NationStates Jolt Archive

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?

So are many other religions.
All as bad as eachother in my opinion.

Traditional Christianity is intolerant. Also fact.
But seeing as we are "liberal", we feel that if people are allowed to choose one intolerant option, they should also be able to choose the other one.

Well, fundamentalists are generally intolerant.

A fundamentalist Christian might hate gays.
A fundamentalist Communist might hate the bourgeoisie.

They might, if pushed to extremes, be willing to kill the people they hate.

Traditional Christianity is intolerant: fact!

EDIT: Cabra beat me to it.

Traditional Christianity is intolerant. Also fact.

Traditional Christianity is intolerant: fact!


Irellivant, do you agree that Islam is also intolerant?

Almost all religions are intolerant of something.

Irellivant, do you agree that Islam is also intolerant?
Who is this "Irellivant" person you speak of?

And Islam is NOT any more intolerant than any other asinine religion.

Irellivant, do you agree that Islam is also intolerant?

All religions are. I can't think of a single one that doesn't claim to be the only one that has it right.

All religions are. I can't think of a single one that doesn't claim to be the only one that has it right.
QFT.

I couldn't agree more. Every religion has its own level of intolerance to that which contradicts the religion's core principles.

Who is this "Irellivant" person you speak of?

And Islam is NOT any more intolerant than any other asinine religion.

Not true, Judaism does not get spread by the sword. You cannot say they are particularly violent yet they follow the old testement the closest.

Christianity also uses the old testement but a lot of it is refuted, contradicted or made unescecerry in the new testement. Where the New Testement actually preaches more peace then intollerance.

The teachings of Quran however actually advocate violence a lof of the time.

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well

I think that sums up the article along with the fact that its on some crappy 90's themed site

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?
Traditional Christianity is intolerant. Also fact.
But seeing as we are "liberal", we feel that if people are allowed to choose one intolerant option, they should also be able to choose the other one.
I don't think that traditional Christianity or Islam is violent. Both holy books have some violent passages, but more often they are history than doctrines.

But the over riding message in both is of peace and charity.

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?

So what's your point? Islam is intolerant? Okay, fine. Liberals defend it? Name one. Christianity is under attack by evil liberals? :rolleyes:

I think that sums up the article along with the fact that its on some crappy 90's themed site

So Hindu = unbiased?

Great tollerance there.

Not true, Judaism does not get spread by the sword. You cannot say they are particularly violent yet they follow the old testement the closest.

Christianity also uses the old testement but a lot of it is refuted, contradicted or made unescecerry in the new testement. Where the New Testement actually preaches more peace then intollerance.

The teachings of Quran however actually advocate violence a lof of the time.

I think if you compare the numbers of deaths caused or inspired by religions over the years, Islam still has a lot of catching up to do before it reaches Christianity's count.

That's beside the point, though, as you claimed that Islam is more intolerant than other religions, not more violent.
Try and serve an orthodox Jew a ham sandwich, and then come back about tolerance.

Traditional Christianity is intolerant!

Criik would you by any chance play World of Warcraft?

I don't think that traditional Christianity or Islam is violent. Both holy books have some violent passages, but more often they are history than doctrines.

But the over riding message in both is of peace and charity.

Never said they were. I said they are both intolerant when it comes to their core beliefs.

Traditional Christianity is intolerant!

Criik would you by any chance play World of Warcraft?

Nope, what would make you think that?

All religions are. I can't think of a single one that doesn't claim to be the only one that has it right.
You have a Black and white worldview. Very few religious groups claim that their religion is 100% true and that all the others are 100% wrong. The more usual explanation, and that which I agree with, is that while other religions have a lot of truth in them, mine has the most truth in it. That's not intolerant.

Not true, Judaism does not get spread by the sword. You cannot say they are particularly violent yet they follow the old testement the closest.

Christianity also uses the old testement but a lot of it is refuted, contradicted or made unescecerry in the new testement. Where the New Testement actually preaches more peace then intollerance.

The teachings of Quran however actually advocate violence a lof of the time.

So pick some quotes and type them out and ask us to explain how they're not violent. Most likely we'll reply with quotes from the NT about how people with long hair are shamed and if you sleep in the same bed that a woman has slept in while she's been on her period, you should be put to death. Things like that.

