NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5306792.stm

A Muslim group in Zanzibar has protested about plans to mark the 60th birthday of the late rock legend and Queen front man Freddie Mercury.
The Zanzibar-born singer who was openly gay was renowned for his flamboyant lifestyle. He was also HIV positive.

Muslims on the Tanzanian archipelago say his antics violated Islam and want a beach party on Saturday cancelled.

Born Farrokh Bulsara to Persian parents on 5 September 1946 in Zanzibar, Freddie Mercury was educated in India before moving to the UK in 1964 where he led the international supergroup Queen to stardom.

...lovely. So a party for a dead guy is an afront to Islam. I continue to fail to see how anyone can see fighting militant Islam is a bad idea. For a religion supposedly based on tolerance, it seems to be trying to one up the Inquisition Era Catholic Church!

While I don't have much to say about Extremist Islam...I can say a few things about Freddie Murcury...Fuckin' A!

...lovely. So a party for a dead guy is an afront to Islam. I continue to fail to see how anyone can see fighting militant Islam is a bad idea. For a religion supposedly based on tolerance, it seems to be trying to one up the Inquisition Era Catholic Church!

This has nothing to do with militant Islam and everything to do with the basic teachings of Islam. Not all religions are based on tolerance.

...lovely. So a party for a dead guy is an afront to Islam. I continue to fail to see how anyone can see fighting militant Islam is a bad idea. For a religion supposedly based on tolerance, it seems to be trying to one up the Inquisition Era Catholic Church!

Difference between militant/conservative "religion" and the real religion, etc etc. And I don't think they liked that, as you point out, Freddie Mercury used drugs and was (very) homosexual. I like Queen, though, so this makes me sad.
Plus violation against freedom of expression and you know the rest. Stupid.

Islams needs to copy the Christians and make up some kind of excommunication thing.

This has nothing to do with militant Islam and everything to do with the basic teachings of Islam. Not all religions are based on tolerance.

Islam is essentially on the same level as Judaism and Christianity; they're all fairly intolerant in some sense. Enough of that, though. This thread should celebrate Freddie Mercury's life. Right?

This has nothing to do with militant Islam and everything to do with the basic teachings of Islam. Not all religions are based on tolerance.

This has everything to do with militant Islam.

Islams needs to copy the Christians and make up some kind of excommunication thing.

They have that and it's call death.

Islams needs to copy the Christians and make up some kind of excommunication thing.

Not all Christians have excommunication because a number of Christian sects don't even have a central figure of authority, or even the same sacrament of communion that the Catholic church has, which is what excommunication is - denial of the sacrament of excommunication and thusly a damning to hell.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5306792.stm

A Muslim group in Zanzibar has protested about plans to mark the 60th birthday of the late rock legend and Queen front man Freddie Mercury.
The Zanzibar-born singer who was openly gay was renowned for his flamboyant lifestyle. He was also HIV positive.

Muslims on the Tanzanian archipelago say his antics violated Islam and want a beach party on Saturday cancelled.

Born Farrokh Bulsara to Persian parents on 5 September 1946 in Zanzibar, Freddie Mercury was educated in India before moving to the UK in 1964 where he led the international supergroup Queen to stardom.

...lovely. So a party for a dead guy is an afront to Islam. I continue to fail to see how anyone can see fighting militant Islam is a bad idea. For a religion supposedly based on tolerance, it seems to be trying to one up the Inquisition Era Catholic Church!
I fail to see any "militancy" in regards to this article. While I may not agree with them, they are expressing their concerns in regards to their religion, in their country.

BTW, how does one go about "fighting militant Islam"?

I fail to see any "militancy" in regards to this article. While I may not agree with them, they are expressing their concerns in regards to their religion, in their country.

BTW, how does one go about "fighting militant Islam"?

Because if it ain't American democratic christian beliefs, it ain't right.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5306792.stm

A Muslim group in Zanzibar has protested about plans to mark the 60th birthday of the late rock legend and Queen front man Freddie Mercury.
The Zanzibar-born singer who was openly gay was renowned for his flamboyant lifestyle. He was also HIV positive.

Muslims on the Tanzanian archipelago say his antics violated Islam and want a beach party on Saturday cancelled.

Born Farrokh Bulsara to Persian parents on 5 September 1946 in Zanzibar, Freddie Mercury was educated in India before moving to the UK in 1964 where he led the international supergroup Queen to stardom.

...lovely. So a party for a dead guy is an afront to Islam. I continue to fail to see how anyone can see fighting militant Islam is a bad idea. For a religion supposedly based on tolerance, it seems to be trying to one up the Inquisition Era Catholic Church!

Well...

At least they aren't any different from our biggoted religious groups.

Well...

At least they aren't any different from our biggoted religious groups.

And I'll beat the Islamaphobes to the punch:

"But... But... They Don't Behead People!" etc etc.

There should be a generic shorthand for these kinds of threads, the way people who agree with Rush Windbag say "Ditto."

How about...

"0MG!! 3b1l m0zl3mz!!"

This has nothing to do with militant Islam and everything to do with the basic teachings of Islam. Not all religions are based on tolerance.

You know a party for deceased gay man would hear bitching in the US in 1970s, for that matter, there's probably still a number of towns that would be less then fond of hosting the celebration.

Freddie Mercury > Islam.

Someone should start a religion based on the teachings of the great Freddie Mercury and Queen shall be our scripture.

They have that and it's call death.

lol those retarded moon-worshippers and the way every one of them (100%) (one out of one) screams "infidel" and carries a sword around for the purpose of beheading westerners.

Do you ever listen to yourself when you say things?

Because if it ain't American democratic christian beliefs, it ain't right.

God save us all from the good intentions of the Christorepublicans.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5306792.stm

A Muslim group in Zanzibar has protested about plans to mark the 60th birthday of the late rock legend and Queen front man Freddie Mercury.
The Zanzibar-born singer who was openly gay was renowned for his flamboyant lifestyle. He was also HIV positive.

