follow the Christian commandments to the letter of the law, and only then will the OT be null and void, as everybody will be enacting it regardless of it being law or otherwise.

“The days are coming,” declares the Lord,

“when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them” declares the Lord.

“This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,” declares the Lord.
“I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the Lord.

“For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.”

That gives Luke 16:17 some much needed context; the OT will forever be binding, as it's simply impossible for Jeremiah's prophecy to come to pass.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

Here's a good wee reference to take a glance at Christianity. The site's name is iffy, but the content is genuine, seeing as how it merely takes passages straight from the Bible.

http://www.evilbible.com/evil-bible-...-in-the-bible/

Plenty of commanded sex slavery in the Good Book.

There you go with that Old Testament bullshit, proving that Doc Savage Fan was right and you are embarrassing yourself. Those who follow that book are called JEWS. Christians follow the New Testament, where Jesus was meant to be the fulfillment of the Old Testament promise of a messiah. But don't take my word for it, let a Christian scholar explain:

When it comes to Christianity and the Old Testament, one should know that most of the laws and rules of the Old Testament do not apply to Christians because of how the faith developed. For instance, in considering stoning, Christians will be familiar with the story of Christ and the woman accused of adultery.

Here we find the crux of Christianity, it is about obeying God’s laws, but it is also about forgiveness and changed lives.

As for the Old Testament, Christians were officially freed of many Old Testament obligations. The historical record affirms this tradition. A good example from the first century of Christianity took place at the Council of Jerusalem.

<snip>

That is just one of many examples showing why Christians do not act upon many Old Testament laws. It is either intellectually dishonest or ignorant to claim otherwise.

Read more here so you don't embarrass yourself in the future.

 

[agent00f]

I'd wager that it's not that good/evil is an Abrahamic thing, but they just took the idea and changed it from being based around morals (e.g, good deeds vs evil deeds), and changed to being based around the religion. It's the ol' story; God is love, and whatever he does is good.

Despite, y'know, him wiping out humans with a huge flood, commanding sex slavery, war, rape, and everything in-between.


The mental gymnastics these guys are doing, is exactly what the Muslims they're demonizing do. A white washing of history, an ignoring of the texts, covering their eyes and putting their fingers in their ears. The standard fare really, when you confront a lifetime of ingrained bullshit.

It's just so obvious. It says right there, in the texts, who to kill, who to rape, who to sexually enslave.

I'm not necessarily saying those religions immaculately conceived the idea that good/bad things are committed by inherently good/bad people.

However it's observable that most other cultures/religions focus more on individual rational self-interest, like for example deities with human foibles such as greed, lust, etc.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Oh, the new covenant. The thing outlined in Jeremiah 31:31-34, where everybody must follow the Christian commandments to the letter of the law, and only then will the OT be null and void, as everybody will be enacting it regardless of it being law or otherwise.



That gives Luke 16:17 some much needed context; the OT will forever be binding, as it's simply impossible for Jeremiah's prophecy to come to pass.

I see that you're quite determined here and that nothing I can say will ever matter one iota to you. I give up...you "win".

 

[AnonymouseUser]

It's just so obvious. It says right there, in the texts, who to kill, who to rape, who to sexually enslave.

I posted a story about isis, the only modern religion that still does this, where they detail who and why they intend to commit these atrocities against, and you deflect by attacking Christians. I would say you should read the isis magazine for clarity, but you seem like one who already has a subscription.

 

[agent00f]

Oh, the new covenant. The thing outlined in Jeremiah 31:31-34, where everybody must follow the Christian commandments to the letter of the law, and only then will the OT be null and void, as everybody will be enacting it regardless of it being law or otherwise.



That gives Luke 16:17 some much needed context; the OT will forever be binding, as it's simply impossible for Jeremiah's prophecy to come to pass.

I'm just putting it out there that arguing the bible as if 2000 year old documents have much bearing on modern reality is playing into the hands of people who believe they should.

For some perspective, a person from 2000 years ago is going to be ignorant as shit by contemporary standards, so there's little reason to believe they can assess our current situation better than anyone today.

I posted a story about isis, the only modern religion that still does this, where they detail who and why they intend to commit these atrocities against, and you deflect by attacking Christians. I would say you should read the isis magazine for clarity, but you seem like one who already has a subscription.

I'm pretty sure there are Christians who ares still relatively barbaric. They just tend to be in areas like africa or other places on the map you're not aware of.

 

[MajinCry]

There you go with that Old Testament bullshit, proving that Doc Savage Fan was right and you are embarrassing yourself. Those who follow that book are called JEWS. Christians follow the New Testament, where Jesus was meant to be the fulfillment of the Old Testament promise of a messiah. But don't take my word for it, let a Christian scholar explain:


<snip>



Read more here so you don't embarrass yourself in the future.