Not true, Judaism does not get spread by the sword. You cannot say they are particularly violent yet they follow the old testement the closest.

Christianity also uses the old testement but a lot of it is refuted, contradicted or made unescecerry in the new testement. Where the New Testement actually preaches more peace then intollerance.

The teachings of Quran however actually advocate violence a lof of the time.
Of course Judaism follows the "Old Testament", as the Torah is their religious doctrine.

If the "New Testament" preached peace, rather than intolerance, then homosexuals would be treated better than they are in the US by Christians, and abortion clinics wouldn't be bombed, and material which contradicts the Bible wouldn't be censored (I could go on...). Didn't Jesus teach tolerance and peace? Why aren't all Christians leading the crusade for tolerance, rather than trying to prevent homosexuals from having the same rights as heterosexuals?

You found one bad thing in the Qu'ran, I counter with this, a list of good stuff the Qu'ran preaches.

1. Don't confuse truth with falsehood or knowingly conceal the truth. 2:42

2. Pay the poor-due. 2:43, 110, 277

3. Be good to parents, relatives, orphans, and the needy. Speak kindly and pay the poor-due. 2:83

4. If you believe it, prove it. (A good rule, but does it apply to Muslims, too?) 2:111

5. The Jews say the Christians are wrong, and vice versa. Yet they both believe in the Scriptures. 2:113

6. Give of your wealth to family, relatives, and the needy. Set slaves free. 2:177

7. Do not fight wars of aggression. (Does this apply only during Ramadan?) 2:190

8. "Do good." 2:195

9. Spend your money for good: to help your parents, your family, orphans, wayfarers, and the needy. 2:215

10. Help orphans. 2:220

11. "There is no compulsion in religion." (But see the next verse which says that disbelievers will burn forever in Hell.) 2:256

12. Don't argue about things that you know nothing about. 3:66

13. Do not be guilty of usury, doubling and quadrpling the sum lent. 3:130

14. I suffer not the work of any worker, male or female, to be lost. Ye proceed one from another. 3:195

15. Give to orphans and don't steal from them. 4:2, 4:10

16. Men and women proceed from one another. 4:25

17. Don't kill other Muslims.(Is it OK to kill non-muslims?) 4:29

18. Be kind to parents, relatives, orphans, the needy, neighbors, and travelers. 4:36

19. Whoever participates in a good cause, will be rewarded. Whoever participates in an evil cause, will bear the consequences thereof. 4:85

20. It is good to help the poor and make peace. 4:114

21. Value justice, for both poor and rich, even when it adversely affects you or your family's interests. 4:135

22. Don't lend money at unfairly high rates of interest. 4:161

23. Don't hate other people. Treat everyone fairly. 5:8

24. Whoever kills a human being, it is as if he had killed all mankind. Whoever saves the life of one, it is as if he had saved the life of all.
(But see the next verse which says that the enemies of Allah and Muhammad will be killed, crucified, have their hands and feet cut off, or expelled. And after they die they will face "an awful doom.") 5:32

25. Pay the poor-due. 5:55

26. Feed and clothe the needy. Set a slave free. 5:89

27. Do good to parents, don't kill your children or other living things unnecessarily. 6:151

28. Don't steal from orphans. Don't cheat or lie. 6:152

29. Pay the poor-due. 7:156

30. Be kind and forgiving toward others. 7:199

31. And if they incline to peace, incline thou also to it. 8:61

32. Pay the poor-due, but only if they are Muslims. [Never help a non-Muslim. (See 28:86)] 9:18

33. Alms are for the poor and needy, to free captives and debtors, and to help wayfarers. But not for non-Muslims. [Never help a non-Muslim. (See 28:86)] 9:60

34. Men and women are protecting friends of one another. They enjoin the right and forbid the wrong, and pay the poor-due. 9:71