Muslims on the Tanzanian archipelago say his antics violated Islam and want a beach party on Saturday cancelled.

Born Farrokh Bulsara to Persian parents on 5 September 1946 in Zanzibar, Freddie Mercury was educated in India before moving to the UK in 1964 where he led the international supergroup Queen to stardom.

...lovely. So a party for a dead guy is an afront to Islam. I continue to fail to see how anyone can see fighting militant Islam is a bad idea. For a religion supposedly based on tolerance, it seems to be trying to one up the Inquisition Era Catholic Church!

Dude, haven't you heard? THAT'S NOT REAL ISLAM!!!

Dude, haven't you heard? THAT'S NOT REAL ISLAM!!!

In case you're being sarcastic, it's only real Islam if Fred Phelps is real christianism. If you believe this is real Islam, you HAVE to believe that Phelps is a real Christian.

In case you're being sarcastic, it's only real Islam if Fred Phelps is real christianism. If you believe this is real Islam, you HAVE to believe that Phelps is a real Christian.

Ah, yes, the old "Islam can't be bad because . . . Christians are bad too!" Do apologists for Islam ever respond to criticism with something other than pointing to some allegedly analogous problem with Christianity?

And yes, I was being sarcastic. Congratulations on recognizing the sarcasm.

As for Fred Phelps, he is a Christian, but a highly divergent Christian and not representative of any more than a tiny minority of all Christians. In contrast, the Zanzibari extremists are both Muslims and representative of a significant percentage of all Muslims.

Freddie Mercury > Islam

Heh, that's something even I can agree on. Really, why do people have to be so homophobic?

You know a party for deceased gay man would hear bitching in the US in 1970s, for that matter, there's probably still a number of towns that would be less then fond of hosting the celebration.

You got that right. I wonder if Phelp's group would protest it. Let's arrange a party for Elton John (I know he's alive, but) in Wichita, Kansas and see what happens.

Here is Islam's view on homosexuality if you would care to take the time to read it. Not that much different than the Christian fundamentalist view.

http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/homosexuality.htm

What is Islam's view of homosexuality?

There is no doubt that in Islam homosexuality is considered 'sinful'. Homosexuality as far as Islam is concerned is a profound mistake ( as are all sins if they are not intending to do wrong). Humans are not homosexuals by nature. People become homosexuals because of their environments. Particularly critical is the environment during puberty. Suggestions, ideas & strange dreams are symptoms of confused attempts to understand new and blunt sexual desires and are rashly interpreted as defining someone as being one sexuality or another. If these conclusions are accompanied by actual homosexual acts they are even more strongly reinforced.

Human instincts can be subjected to acts of will. Sexuality is a choice of identity which follows choices of action which follow from choices of what to have sexual fantasies about. Human beings are especially able to control their thoughts, entertaining some and dismissing others.

Ah, yes, the old "Islam can't be bad because . . . Christians are bad too!" Do apologists for Islam ever respond to criticism with something other than pointing to some allegedly analogous problem with Christianity?

And yes, I was being sarcastic. Congratulations on recognizing the sarcasm.

As for Fred Phelps, he is a Christian, but a highly divergent Christian and not representative of any more than a tiny minority of all Christians. In contrast, the Zanzibari extremists are both Muslims and representative of a significant percentage of all Muslims.

A "significant percentage"? What percentage would that be, then, share with us...

A "significant percentage"? What percentage would that be, then, share with us...

The mythical 100% that Meir Kahane Jr.- whoops, New Mitanni claims is proof that "m0zl3mz r a1rr3d33mbl`/ 3b1l" and that the world as a whole can only achieve peace when they're all killed off or deported to reservations where not even shit and fungus will grow. Probably from sites like Jihadwatch amongst others.

A "significant percentage"? What percentage would that be, then, share with us...

Obviously it's high enough for the Muslims to demand that the event be called off in a democratically elected state; it's not the government that's doing it, it's the people themselves. Extremism is obviously very high as a percentage of Muslims in Zanzibar and it is reflected in their actions.

The mythical 100% that Meir Kahane Jr.- whoops, New Mitanni claims is proof that "m0zl3mz r a1rr3d33mbl`/ 3b1l" and that the world as a whole can only achieve peace when they're all killed off or deported to reservations where not even shit and fungus will grow. Probably from sites like Jihadwatch amongst others.

Is he really a Kahanist, or just generally racist/ultranationalist? I thought he was Catholic? Either way, you're a strange bird, Mitanni.

I fail to see any "militancy" in regards to this article. While I may not agree with them, they are expressing their concerns in regards to their religion, in their country.

BTW, how does one go about "fighting militant Islam"?

Funny! Aren't you the one always railing against the Bible-thumpers in the US? :p

Christianty died when christians stopped opposing the things that are against their religion. Islam is still alive, on the other hand.

Dude, haven't you heard? THAT'S NOT REAL ISLAM!!!

Yes. Which is why we must fight extremism everywhere.

*shrug* If they don't want the celebration in Zanzibar, then move it to the UK where he made his money.

Christianty died when christians stopped opposing the things that are against their religion. Islam is still alive, on the other hand.

Yes, because Christians have stopped opposing abortions, contraception, homosexuality....

A religious group in a democracy is protesting an event celebrating a gay singer and asking for a beach party in his honor to be canceled. No action has been taken by the government yet.

If you don't specify the religion or country, it sounds like something that could happen in America.

Yes, because Christians have stopped opposing abortions, contraception, homosexuality....

Remember, when Christians and Jews are oppressive, it's just an exception. When Muslims are oppressive, it's The Rule.

A religious group in a democracy is protesting an event celebrating a gay singer and asking for a beach party in his honor to be canceled. No action has been taken by the government yet.

If you don't specify the religion or country, it sounds like something that could happen in America.

Didn't you hear? It's only repulsive when the "evil muslims" do it.

Very difficult to evaluate without sufficient statistics. Certainly, if Freddie Mercury offended the sensibilities of a quantity Zanzibarians (I never thought I'd use that word....), as I daresay he ought to, they have no obligation to attend the beach party held in his honour. However, I would question, unless such individuals constitute a majority, their right to have it banned.