So the Bible was lying when it said the OT is forever binding, and that it is dishonest in that it never states that the OT is now abolished?

Riiiiight.

I posted a story about isis, the only modern religion that still does this, where they detail who and why they intend to commit these atrocities against, and you deflect by attacking Christians. I would say you should read the isis magazine for clarity, but you seem like one who already has a subscription.

Again, I'm pointin' out that the religions are as bad as each other. See, you keep saying that Christianity is morally superior to Islam. It isn't; they're as vile and apprehensive as each other.


And Agent made a good point, take a look at Africa for some prime Christian culture.

 

[Blue_Max]

I posted a story about isis, the only modern religion that still does this, where they detail who and why they intend to commit these atrocities against, and you deflect by attacking Christians. I would say you should read the isis magazine for clarity, but you seem like one who already has a subscription.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HYLiMaj9Ak

Most recent issue shows just how much regard they hold for our SJW's eagerness to support islam (without converting to it!)

 

[agent00f]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HYLiMaj9Ak

Most recent issue shows just how much regard they hold for our SJW's eagerness to support islam (without converting to it!)

Good people support muslims who are unjustly maligned by bigot shitheads.

These are basically the same christians who supported slavery/segregation/etc and now this for the same underlying reasons after the former became politically untenable.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

Huge Increase in Girls Victimized by Genital Mutilation in U.S.

An estimated 513,000 women and girls are at risk or have already been subjected to female genital mutilation in the United States, with the number skyrocketing due to increased immigration from countries in the Middle East and North Africa, where the practice is common.

The government places the blame on increased immigration from majority Muslim nations, where female genital mutilation is a common practice.

More barbarism being imported from moslem countries.

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officials have had no criminal investigation into the practice, despite identifying “at least 25 individuals in immigration court proceedings who were suspected of assistance in the perpetration of” female genital mutilation.

“Of the 25 suspected perpetrators, officials were aware of 1 individual who was removed from the country in July 2005,” the report said. “The remaining 24 were granted relief or protection from removal, were still in immigration proceedings, or were not issued a travel document by their home country to implement the immigration court’s final order of removal.”

Once again, moslem crimes being ignored by government officials.

 

[MajinCry]

The key thing to note is here:

have already been subjected to female genital mutilation

'Twas the same distinction made in the thread about FGM in the UK; many of these women will have been mutilated in their country of origin, rather than the US/UK.

 

[SmilingBhudda]

Why, because of all the Christians that don't follow the commandments.

Christians that eat shellfish? They're breaking a commandment.

Christians that wear clothes of more than one fabric? They're breaking a commandment.

Christians that don't utterly destroy foreign religions that they are not fully knowledgeable about? Why, breaking another commandment.

Not stoning to death a rape victim that was not rescued during the act, as she did not scream? Breaking another commandment.

Not selling your virgin daughter, that was raped, to the rapist? Breaking another commandment right there.

Not stoning unruly children to death? Breaking another commandment right there.

Etc. etc. Most Christians don't really follow their religion.

As an atheist (I assume) you should use your analytical abillity to understand the immense value the teachings of Jesus has had on our society. Classical philosophy combined with Christianity is what enabled us to become the leading civilization. The petty insults are getting boring.

Ever wondered why we are the least corrupt society? It's because the values created during the Reformation, you know, that time we stood up against the corruption of the Catholic Church?

Ever wondered why the islamic empire went into decay after they were beaten back by us twice? It's not the crusades as any Muslim will tell you nowadays. No, it's because Islam creates a corrupt society (as you can still see today). And why is that? Because its a religion created by thiefs, killers and rapists that actually allows you to steal, kill and rape.

I already did by not only explaining the difference in sources but how can you can learn to recognizes the discrepancy. Regrettably you got stuck on the learning part.



It's hardly some exclusive situation given the US has a sizable black population brought over for largely the same reasons, and many american feel the same way about them.

I will glady trade your black population with our muslims, heck, you can even throw in the Mexicans as well. At least we wont have to worry if they are going to blow themselves up everytime we see one. But we can't do that because you are our last hope now.

Edit: Actually it's a very exclusive situation. People from all over the world live here without causing much problems, but there is only one kind that actually wants to destroy our civilization.

 

[realibrad]

No, I'm trying to say if you're in any position to grasp what peer review meant, it should be obvious that relevant sophisticated expertise is necessary to accurately evaluate these rather complex papers.