35. Be kind to your relatives. 16:90

36. Be kind to your parents. Treat them with respect in their old age. 17:23

37. Help your family, the needy, and wayfarer. Don't selfishly squander your wealth. 17:26

38. Don't kill your children to avoid falling into poverty. 17:31

39. Don't steal from orphans. 17:34

40. Don't follow what you don't know. 17:36

41. "Increase me in knowledge." 20:114

42. Feed the poor and unfortunate. 22:28

43. Don't lie. 22:30

44. Be kind to others, forbid injustice, and pay the poor-due. 22:41

45. Pay the poor-due. 22:78

46. Pay the poor-due. 23:4

47. Repel evil with that which is better. 23:96

48. Pay the poor-due. 24:37, 24:56

49. Repel evil with good. 28:54

50. Be kind to your parents. 29:8

51. Men and women should help each other with love an mercy. 30:21

52. Help your family, the needy, and wayfarers. 30:38

53. Pay the poor-due. 31:4

54. Good and evil are not the same. Repel evil with goodness. That way your enemies will become your friends. 41:34

55. Be loving and kind to your relatives. 42:23

56. It is wrong to oppress people. 42:42

57. Live peacefully with disbelievers. 43:88-89

58. Be kind to your parents. 46:15

59. Don't defame, insult, spy on, or backbite one another.. 49:11-12

60. Give of your wealth to help the poor. 51:19

61. "A guess can never take the place of the truth." 53:28

62. Pay the poor-due. 58:13

63. Pay the poor-due. 73:20

64. Free a slave, feed the hungry, and exhort one another to pity. 90:13-17

65. Don't oppress orphans or drive away beggars. 93:9-10

66. Pay the poor-due. That is true religion. 98:5

67. Let each person believe (or disbelieve) whatever he or she wishes. 109:1, 6

You have a Black and white worldview. Very few religious groups claim that their religion is 100% true and that all the others are 100% wrong. The more usual explanation, and that which I agree with, is that while other religions have a lot of truth in them, mine has the most truth in it.

No, all religions claim that they are 100% true. But very few claim that all others are 100% wrong.
Islam makes room for Christianity and Judaism as not being entirely wrong. Christianity doesn't return the favour, though.

You have a Black and white worldview. Very few religious groups claim that their religion is 100% true and that all the others are 100% wrong. The more usual explanation, and that which I agree with, is that while other religions have a lot of truth in them, mine has the most truth in it.

Regardless, the general theory is this: "While the others might have some truth to them, my religion is the only way to heaven, and the others will get you sent to hell".

Not true, Judaism does not get spread by the sword. You cannot say they are particularly violent yet they follow the old testement the closest.

all those Genocides committed never happened then? (and no modern religion is spread by the sword)

Christianity also uses the old testement but a lot of it is refuted, contradicted or made unescecerry in the new testement. Where the New Testement actually preaches more peace then intollerance.

so what your saying is Christianity is the most tolerant religion on the planet?

The teachings of Quran however actually advocate violence a lof of the time.

ever read the Koran? (Quaran WTF!?)

Of course Judaism follows the "Old Testament", as the Torah is their religious doctrine.

If the "New Testament" preached peace, rather than intolerance, then homosexuals would be treated better than they are in the US by Christians, and abortion clinics wouldn't be bombed, and material which contradicts the Bible wouldn't be censored (I could go on...). Didn't Jesus teach tolerance and peace? Why aren't all Christians leading the crusade for tolerance, rather than trying to prevent homosexuals from having the same rights as heterosexuals?


Jesus mentions nothing about Homosexuality or abortion so your point is void.


You found one bad thing in the Qu'ran, I counter with this, a list of good stuff the Qu'ran preaches.

Those verses don't contradict the other ones that command you to kill non believers so they are irellivent.

10. Help orphans. 2:220


Those intolerant bastards! Fact!

Regardless, the general theory is this: "While the others might have some truth to them, my religion is the only way to heaven, and the others will get you sent to hell".

That's Christianity, mostly.
Islam is actually more tolerant in that respect, assuming several levels of heaven and hell, with Christians and Jews being able to get into heaven, but not to the top level.

Not true, Judaism does not get spread by the sword.

Largly because facts and circumstances have lead us more often to be the subjugated than the subjugators. Tends to lend one to a certain perspective. That being said if you go back far enough you'll find we did our fair shair of pillaging and killing. I don't have enough pride in mmy "people" to suggest we're not above a good ole crusade now and again, it's just that we've more often been the targets than anythinge lse.