So what's bad about party for a famous person?!

Islam doctrines:rolleyes:


Oh well, I am nobody to say what Muslims should or should not do. But I can say for Freddie - he rocks! *bows*

Remember, when Christians and Jews are oppressive, it's just an exception. When Muslims are oppressive, it's The Rule.

And no evidence to the contrary will ever sway them.

Well, at least that probably means the guys that believe "all moslems are ebul" are very blissful, for ignorance is bliss...

Difference between militant/conservative "religion" and the real religion, etc etc. And I don't think they liked that, as you point out, Freddie Mercury used drugs and was (very) homosexual. I like Queen, though, so this makes me sad.
Plus violation against freedom of expression and you know the rest. Stupid.

How exactly can one be "very" homosexual?

Very difficult to evaluate without sufficient statistics. Certainly, if Freddie Mercury offended the sensibilities of a quantity Zanzibarians (I never thought I'd use that word....), as I daresay he ought to, they have no obligation to attend the beach party held in his honour. However, I would question, unless such individuals constitute a majority, their right to have it banned.

Interest groups. I'm not sure how it is in Zanzibar, but religious groups and other minority interest groups can hold major sway over policy. Maybe it's not their right, but it's the reality. Really, I doubt that many people in Zanzibar care about Freddie Mercury or whether people hold a public party for him.

How exactly can one be "very" homosexual?

Freddie is a huge gay icon, so I call him "very" homosexual. Even though being very homosexual is kind of like being very pregnant; you either are or you aren't.

Interest groups. I'm not sure how it is in Zanzibar, but religious groups and other minority interest groups can hold major sway over policy. Maybe it's not their right, but it's the reality. Really, I doubt that many people in Zanzibar care about Freddie Mercury or whether people hold a public party for him.

I don't know. Islamic procedure generally renders the imposition of the Koran the role of law. If we concede that Mercury was thoroughly immoral, at least to an Islamic observant, than they are at perfect liberty to act in the manner theyr propose.

Freddie is a huge gay icon, so I call him "very" homosexual. Even though being very homosexual is kind of like being very pregnant; you either are or you aren't.

Okay then.

So what's bad about party for a famous person?!

Islam doctrines:rolleyes:


Oh well, I am nobody to say what Muslims should or should not do. But I can say for Freddie - he rocks! *bows*

Same could go for christian doctrines - according to the Old Testament, mr. Mercury would be stoned to death. Nice Christians are out in the wonderful Topeka everyday picketing funerals and claiming that God hates gays. It's not about the religious doctrines - for even wiccan doctrine can be seen as opposing homosexuality. It's about each and every person. Most Christians are tolerant, as are most muslims, as are most Jews, as are most wiccans. As are most anything. But then we see mr. Ignorant Mullah saying gays should burn, and we see mr. Voldemort Ratzlinger saying everyone but catholics will burn, and we see mr. Human Cabbage Sharon saying Israel has the right to murder whoever it sees fit, and we see ms. Goth Occultist Wannabe saying that only worshipping the Goddess is wise. Are these morons representative of mainstream thought? Hardly - Islam has several stories about "sexual deviants" that were saved anyways regardless of "changing their ways", many - or most - Catholics despise the current lich they have for a pope, many jews think Sharon got his current state coming and most wiccans are very nice people. As was pointed out, this could be taking place in America with Christians if the religion and country weren't mentioned.

Is he really a Kahanist, or just generally racist/ultranationalist? I thought he was Catholic? Either way, you're a strange bird, Mitanni.

"Racist"? The Korean and Jewish girls I've dated, among others, would beg to differ. "Nationalist"? Definitely. "Ultranationalist"? A matter of opinion. "Strange bird?" Likewise.

"Racist"? The Korean and Jewish girls I've dated, among others, would beg to differ. "Nationalist"? Definitely. "Ultranationalist"? A matter of opinion. "Strange bird?" Likewise.

You CAN focus your hatred on one single group (such as arabs/muslims) and still be a racist/bigot, regardless of having dated every other race/religion there is. Nationalism did not, as was seen in both World Wars, work, nor it ever will. Ultranationalism even less. And you're strange in that your ideas fail to match the present time.

Questions?

...snip...according to the Old Testament, mr. Mercury would be stoned to death. ...snip... But then we see mr. Ignorant Mullah saying gays should burn,...

There is one very big difference here, and that is the way the two religions view their sacred text. Most Christians believe the Bible to be written by men inspired by God. There is room for interpretation of the text and different people will and can interpret it differently therefore the religion can evolve.

Muslims however believe the Koran was written by God himself and was given to Mohammed by the angel Gabriel. As God wrote it, it is perfect and as the written word of God, there is no room for interpretation.

So, if the Koran states homosexuality is a sin and the sinner must be punished, then it is a sin and he must be punished. So, the Mullah is not ignorant but is following the word of God.

There is one very big difference here, and that is the way the two religions view their sacred text. Most Christians believe the Bible to be written by men inspired by God. There is room for interpretation of the text and different people will and can interpret it differently therefore the religion can evolve.

Muslims however believe the Koran was written by God himself and was given to Mohammed by the angel Gabriel. As God wrote it, it is perfect and as the written word of God, there is no room for interpretation.

So, if the Koran states homosexuality is a sin and the sinner must be punished, then it is a sin and he must be punished. So, the Mullah is not ignorant but is following the word of God.

False. I've seen, and researched for a purpose once, one passage of the Quran that had at least three interpretations, regarding interfaith marriage. So, the Quran is as open to interpretation as any other book. Further, the Quran doesn't state homosexuality as a sin, but as a "mistake". A mullah that says it's a sin is not following the Quran, then. Further, if you studied linguistics like I do, you would know that it's impossible to make a text that leaves no room for (mis)interpretation. Yes, it's impossible even for God, unless He also controlled how each text is interpreted by each person, which would then turn free will into nothingness.