The problems is you've never known what expertise implies, and thus can't understand why that is. For example to your crowd, some chemist/geologist/engineer denying AGW is just a good as those actually in the field.

Also, the authors in this case answer to their reviewers/peers & such, not some rando journalist presumably on your level.

Actually, the Lancet paper falls in the purview of my linked article. That said, even if they were not, the logic behind their criticisms were sound and sourced. The author in your study could not or would not back up his data. The Lancet was also the same journal that published a paper in 1998 that linked autism to vaccines. Just because a paper is authored by someone who has a mastery does not mean they cannot examine the data and methodology.

But fine, if you want another that you feel qualifies as a peer, then how about The New England Journal of Medicine?

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa0707782#t=article

The IFHS results for trends and distribution of deaths according to province are consistent with what has been reported from the scanning of press reports for civilian casualties through the Iraq Body Count project. The estimated number of deaths in the IFHS is about three times as high as that reported by the Iraq Body Count. Both sources indicate that the 2006 study by Burnham et al. considerably overestimated the number of violent deaths. For instance, to reach the 925 violent deaths per day reported by Burnham et al. for June 2005 through June 2006, as many as 87% of violent deaths would have been missed in the IFHS and more than 90% in the Iraq Body Count. This level of underreporting is highly improbable, given the internal and external consistency of the data and the much larger sample size and quality-control measures taken in the implementation of the IFHS.

So, now do you accept that your paper was wrong?

NEJM questioned his findings.
Author had ethics violations for his paper.

Ready to admit you are wrong yet?

 

[agent00f]

As an atheist (I assume) you should use your analytical abillity to understand the immense value the teachings of Jesus has had on our society. Classical philosophy combined with Christianity is what enabled us to become the leading civilization. The petty insults are getting boring.

Ever wondered why we are the least corrupt society? It's because the values created during the Reformation, you know, that time we stood up against the corruption of the Catholic Church?

Ever wondered why the islamic empire went into decay after they were beaten back by us twice? It's not the crusades as any Muslim will tell you nowadays. No, it's because Islam creates a corrupt society (as you can still see today). And why is that? Because its a religion created by thiefs, killers and rapists that actually allows you to steal, kill and rape.

The west is in lead in large part because of technology and mercantilism; often used for beating everyone else down to widen the gap.

Of course nobody wants to tell themselves that, so you create a narrative based around jingoism and how god loves us because we're the good guys.

I will glady trade your black population with our muslims, heck, you can even throw in the Mexicans as well. At least we wont have to worry if they are going to blow themselves up everytime we see one. But we can't do that because you are our last hope now.

You should know the descendants of slaves are responsible much of our renowned gun-violence numbers and such. If you're competent at comparing numbers, you might want to contrast those to yours.

 

[brycejones]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HYLiMaj9Ak

Most recent issue shows just how much regard they hold for our SJW's eagerness to support islam (without converting to it!)

Well shock of shocks since ISIS is a bunch of assholes. Not sure what your point is besides continuing to provide free promotion to ISIS.

 

[MajinCry]

As an atheist (I assume) you should use your analytical abillity to understand the immense value the teachings of Jesus has had on our society. Classical philosophy combined with Christianity is what enabled us to become the leading civilization. The petty insults are getting boring.

Not true at all. It's at the expense of actual human lives that western civilization has advanced quite a bit. The dark ages is a great example of Christianity being strong. And let's not forget all those dudes that Christianity wanted dead, for furthering science and medicine.

Ever wondered why we are the least corrupt society? It's because the values created during the Reformation, you know, that time we stood up against the corruption of the Catholic Church?

The least corrupt society? I think Sweden or Finland holds that title. But really, I don't know if you're being serious. London, for example, was lauded as one of the most financially corrupt areas in the world by some super-heavyweight dude who spoke out against the mafia. Cannae remember his name, sadly.

But forget that, what about the illegal wars? Vietnam and Nicaragua for example. Or what about the war profiteering, where the US has propped up violent dictators, helped them exact slaughter and oppression, then take 'em down and wage war in the designated country? I'd like to hear what Libyans, Iraqis and the Vietnamese have to say about the west's corruption.

Ever wondered why the islamic empire went into decay after they were beaten back by us twice? It's not the crusades as any Muslim will tell you nowadays. No, it's because Islam creates a corrupt society (as you can still see today). And why is that? Because its a religion created by thiefs, killers and rapists that actually allows you to steal, kill and rape.

Right, just like Christianity. Notice how we can play this game as well; the Christian empire fell into decay, and has since been getting ever weaker. Remember the days when you would be burned at the stake for speaking out against Christianity? Those were righteous days.