So Hindu = unbiased?

Great tollerance there.

along with the crappy site you can be pretty sure its just one of those half arsed racist sites on the web, in this case fuelled by the hatred between India and Pakistan

That's beside the point, though, as you claimed that Islam is more intolerant than other religions, not more violent.
Try and serve an orthodox Jew a ham sandwich, and then come back about tolerance.
Or ask a male Hasidic Jew, who has been pulled over by a female cop, to cooperate with her. He'll refuse to talk to her.

so what your saying is Christianity is the most tolerant religion on the planet?


No, not in the least. There are intollerant things about christianity and there are much less tolerant religions. Like bhudism.


ever read the Koran? (Quaran WTF!?)

Theres more then one spelling.

Jesus mentions nothing about Homosexuality or abortion so your point is void.

Those verses don't contradict the other ones that command you to kill non believers so they are irellivent.

Christians believe in the bible, not just in what Jesus said. And Paul does have a good few things to say about gays.

And you'll have to show me the Sutra that says kill all non-believers.


Oh, and who the hell is "irellivent"???

Jesus mentions nothing about Homosexuality or abortion so your point is void.



Those verses don't contradict the other ones that command you to kill non believers so they are irellivent.

Last I checked, roughly 90% of Christians follow more John or Paul than they do Jesus, whether they know it or not.

Jesus mentions nothing about Homosexuality

Well he hadn't told his parents how much he liked to hang around with sailors

Jesus mentions nothing about Homosexuality or abortion so your point is void.

Those verses don't contradict the other ones that command you to kill non believers so they are irellivent.
But they don't say NOT to help those who are non-believers, so your point is moot as well.

Even if Jesus mentions nothing of that, be was born in a time when homosexuality was part of society (check your Roman history). So, it's possible he didn't have to say it because it was already there.

there are much more tolerant religions. Like bhudism.

God dammit! Buddhists have crushed other religions, just like everyone else!

No. No.

Not "Islam is intolerant."

People are intolerant.

Muslims hate Jews.

Jews hate Muslims.

Conservatives hate Muslims, atheists, hippies, pacifists, and gays.

Liberals hate people in camoflage suits that own guns and come from Virginia. They also hate Evil Corporations, Bush, and Evangelicals. They also hate people who drive SUV's and think the people who do that have small penii.

Klan assholes hate blacks.

The corollary? Mostly stupid people do that.

Though - as Nationstates General demonstrates all the time - quite a few SMART people are given to such loathing and stereotyping.

"Americans are homophobes."

"Muslims are evil."

"Republicans are working for the rich."

"Democrats are fighting a war on morality."

That's stupid. Whoever says it.

Christians believe in the bible, not just in what Jesus said. And Paul does have a good few things to say about gays.

And you'll have to show me the Sutra that says kill all non-believers.


Oh, and who the hell is "irellivent"???

Ok so I can't spell it whatever.

God dammit! Buddhists have crushed other religions, just like everyone else!

Damn those meditating Buddhists and their subtle ways of pwn'ing the rest of us! :p

Ok so I can't spell it whatever.

No Sura then?
Thought so.

No. No.

Not "Islam is intolerant."

People are intolerant.

Muslims hate Jews.

Jews hate Muslims.

Conservatives hate Muslims, atheists, hippies, pacifists, and gays.

Liberals hate people in camoflage suits that own guns and come from Virginia. They also hate Evil Corporations, Bush, and Evangelicals. They also hate people who drive SUV's and think the people who do that have small penii.

Klan assholes hate blacks.

The corollary? Mostly stupid people do that.

Though - as Nationstates General demonstrates all the time - quite a few SMART people are given to such loathing and stereotyping.

"Americans are homophobes."

"Muslims are evil."

"Republicans are working for the rich."

"Democrats are fighting a war on morality."

That's stupid. Whoever says it.

Oh, the white folks hate the black folks,
And the black folks hate the white folks;
To hate all but the right folks
Is an old established rule.