Do your homework.

False. I've seen, and researched for a purpose once, one passage of the Quran that had at least three interpretations, regarding interfaith marriage. So, the Quran is as open to interpretation as any other book. Further, the Quran doesn't state homosexuality as a sin, but as a "mistake". A mullah that says it's a sin is not following the Quran, then. Further, if you studied linguistics like I do, you would know that it's impossible to make a text that leaves no room for (mis)interpretation. Yes, it's impossible even for God, unless He also controlled how each text is interpreted by each person, which would then turn free will into nothingness.

Do your homework.

I suggest you do some of your own, Heikoku. Celtlund's statement is precisely the one followed by all Sunni Imams - The Quran is perfect, and not subject to interpretation. They hold this up as proof of it's superiority over the bible.
Now, there are other Islamic religious texts, collectively called the Sunna, which are written by men and are therefore subject to interpretation.
Of course, to non-islamics, the concept of it being "not subject to interpretation" seems ludicrous, but that is the stated position.

The Militant Boyscouts also do not like homosexuals. How anyone can support those people is beyond me.

False. I've seen, and researched for a purpose once, one passage of the Quran that had at least three interpretations, regarding interfaith marriage. So, the Quran is as open to interpretation as any other book. Further, the Quran doesn't state homosexuality as a sin, but as a "mistake". A mullah that says it's a sin is not following the Quran, then. Further, if you studied linguistics like I do, you would know that it's impossible to make a text that leaves no room for (mis)interpretation. Yes, it's impossible even for God, unless He also controlled how each text is interpreted by each person, which would then turn free will into nothingness.

Do your homework.

All I can say is your research and my research disagree. So, I guess everyone else will have to read what we both have said, do their own research, and decide for themselves. :fluffle:

You CAN focus your hatred on one single group (such as arabs/muslims) and still be a racist/bigot, regardless of having dated every other race/religion there is.

Opposition, particularly reasoned opposition grounded in actual study of the opponent and supported with specific evidence, is not equivalent to "bigotry". Strike one.

Nor is Islam a "race." Nor does my opposition extend to Arabs per se, since Egyptian Copts and Lebanese Maronites, for example, are both Arabs and Christians. Strike two.

And you're strange in that your ideas fail to match the present time.

I have even less interest in adopting ideas that conform to your notion of "the present time" than I have in apostasizing to Islam.

Strike three. You're out.

Questions?

Only one: are you now or have you ever been in grad school?

I always have to laugh when people try to justify what Islamic people do by saying "Well the Xtians Did it dring the Curzatzed!!!111LOLOL!" Yes, like just because one group of people did it, justifies the other group doing it, thus making it ok. :rolleyes:

I always have to laugh when people try to justify what Islamic people do by saying "Well the Xtians Did it dring the Curzatzed!!!111LOLOL!" Yes, like just because one group of people did it, justifies the other group doing it, thus making it ok. :rolleyes:

No. The phrase is "Let He who is without sin cast the first stone." So far we've had plenty of Islamaphobes who act like no other religion in the world has ever committed violent acts in the name of their deities.

No. The phrase is "Let He who is without sin cast the first stone."

I am sorry, but I don't think crusaders are posting in NSG about intolerance of muslims.:rolleyes:

So folks, none of us are saints and sinless, so let's dare not speak about ANYTHING unless we can demonstrate that we are sinless saints...

I am sorry, but I don't think crusaders are posting in NSG about intolerance of muslims.:rolleyes:

So folks, none of us are saints and sinless, so let's dare not speak about ANYTHING unless we can demonstrate that we are sinless saints...

It's nice to know you'll jump in and save the day when someone dares to refuse singing your favorite chant of "m0zl3mz r 3b1l".

So folks, none of us are saints and sinless, so let's dare not speak about ANYTHING unless we can demonstrate that we are sinless saints...

You want NS to remain silent....FOREVER?

...lovely. So a party for a dead guy is an afront to Islam. I continue to fail to see how anyone can see fighting militant Islam is a bad idea. For a religion supposedly based on tolerance, it seems to be trying to one up the Inquisition Era Catholic Church!


Actually, this is how one would expect a religion based on tolerance to act. Practicing tolerance means that a group reserves the right to accept or reject the beliefs of others, as opposed to acceptance, which would hold the beliefs of others beyond their judgement.

Thomas Paine said it best, but I think the best way to put it in modern terms is that tolerance is merely the watered-down version of intolerance.

Actually, this is how one would expect a religion based on tolerance to act. Practicing tolerance means that a group reserves the right to accept or reject the beliefs of others, as opposed to acceptance, which would hold the beliefs of others beyond their judgement.

Thomas Paine said it best, but I think the best way to put it in modern terms is that tolerance is merely the watered-down version of intolerance.

***shakes head...wanders away...screams*** WTF?

No. The phrase is "Let He who is without sin cast the first stone." So far we've had plenty of Islamaphobes who act like no other religion in the world has ever committed violent acts in the name of their deities.

So far, I really haven't seen anyone else claim that their religion or belief system haven't commited violent acts.

It's nice to know you'll jump in and save the day when someone dares to refuse singing your favorite chant of "m0zl3mz r 3b1l".

Oh please captain Islam who saves muslims from evil NSers...how courageous of you to beat others with what you think they would be saying if not for you.../insert smart looking 12@#*($#) here/

Remember, when Christians and Jews are oppressive, it's just an exception. When Muslims are oppressive, it's The Rule.


Funniest thing I've heard in a long time. The only reason that the christians and jews are only oppressive on occasion, is that they no longer have that much secular power. (some xtians here in the states are trying to change that.) If christianity still had the power it did up through the age of enlightenment, then we'd still be having the burning times.

Ah, the late, great Farouk Bulsara. What a champion.

I was going to post this earlier, but I figured people would say, "oh noes, not another muslim bashing thread".

Hey, the truth hurts, doesn't it?

Islams needs to copy the Christians and make up some kind of excommunication thing.