I will glady trade your black population with our muslims, heck, you can even throw in the Mexicans as well. At least we wont have to worry if they are going to blow themselves up everytime we see one. But we can't do that because you are our last hope now.

I'm from Scotland ya ninny.

Edit: Actually it's a very exclusive situation. People from all over the world live here without causing much problems, but there is only one kind that actually wants to destroy our civilization.

Well, no, that's not true. For example, when the European settlers arrived, they set in motion a cycle of violence, rape and slaughter, from which an entire race will never recover; the Native American population today is around 97% lower than it was more than 500 years ago, before the Christians came.

There used to be upwards of 150 million Native Americans. Today? 2.5 Million tops. A prime example of Christianity's tolerance, where Christians enacted sex slavery, rape, slaughter and genocide. Those reservation schools, a more modern continuation of that, only finally shut down in the mid 90s.

I'd wager you're delusional, but it's more like you've just bought into patriotic musings and naivete

 

[agent00f]

Actually, the Lancet paper falls in the purview of my linked article. That said, even if they were not, the logic behind their criticisms were sound and sourced.

Lol, how can someone like you tell? Because it has technical sounding words in it? Serious question.

Appears rather obvious you're just linking arbitrary material that happens to criticize a study you don't like.

The author in your study could not or would not back up his data. The Lancet was also the same journal that published a paper in 1998 that linked autism to vaccines. Just because a paper is authored by someone who has a mastery does not mean they cannot examine the data and methodology.

But fine, if you want another that you feel qualifies as a peer, then how about The New England Journal of Medicine?

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa0707782#t=article

So, now do you accept that your paper was wrong?

NEJM questioned his findings.
Author had ethics violations for his paper.

Ready to admit you are wrong yet?

It's pretty clear you never got that far in school, and pretending you did isn't helping. However, of the schooling you've had, it should've taught that there's a difference between knowing/understanding something and not. For example, when a journal publishes a paper, it's not supporting some position the same way that the news outlets you might read supports some partisan effort. Since you can't be bothered to google what peer review is, I have to expend effort iterating that a reviewed paper simply means it's reasonably free of errors far as experts can tell. So this isn't Lancet vs NEJM like Fox News vs MSNBC. That's something you simply don't understand because you never reached the point where that academic experience could be taught.

The author here happens to be part of another different kind of study, which came up with somewhat lower numbers. Notice that it's not a study conducted by the NEJM, but of course you can't be expected to know/understand this for obvious reasons. Of course another author is entitled to believe his study/methodology/etc is more accurate as to be expected, but the idea that NEJM is debunking anything is rather comedic.

The reality is at this rate you'll never reach a position where your opinions on academic subjects would be taken seriously by anyone. In my naive optimism I tried to help with some guidance starting with accepting where you are now, but in hindsight that was only ever going to be an exercise in futility.

 

[SmilingBhudda]

The west is in lead in large part because of technology and mercantilism; often used for beating everyone else down to widen the gap.

Of course nobody wants to tell themselves that, so you create a narrative based around jingoism and how god loves us because we're the good guys.



You should know the descendants of slaves are responsible much of our renowned gun-violence numbers and such. If you're competent at comparing numbers, you might want to contrast those to yours.

Yes, and how were we able to create that technology and build our ships? By building a stable society and not constantly killing each other over petty grievances. You should look into ancient Arabic society with its clans and honor system. That is what Islam creates, at least the Sunni version of it. It's a field day for corrupt assholes. The so called golden age of Islam was the last sigh of the ancient civilization it conquered. After that it fell miles behind the west because they turned to tradition, not innovation.

Now I'm not saying that all muslims are dumb ass backwards people. Considering the fact they were catapulted into the modern world only a 100 years ago, they might not be doing so bad. But they must break away from the sytem that Islam is. We can help them here but not with more than 5% of our population.

Btw, don't forget the islamic empire controlled the slave trade for many centuries. And they didn't just capture black folks. Millions of Europeans were taken as well. Also: yes, white people traded in slaves, just like all other people of the world. But try to remember every once in a while that it was also white people who abolished it, largely under the influence of Christianity. But if it were up to Islam, it might be implemented again.

 

[agent00f]

Yes, and how were we able to create that technology and build our ships? By building a stable society and not constantly killing each other over petty grievances. You should look into ancient Arabic society with its clans and honor system. That is what Islam creates, at least the Sunni version of it. The so called golden age of Islam was the last sigh of the ancient civilization it conquered. After that it fell miles behind the west because they turned to tradition, not innovation.

Now I'm not saying that all muslims are dumb ass backwards people. Considering the fact they were catapulted into the modern world only a 100 years ago, they might not be doing so bad. But they must break away from the sytem that Islam is. We can help them here but not with more than 5% of our population.