But during National Brotherhood Week,
National Brotherhood Week,
Lena Horne** and Sheriff Clark*** are dancing cheek to cheek.
It's fun to eulogize
The people you despise
As long as you don't let 'em in your school.

Oh, the poor folks hate the rich folks,
And the rich folks hate the poor folks.
All of my folks hate all of your folks,
It's American as apple pie.

But during National Brotherhood Week,
National Brotherhood Week,
New Yorkers love the Puerto Ricans 'cause it's very chic.
Step up and shake the hand
Of someone you can't stand,
You can tolerate him if you try!

Oh, the Protestants hate the Catholics
And the Catholics hate the Protestants,
And the Hindus hate the Moslems,
And everybody hates the Jews.

But during National Brotherhood Week,
National Brotherhood Week,
It's National Everyone-Smile-At-One-Another-Hood Week.
Be nice to people who
Are inferior to you.
It's only for a week, so have no fear;
Be grateful that it doesn't last all year!

Ok so I can't spell it whatever.
It's not terribly hard to use a dictionary to check your spelling. In fact, it might lend some credibility to your argument.

And it's spelt "irrelevant".

Dictionary (http://www.dictionary.com) - now you can't say you don't have one.

Those verses don't contradict the other ones that command you to kill non believers so they are irellivent.

So obviously the ones telling you to kill non-believers(assuming there are any) are more important than all those ones. Because Muslims are teh EVIL!!!1!11!!1!11eleventy!

So obviously the ones telling you to kill non-believers(assuming there are any) are more important than all those ones. Because Muslims are teh EVIL!!!1!11!!1!11eleventy!

If I started a cult, and in that cult I started preaching abuot how you should water your neighbours garden, and help old people across that street.

But then if I also said kill all women who do not get married by 30, that would be much more important.

Ok so I can't spell it whatever.

It's okay. I'm proud of you for the simple fact that your first 100 posts haven't been filled to the brim with useless emoticons. GJ

If I started a cult, and in that cult I started preaching abuot how you should water your neighbours garden, and help old people across that street.

But then if I also said kill all women who do not get married by 30, that would be much more important.

Those two don't contradict each other, try again.

If I started a cult, and in that cult I started preaching abuot how you should water your neighbours garden, and help old people across that street.

But then if I also said kill all women who do not get married by 30, that would be much more important.

Not if nobody did it. I'm friends with Muslims (Most of them Iraqi, as it happens) and they don't kill me. Heck, they don't even try to kill me!

Those two don't contradict each other, try again.

They wern't suppost to, that was the point.

So obviously the ones telling you to kill non-believers(assuming there are any) are more important than all those ones. Because Muslims are teh EVIL!!!1!11!!1!11eleventy!

But they can't be all that bad. They don't condemn Lesbians to hell!

In fact, Lesbians are not frowned upon in Islam, though gays are! :p

1. Homosexual acts are condemned as unnatural. (Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you?) 7:80-81

2. Male homosexual activities are condemned as unnatural. 26:165-6

3. Male homosexuals commit abominations and act senselessly. 27:54-55

4. Male homosexuals acts are condemned as unnatural. 29:28-29

See, Islam isn't all that bad. It's good for Lesbians!

But then if I also said kill all women who do not get married by 30, that would be much more important.

all religious text are open to interpretation unless somehow all the various splinter religions do not exist

They wern't suppost to, that was the point.

Ooops, my bad.

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?

why am i not the surprised that this was going to be one of your threads. so unoriginal.

why am i not the surprised that this was going to be one of your threads. so unoriginal.

NSG n00bs go though clear cycles *goes to post about ebil Muslims*

Allah has a sense of humour...

- Allah turned the Sabbath-breaking Jews into apes. 2:65-66

But they can't be all that bad. They don't condemn Lesbians to hell!

In fact, Lesbians are not frowned upon in Islam, though gays are! :p



See, Islam isn't all that bad. It's good for Lesbians!

That's because Islam is a male-dominated religion and most men are not threatened by Lesbians. They consider us to be simply misguided and as soon as we have sex with them, we'll be cured. :rolleyes: In the meantime, they like to watch. :p

The original Quran was about muslims REACTING against the persecution by the Meccans, and any Imam will inform you that these are the ones being refered to in the Quran. So much so that they favor freedom of religion, which is much more than I can say about Christianity.