They do. They just call it 'killing' instead. :p

I was going to post this earlier, but I figured people would say, "oh noes, not another muslim bashing thread".

Hey, the truth hurts, doesn't it?

Personally, I did not envision it as a Muslim bashing thread. It's more of an idiot Muslim bashing thread. It could just as easily have been about Baptists or Vegetarians or the Dutch. ;)

(In case you don't get it: Baptists are also anti-gay. Vegetarians are anti-meat, which he ate a lot of. And the Dutch? Well...)

I really don't get this whole "christians do it too, so it must be OK" thing. If it's bad, it's bad, regardless of whether or not they're the only ones doing it.

I was going to post this earlier, but I figured people would say, "oh noes, not another muslim bashing thread".
Well, you do seem to be the King of the Muslim bashing brigade?

Hey, the truth hurts, doesn't it?
Especially when your words come back to haunt you via a captured post?:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11617712&postcount=99

The problem is that only the really intolerant asshole extremists can stand up and shout out their message without repercussions.

Whenever someone becomes well known for standing up and shouting out, "Hey! Can't we all live together in peace and harmony?" he gets killed. :(

Call me if I become a Muslim, and kill people on TV and the Internet.

Haven't seen a Christian do that in some time, in the name of religion.

Whenever someone becomes well known for standing up and shouting out, "Hey! Can't we all live together in peace and harmony?" he gets killed. :(

Or put on a cross. After a 100 year his followers argue wether he said that you should have a green hat or a red hat on sundays and start a war which kills thousands of innocent people.

Call me if I become a Muslim, and kill people on TV and the Internet.

Haven't seen a Christian do that in some time, in the name of religion.

Well, we have the christians that bombs abortion clinics and murder doctors...

Or put on a cross. After a 100 year his followers argue wether he said that you should have a green hat or a red hat on sundays and start a war which kills thousands of innocent people.

Wow. That's got me Tongue Tied! (lol!)

Well, we have the christians that bombs abortion clinics and murder doctors...

Nowhere near as often. Not even close.

Nowhere near as often. Not even close.

Well, what you said was the following:
Haven't seen a Christian do that in some time, in the name of religion.

You don't say hat it should be in the same amount, you just say "a christian". But I guess there is a grade in hell...

Or put on a cross. After a 100 year his followers argue wether he said that you should have a green hat or a red hat on sundays and start a war which kills thousands of innocent people.

Wasn't it blue and green?

Wasn't it blue and green?

In reality they were supposed to be green, but the war was fought over whether they were supposed to be red or blue (I assume you're talking Red Dwarf here).

Wasn't it blue and green?

BLASPHEMER!!!

It was yellow with red polka dots. Expect to have holy war waged upon you once our denomination gets a holy army.

In reality they were supposed to be green, but the war was fought over whether they were supposed to be red or blue (I assume you're talking Red Dwarf here).

Well, I was thinking a bit about Red Dwarf but couldn't remember the colours...I just wanted a stupid reason to start a war about the learning from a guy that said that we should be nice to each other, and got nailed to a cross for that.

In reality they were supposed to be green, but the war was fought over whether they were supposed to be red or blue (I assume you're talking Red Dwarf here).

Actually, that is based on an apparent actual event in which a riot started in Constantinople(?) over the importance of wearing a certain color. A lot of people died.

In the original Tomorrow People television series, they revisit the incident and blame it on space aliens. :p

Actually, that is based on an apparent actual event in which a riot started in Constantinople(?) over the importance of wearing a certain color. A lot of people died.

It doesn't even surprise me that something like that could actually happen.

Actually, that is based on an apparent actual event in which a riot started in Constantinople(?) over the importance of wearing a certain color. A lot of people died.

In the original Tomorrow People television series, they revisit the incident and blame it on space aliens. :p

Why am I not suprised...

I finally found something on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nika_riots

*nod* I was right. The Blue and the Green.

You see, it's not "Christians do it too so it's okay". No matter how much the muslim-bashers claim it. It's "Christians do it too so it's either a proof that BOTH groups are bigots or it's a proof that neither one is and that these are merely jerks inside the given groups.". It's not about being "okay", it's about "showing that the rest of the group is as bigoted". And that does demand coherence, and that does demand us to say that it's either both or neither, or admit sheer, plain, simple and abject bigotry. The kind of which recommends carpet-bombing against Arabs.

Can you understand that or should I draw you guys a picture?

I continue to fail to see how anyone can see fighting militant Islam is a bad idea. For a religion supposedly based on tolerance

"Militant Islam" is a religion? No it isn't. So next time, just say "fighting Islam." You consider the West to be at war with Islam and just add "militant" or "extremist" qualifiers there just so you look politically correct.

"Militant Islam" is a religion? No it isn't. So next time, just say "fighting Islam." You consider the West to be at war with Islam and just add "militant" or "extremist" qualifiers there just so you look politically correct.

It has all the qualifiers of a war too, because he demonizes Islam for something that many Christians do as well. So, yes, you're right. I fail to see him calling for a war against "militant Christianity". Too bad.

"Racist"? The Korean and Jewish girls I've dated, among others, would beg to differ. "Nationalist"? Definitely. "Ultranationalist"? A matter of opinion. "Strange bird?" Likewise.

so if adolf hitler slept with a black woman, he would be the epitome of racial tolerance?

Is he really a Kahanist, or just generally racist/ultranationalist? I thought he was Catholic? Either way, you're a strange bird, Mitanni.

hes not really all that strange, Mittani repesents a large, and growing part the american public. If I was a muslim I would leave the country, IMMEDIATLY and if I couldn't i would not let my kids go to public school, for their own safety. Pathetic really you would think we could learn from our mistakes invloving the japanese-american population in WWII...:(

so if adolf hitler slept with a black woman, he would be the epitome of racial tolerance?

The statement was meant as a further, if superfluous, refutation of the knee-jerk accusation of *gasp* "racism."