The problem with these sort of assessments is that the authors invariably conflate themselves with the smart progressive people responsible for the ascent of the west, when really they're a lot closer to the portion of muslims they're disparaging.

That isn't some sort of coincidence, but rather a correlation between lack of historical perspective and the endowment effect.

For example, quite a few civilizations around those times you're speaking of were reset by the mongols, the relatively backwards western europe at the time only spared due to fortuitous serendipity. Or the fact that the feudal system was abandoned due in substance to the massive labor shortage following the black death.

It's also entirely odd that someone praising the virtues of capitalism would decry class structure in others; someone from europe no less.

 

[SmilingBhudda]

Yes, yes I know all about cherrypicking from history. Doesn't mean my picks don't hold value.

To understand Islam you must understand the people that created it. People that regularly raided villages and other tribes. And then solidified that way of living in their religion. And denied any change ever.

Just look at the 5 pillars. Not a single moral lesson. You might say: but wait, there's charity...yes, charity to spread Islam, violently if necessary. The declaration of obedience, the discpline of praying, the fasting for endurance...it's the perfect warrior religion system. Oh, I forgot about the bonus from the pelgrim tax.

Notice also how Islam always creates conflict when it comes into contact with other societies. It's rigid system of rules is bound to clash with the existing social conventions. It keeps muslims separate from non-muslims, hindering social interaction and preventing integration. It's not a religion that was designed to co-exist, it's designed to take over and implement it's own law.

Also notice how Islam always claims rights for itself, but as soon as it takes over power, always denies rights for others. That makes the constant cries of muslims about being discriminated even more hard to swallow. Typical Arab honor reaction though, never admit your own mistakes, always blame someone else. And certainly don't blame a Muslim, follower of the perfect man, the prophet Muhammed. First prophet ever to decide the splitting of the booty.

Ok, all that sounds harsh. But I guess that's fitting for a harsh religion from a harsh habitat. I'm starting to get the feeling though that all the good willing muslims are nothing more than a facade for the real goal.

 

[agent00f]

Yes, yes I know all about cherrypicking from history. Doesn't mean my picks don't hold value.

To understand Islam you must understand the people that created it. People that regularly raided villages and other tribes. And then solidified that way of living in their religion. And denied any change ever.

Just look at the 5 pillars. Not a single moral lesson. You might say: but wait, there's charity...yes, charity to spread Islam, violently if necessary. The declaration of obedience, the discpline of praying, the fasting for endurance...it's the perfect warrior religion system. Oh, I forgot about the bonus from the pelgrim tax.

Notice also how Islam always creates conflict when it comes into contact with other societies. It's rigid system of rules is bound to clash with the existing social conventions. It keeps muslims separate from non-muslims, hindering social interaction and preventing integration. It's not a religion that was designed to co-exist, it's designed to take over and implement it's own law.

Also notice how Islam always claims rights for itself, but as soon as it takes over power, always denies rights for others. That makes the constant cries of muslims about being discriminated even more hard to swallow. Typical Arab honor reaction though, never admit your own mistakes, always blame someone else. And certainly don't blame a Muslim, follower of the perfect man, the prophet Muhammed. First prophet ever to decide the splitting of the booty.

Ok, all that sounds harsh. But I guess that's fitting for a harsh religion from a harsh habitat. I'm starting to get the feeling though that all the good willing muslims are nothing more than a facade for the real goal.

If islam is so inherently shitty why was the ME ahead of the christian west for most of history?

 

[Blue_Max]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXa80iqZQqI

Since it's so relevant right now, a comparison of the seven deadly sins - islam vs. christianity.

You decide.

 

[techne]

The reality is at this rate you'll never reach a position where your opinions on academic subjects would be taken seriously by anyone. In my naive optimism I tried to help with some guidance starting with accepting where you are now, but in hindsight that was only ever going to be an exercise in futility.

I beg you: do not abandon us! How could we live without your expertise and guidance? Light of the lights! Mastermind of the burning flesh! Grandiose leader of the flock beasts holding gas and knives! Please keep up with your resentment fight!

After all, it seems that we really need all this to take conscience of what make us unique.

 

[agent00f]

I beg you: do not abandon us! How could we live without your expertise and guidance? Light of the lights! Mastermind of the burning flesh! Grandiose leader of the flock beasts holding gas and knives! Please keep up with your resentment fight!

After all, it seems that we really need all this to take conscience of what make us unique.

It's worth noting not everyone here is that stupid. But I believe there's some obligation of better informed to impress the gravity of their situation upon dummies, or else risk the consequences exhibited here daily.