Get your facts straight before showing up to argue about them, lest you come across as ignorant of the facts.

That's because Islam is a male-dominated religion and most men are not threatened by Lesbians. They consider us to be simply misguided and as soon as we have sex with them, we'll be cured. :rolleyes: In the meantime, they like to watch. :p
Which is proof that Islam doesn't always suppress women. :D

Get your facts straight before showing up to argue about them, lest you come across as ignorant of the facts.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too late for that for our little troll...

The original Quran was about muslims REACTING against the persecution by the Meccans, and any Imam will inform you that these are the ones being refered to in the Quran. So much so that they favor freedom of religion, which is much more than I can say about Christianity.

Get your facts straight before showing up to argue about them, lest you come across as ignorant of the facts.

Source?

Source?

You still haven't provided that Sura about killing all infidels indiscriminately...

Source?

The Quran itself. I'm an occultist; I study many, MANY religions.

The Quran itself. I'm an occultist; I study many, MANY religions.

Find me a quote that promotes freedom of religion.

Find me a quote that promotes freedom of religion.

I will as soon as you find that sura you CLAIMED existed.

I will as soon as you find that sura you CLAIMED existed.

Which one?

Find me a quote that promotes freedom of religion.
You have one quote that promotes the killing of infidels, and I have far more than promote good toward all men.

You should prove your stance before you claim any negative about Islam because so far the odds are stacked in favour of it.

Find me a quote that promotes freedom of religion.
Hmm, ok, I'm going to look really, really, hard, and take like five hundred years of searchi... oh wait, here's one.

Let each person believe (or disbelieve) whatever he or she wishes. 109:1, 6

Which one?

You know what? I'll do you a favor.

Let each person believe (or disbelieve) whatever he or she wishes. 109:1, 6 (Beaten to it, ah well.)

In. This. Very. Thread.

Are you sure you want to argue about theology with the occultist?

You know what? I'll do you a favor.

Let each person believe (or disbelieve) whatever he or she wishes. 109:1, 6 (Beaten to it, ah well.)

In. This. Very. Thread.

Are you sure you want to argue about theology with the occultist?

Actually, I posted it way back on page two (in the huge quote) before Cabra got to it.

But, it has been posted thrice.

I think this child will find (s)he is over his/her head very shortly. NSG is a very unforgiving place, and I doubt Sovietstan will allow this to fly.

Actually, I posted it way back on page two (in the huge quote) before Cabra got to it.

But, it has been posted thrice.

I think this child will find (s)he is over his/her head very shortly. NSG is a very unforgiving place, and I doubt Sovietstan will allow this to fly.

I'm aware it has been posted, but, until he refutes it or stops, I will repeat it so he can't ignore it.

Hmm, ok, I'm going to look really, really, hard, and take like five hundred years of searchi... oh wait, here's one.

That refers to the law of an Islamic country. He doesn't mind if their are non believers, as long as it is within his own law.

Actually, I posted it way back on page two (in the huge quote) before Cabra got to it.

But, it has been posted thrice.

I think this child will find (s)he is over his/her head very shortly. NSG is a very unforgiving place, and I doubt Sovietstan will allow this to fly.

I am of the belief that Soviestan was arrested. I think he was the one who was trying to buy hand grenades from the FBI (recent news story - no posts from Soveistan after the arrest).

That refers to the law of an Islamic country. He doesn't mind if their are non believers, as long as it is within his own law.
Which one?

That refers to the law of an Islamic country. He doesn't mind if their are non believers, as long as it is within his own law.

Source? I gave sources to the statements you asked, so you'll now either give a source or admit you lost.

Not true, Judaism does not get spread by the sword. You cannot say they are particularly violent yet they follow the old testement the closest.

Christianity also uses the old testement but a lot of it is refuted, contradicted or made unescecerry in the new testement. Where the New Testement actually preaches more peace then intollerance.

The teachings of Quran however actually advocate violence a lof of the time.

Deuteronomy 13:13-19: Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases…you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God.