I realize you're only 16, but you really do need to learn what words mean before you use them. So here's your lesson for today: Islam is NOT a "race." It is a belief system. The term "racism" does not apply to opposition to a belief system.

Is that clear now, or do I need to repeat it?

Pathetic really you would think we could learn from our mistakes invloving the japanese-american population in WWII...:(

Number of people in America killed during WWII by Japanese-Americans: 0

Number of people in America killed on 9/11 by Islamo-Nazi agents who entered the country under false pretenses and pretended to be "peaceful": 3000

It seems that we have in fact learned from our mistakes. They're just not the mistakes you have in mind.

I was going to post this earlier, but I figured people would say, "oh noes, not another muslim bashing thread".

Hey, the truth hurts, doesn't it?

Yep. It sure does! (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43365)


Christians, Jews oppose Jerusalem 'gay' fest
Unusual coalition formed to sign petition opposing 10-day homosexual event

JERUSALEM – Warning of divine retribution and possible violent protest, evangelical Christians and rabbis from the United States have joined forces with ultra-orthodox Jews in Israel to fight plans to hold an international gay festival in Jerusalem this summer.

News sources report the WorldPride Parade, last held in Rome in 2000, is a 10-day event including street parties, workshops and a gay film festival. Jerusalem's ultra-orthodox Jewish Mayor Uri Lupolianski says he is powerless to interfere as public events are licensed by the police, not City Hall.

At a news conference Wednesday, California pastor Leo Giovinetti said hosting the 10-day World Pride event could bring divine retribution upon Jerusalem, citing the biblical story of Sodom and Gomorra as a precedent, according to Steve Weizman, writing for the Associated Press.



There seems to be no monolopy on objecting to all things gay when it comes to the Big Three religions.

The only part that is hilarious is watching each individual group point out specific instances as indicitive of the intolerance of the other.

Yep. It sure does! (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43365)



There seems to be no monolopy on objecting to all things gay when it comes to the Big Three religions.

The only part that is hilarious is watching each individual group point out specific instances as indicitive of the intolerance of the other.

But then he'll say "Oh, you're claiming that it makes it ok if Christians and Jews also do it".

Allow me to pre-empt that one.

No, he's claiming - and PROVING - that Islam has no monopoly on this kind of idiocy.

Is that clear or should I draw you a picture?

...lovely. So a party for a dead guy is an afront to Islam. I continue to fail to see how anyone can see fighting militant Islam is a bad idea. For a religion supposedly based on tolerance, it seems to be trying to one up the Inquisition Era Catholic Church!
I don't think this is really militant Islam so much as merely Islamic conservatism.

I don't think that there is anyone who believes that fighting militant Islam is a bad idea.

And I'll beat the Islamaphobes to the punch:

"But... But... They Don't Behead People!" etc etc.
The Islamic group in this article doesn't behead people. Way to use the oversized tar brush.

God save us all from the good intentions of the Christorepublicans.
I prefer the term "born-again Republicans" ;)

True sentiment though. Except perhaps calling the intentions "good".

Here is Islam's view on...
Like any other world religion, Islam is interpreted in many different ways. There are few views that unite the whole religion.

Christianty died when christians stopped opposing the things that are against their religion. Islam is still alive, on the other hand.
How do Christians not oppose things that are against their religion? Gratuitous warfare is against most Christian beliefs, but that didn't stop many bloodthirsty kings from calling themselves Christian.

Didn't you hear? It's only repulsive when the "evil muslims" do it.
Why do you assume that those who are repulsed by Muslim homophobia, have no problem with Christian homophobia?

Why do you assume that those who are repulsed by Muslim homophobia, have no problem with Christian homophobia?

Oh, I'm not claiming they have no problem, but they DO seem to believe that, while the group of derelicts that protested Mercury is a representative of all muslims, Fred Phelps is not a representative of all Christians. I'm pointing out to them (in short words so they understand) that, just like Fred Phelps doesn't represent all Christians, said derelicts don't represent all muslims.

"Racist"? The Korean and Jewish girls I've dated, among others, would beg to differ. "Nationalist"? Definitely. "Ultranationalist"? A matter of opinion. "Strange bird?" Likewise.
Nationalism is stupid, irrational and destructive*.

*Unless your country is victim of an imperial power.

No. The phrase is "Let He who is without sin cast the first stone."
Who's casting stones?

Attacks on human rights should always be criticised, right?

Or only when committed by western countries?

So far we've had plenty of Islamaphobes who act like no other religion in the world has ever committed violent acts in the name of their deities.
I haven't seen anyone saying this either.

Call me if I become a Muslim, and kill people on TV and the Internet.

Haven't seen a Christian do that in some time, in the name of religion.
This is just threadjacking.

Oh, I'm not claiming they have no problem, but they DO seem to believe that, while the group of derelicts that protested Mercury is a representative of all muslims, Fred Phelps is not a representative of all Christians. I'm pointing out to them (in short words so they understand) that, just like Fred Phelps doesn't represent all Christians, said derelicts don't represent all muslims.

"It's only repulsive when the "evil muslims" do it."

Presuming that "it" means homophobic activism, then that is exactly what you're saying.

You don't seem to be aware that not everyone who is calling this group for the bunch of petulant morons that they are is tarring all Muslims.

"It's only repulsive when the "evil muslims" do it."

Presuming that "it" means homophobic activism, then that is exactly what you're saying.

You don't seem to be aware that not everyone who is calling this group for the bunch of petulant morons that they are is tarring all Muslims.

Okay, mis-expressed myself there.

But, it is a fact that many of the people who are calling this group for the bunch of petulant morons that they are are tarring all Muslims. DK and New Mittanni to name a few.

But I'll clarify, then: Attention, people. Whoever is calling this group for the ignorant morons they are and would do the same if this were a Christian group, all the while not tarring all members of said given group, assume that all my messages agree with you; Whoever is using this event to tar all muslims, I'll continue to call you on your bigotry.

Okay, mis-expressed myself there.

But, it is a fact that many of the people who are calling this group for the bunch of petulant morons that they are are tarring all Muslims. DK and New Mittanni to name a few.

But I'll clarify, then: Attention, people. Whoever is calling this group for the ignorant morons they are and would do the same if this were a Christian group, all the while not tarring all members of said given group, assume that all my messages agree with you; Whoever is using this event to tar all muslims, I'll continue to call you on your bigotry.

Here, Here

Number of people in America killed on 9/11 by Islamo-Nazi agents who entered the country under false pretenses and pretended to be "peaceful": 3000

Number of people in America killed on December 7th by Jap-nazi agents who entered the country under false pretenses and pretended to be "peaceful": 3000

like trying to teach a brick wall quantum mechanics, not all 1,200,000,000 muslims in the world are terrorists:http://www.sullivan-county.com/identity/bin_laden.html
http://www.usembassyjakarta.org/lawmaker.html
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/10/17/195606.shtml

at least read the second link, the one from the US GOVERNMENT that is supporting an islamic cleric

in his denounciation of islamic terror,

is the USA GOVERNMENT part of your cyclical taquiiya conpiracy?

Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.

It is seen as separate and “other”. It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.

It is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist.

It is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism, and engaged in a Clash of Civilizations.

It is seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage.
Criticisms made of 'the West' by Islam are rejected out of hand.

Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.

Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural and normal.

the 8 symptoms of an epidemic known as islamophobia. Authored by the Runnymede Trust and the vice-chancellor of the University of Sussex

Okay, mis-expressed myself there.

But, it is a fact that many of the people who are calling this group for the bunch of petulant morons that they are are tarring all Muslims. DK and New Mittanni to name a few.

But I'll clarify, then: Attention, people. Whoever is calling this group for the ignorant morons they are and would do the same if this were a Christian group, all the while not tarring all members of said given group, assume that all my messages agree with you; Whoever is using this event to tar all muslims, I'll continue to call you on your bigotry.

The congratulatory self-righteousness of your postings continues to amuse :)

Since you seem to think it matters to anyone when you "call" someone on "bigotry," please, "call" all you want.

And for anyone interested, I'm on record as not stating that "all Muslims are terrorists," "all Muslims are evil," etc. See, e.g., [H, you do know what e.g., means, right?] http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11269690&postcount=214 ; http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11269776&postcount=216 . But since it suits your purpose to misstate my position, maybe I'll just keep "calling" you on intellectual dishonesty.

There seems to be no monolopy on objecting to all things gay when it comes to the Big Three religions.

Technically, Judaism is not in the "big three". Not enough numbers ;)

But homophobia is not peculiar to Abrahamic religions and their followers. Although I do not know of scriptural validation of homophobia in Hindu/Buddhist religions, I know that homophobia is rampant in Hindu and Buddhist societies too. Gays do not even "come out" in these societies for fear of societal discrimination.

The congratulatory self-righteousness of your postings continues to amuse :)

Since you seem to think it matters to anyone when you "call" someone on "bigotry," please, "call" all you want.

And for anyone interested, I'm on record as not stating that "all Muslims are terrorists," "all Muslims are evil," etc. See, e.g., [H, you do know what e.g., means, right?] http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11269690&postcount=214 ; http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11269776&postcount=216 . But since it suits your purpose to misstate my position, maybe I'll just keep "calling" you on intellectual dishonesty.

hhhhmmm islam is an evil religion? no in my own little world a follower of an evil religion, would be in fact evil. Seeing as how its saf to say all muslims are followers of islam wouldn't that make all muslims evil?

EDIT: could you try refuting my argument insteadof mocking and avoiding most of the points completely?

The congratulatory self-righteousness of your postings continues to amuse :)

Since you seem to think it matters to anyone when you "call" someone on "bigotry," please, "call" all you want.

And for anyone interested, I'm on record as not stating that "all Muslims are terrorists," "all Muslims are evil," etc. See, e.g., [H, you do know what e.g., means, right?] http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11269690&postcount=214 ; http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11269776&postcount=216 . But since it suits your purpose to misstate my position, maybe I'll just keep "calling" you on intellectual dishonesty.

Oh, right, so you claim that the teachings of Islam are mostly evil... Do tell, have you read many of them, or just pulled that conviction out of your fourth point of contact? Or just handpicked places that said exactly what you wanted to hear about Islam? Because, unless you have done some pretty extensive studies on Islam, you're applying pre-conceived notions here.

Children, what do we call a person that applies pre-conceived notions to the basis of a given (big) group?

Maybe so, but what's the (very human) mistake in reasoning said people are making?

Sorry I deleted my post in the meantime - my bad!

I don't want to be rude, but games like that... erch, sorry, nevermind, I'm gone!

I'll make things easier: Someone that, basing themselves on little to no evidence, qualifies a given element of a group as bad or evil, is called a bigot.

Now, New Mittanni, do tell. How much have you researched Islam? Have you ever talked to an Imam or a sheikh? Come on, now, don't be afraid, share with us your horrible, horrible experiences with Islam...

"Militant Islam" is a religion? No it isn't. So next time, just say "fighting Islam." You consider the West to be at war with Islam and just add "militant" or "extremist" qualifiers there just so you look politically correct.

Wahabism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahabism

And, BTW, yes I hate all extremists, youngster. :rolleyes:

Wahabism.

Ah, good to know that the religion of Saudi Arabia, one of the key allies of the US, was going to come up. But, seeing as most muslims deplore and hate wahhabism, it proves what I've been saying the whole time about the fact that Islam is not one single hivemind group.

Ah, good to know that the religion of Saudi Arabia, one of the key allies of the US, was going to come up. But, seeing as most muslims deplore and hate wahhabism, it proves what I've been saying the whole time about the fact that Islam is not one single hivemind group.

Exactly! There are probably as many sub groups of Islam as there are of Christianity. (There are *8* branches of Catholicism alone!)

You see, it's not "Christians do it too so it's okay". No matter how much the muslim-bashers claim it. It's "Christians do it too so it's either a proof that BOTH groups are bigots or it's a proof that neither one is and that these are merely jerks inside the given groups.". It's not about being "okay", it's about "showing that the rest of the group is as bigoted".
Except that you and Gauthier deliberately exaggerate the number of Muslim bashers to include even people like me (judging by Gauthier's aggression against me).

If you aren't saying that Muslim intolerance is "okay" then why chastise people for criticising it?

It is completely unnecessary to bring up Christianity. I can criticise one religious group without writing a disclaimer about all the other ones.

Number of people in America killed during WWII by Japanese-Americans: 0

Number of people in America killed on 9/11 by Islamo-Nazi agents who entered the country under false pretenses and pretended to be "peaceful": 3000
Comparable? No Muslim Americans have killed people as part of a terrorist campaign. Every Muslim terrorist against America has come from another country. Similar to how none of the Japanese who attacked Americans was born in the US.

Okay, mis-expressed myself there.

But, it is a fact that many of the people who are calling this group for the bunch of petulant morons that they are tarring all Muslims. DK and New Mittanni to name a few.
You've just named most of them. There aren't many bigots around.

It's getting irritating that every time someone makes a news thread about someone getting attacked for Muslim religious reasons, and then someone says "Christians do it too!" as if it's a relevant comment.

Even worse is Gauthier who thinks that we shouldn't criticise human rights abuses bayond our own borders at all.

Except that you and Gauthier deliberately exaggerate the number of Muslim bashers to include even people like me (judging by Gauthier's aggression against me).

Take a look at the roster of the so-called "Jew Crew" on General and most if not all of them are Muslim bashers on top of being an unquestioning supporter of Israeli policies.

If you aren't saying that Muslim intolerance is "okay" then why chastise people for criticising it?

Take a look at the title of this thread. "More Islamic 'tolerance' and Freddie Mercury." It's sarcastic and it makes no effort to distinguish the Zanzibari fundamentalists from Muslims as a whole. It's another potshot subscribing to the Islamic Borg Collective theory of generalization.

It is completely unnecessary to bring up Christianity. I can criticise one religious group without writing a disclaimer about all the other ones.

If the history of the NS threads haven't passed you by, almost all of the ones bringing up an instance of oppression or wrongdoing by fundamentalist Muslims do nothing to highlight and separate the hardline nutcases from every other member of Islam; if anything they imply again and again that they're all part of a hivemind collective. It's also insinuated that Christianity and Judaism are both those morally superior to the "evil and wicked religion" that is Islam in these posts. Pointing out the wrongs committed by other religions is not "It's okay because they do it too," it's a reality check on the condescending and sanctimonious attitude being adopted towards Islam in general. No religion is perfect but people never remember that when they're on the "0mg 3b1l m0zl3mz!!" bandwagon.

You've just named most of them. There aren't many bigots around.

It's getting irritating that every time someone makes a news thread about someone getting attacked for Muslim religious reasons, and then someone says "Christians do it too!" as if it's a relevant comment.

The more prolific and outspoken members of "The Jew Crew" tend to express bigoted attitudes against Muslims, with no effort to distinguish the extremists and terrorists from every other member of the faith. And even nonmembers such as Aryvathya, Celtlund and Deep Kimchi subscribe to the PTL Ministries Theory that Islam is indeed an evil and wicked religion that's irredeemably brutal and savage.

And if something wrong committed by a member of a non-Islamic religion makes news who brings it to the attention of NS General?

None of the forementioned I can almost guarantee.

Even worse is Gauthier who thinks that we shouldn't criticise human rights abuses bayond our own borders at all.

Glad to know you're an amazing mindreader, Kreskin.

:rolleyes:

I raise objections because the criticisms are always snide blanket statements aimed at Muslims overall and if they ever bother to specify extremists, it's always an afterthought in small print.

And, BTW, yes I hate all extremists, youngster. :rolleyes:

I hope you don't think that by calling me "youngster" you're gaining anything from your alleged chronological seniority, like trying to intimidate or dismiss me. It's actually quite pointless, and your point, if any, doesn't really contradict mine in the same way an actual argument would.

I hope you don't think that by calling me "youngster" you're gaining anything from your alleged chronological seniority, like trying to intimidate or dismiss me. It's actually quite pointless, and your point, if any, doesn't really contradict mine in the same way an actual argument would.

Feel free to actually discuss the point, eh?

Alleged chronological seniority? Hard to say. That you haven't read 6000 or so posts of mine and would know that I hate extermists? Yeah.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5306792.stm

A Muslim group in Zanzibar has protested about plans to mark the 60th birthday of the late rock legend and Queen front man Freddie Mercury.
The Zanzibar-born singer who was openly gay was renowned for his flamboyant lifestyle. He was also HIV positive.

Muslims on the Tanzanian archipelago say his antics violated Islam and want a beach party on Saturday cancelled.

Born Farrokh Bulsara to Persian parents on 5 September 1946 in Zanzibar, Freddie Mercury was educated in India before moving to the UK in 1964 where he led the international supergroup Queen to stardom.

...lovely. So a party for a dead guy is an afront to Islam. I continue to fail to see how anyone can see fighting militant Islam is a bad idea. For a religion supposedly based on tolerance, it seems to be trying to one up the Inquisition Era Catholic Church!
Ah, but in Iran he and Queen are kinda popular(For those who can get Blackmarket copies of their works...)
Or so i've heard.

Ah, but in Iran he and Queen are kinda popular(For those who can get Blackmarket copies of their works...)
Or so i've heard.

Yeah, but Iran is already trying to go counter-counter-revolutionary :( :
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14676069/

Iran's leader calls for purge of liberal professors
Ahmadinejad says 'change has begun' to staffing in country's universities

Earlier this year, Iran retired dozens of liberal university professors and teachers. And last November, Ahmadinejad's administration for the first time named a cleric to head the country's oldest university in Tehran amid protests by students over the appointment.


...not a good sign. I predict that if things stay on course, they'll be going the way of Afghanistan in a few years. Already the standard of living is half what it used to be in 1978.