AND ANOTHER IN SIMPLE TERMS ABOUT WHAT GOD WANTS:

Anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. – Lev 24:16

WOW, GOD WANTS YOU TO KILL ALL THOSE THAT EVEN SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT HIM (SOUNDS LIKE BUSH)


I think bush read this passage and decided he liked it:


Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. - Isaiah 13

Exodus 23:24 "Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images."

Meaning: Do not allow others to worship a different god. Conquer them and destroy their religious property.

Bible verses.

Awwww, man, and I wanted to use my Riddler move to finish him off, now I can't, you finished him off yourselves! :(

:D

And a another little gem...

Deuteronomy 2:25 This day will I begin to put the dread of thee and the fear of thee upon the nations that are under the whole heaven, who shall hear report of thee, and shall tremble, and be in anguish because of thee.

Meaning: All nations shall be terrorized by the followers of Yahweh.

So... Jews are assholes too in the name of their god.

Traditional Christianity is intolerant. Also fact.


Traditional Christiantiy didnt begin with a millitary conquest campagin and a battle.

Traditional Christiantiy didnt begin with a millitary conquest campagin and a battle.
No, it just began with a guy being nailed to a cross. You can't tell me that's not violent.

Traditional Christiantiy didnt begin with a millitary conquest campagin and a battle against a group that was persecuting it, such as the persecution war the Meccans were waging the Muslims.

Here's that part you dropped when you wrote that. You're welcome.

Evil and intolerance come in many differant forms.

Evil and intolerance come in many differant forms.
QFT.

No, it just began with a guy being nailed to a cross. You can't tell me that's not violent.
But it was not the christians that did that.

But it was not the christians that did that.

It wasn't the Muslims that began the war either...

So, if I'm to understand the OP correctly, the religion of Islam is actually a Borg-like hive-mind collective consciousness, which we can then describe as having certain personal character traits such as "intolerant" or "nice-smelling." Yes?

So, if I'm to understand the OP correctly, the religion of Islam is actually a Borg-like hive-mind collective consciousness, which we can then describe as having certain personal character traits such as "intolerant" or "nice-smelling." Yes?

MARRY ME! :D

So, if I'm to understand the OP correctly, the religion of Islam is actually a Borg-like hive-mind collective consciousness, which we can then describe as having certain personal character traits such as "intolerant" or "nice-smelling." Yes?
That's what it sounds like.

Of course, we get posts about the evil hive-mind of fundamentalist Christians who are going to destroy the education system with their evil Creationism, and their hatred of homosexuals, and they're going to get rid of abortion and turn women back into the barefoot and pregnant chattel they used to be...

That's what it sounds like.

Of course, we get posts about the evil hive-mind of fundamentalist Christians who are going to destroy the education system with their evil Creationism, and their hatred of homosexuals, and they're going to get rid of abortion and turn women back into the barefoot and pregnant chattel they used to be...

True, we do. And then there's all kinds of things about "the left," "liberals," or just plain "Democrats," and same for "the right," "conservatives," "Republicans. Then we get to people's more special peeves, like "multiculturalism," or "intolerance."

Whole lot of that going on. It's what pundits and campaigners live for.

MARRY ME! :D

Say that again with a big banner being towed by a plane in the sky!

I'll still say no, but I like those things. Especially if they're on jets and the banner gets toasted, then falls, burning, to the ground, destroying three city blocks and killing at least ten children. Ahh... romance. :)

I'll still say no, but I like those things. Especially if they're on jets and the banner gets toasted, then falls, burning, to the ground, destroying three city blocks and killing at least ten children. Ahh... romance. :)

Awww, come on. :p

Wait...

What's your gender again?

Awww, come on. :p

Wait...

What's your gender again?

I'm a dude. But even if you're a sexy young nymphoid nymph-a-lot, I have to point out that in the history of humanity no relationship worth having ever began with the words, "What's your gender?"

I'm a dude. But even if you're a sexy young nymphoid nymph-a-lot, I have to point out that in the history of humanity no relationship worth having ever began with the words, "What's your gender?"

Male here. Ah well. :p

I'm a dude. But even if you're a sexy young nymphoid nymph-a-lot, I have to point out that in the history of humanity no relationship worth having ever began with the words, "What's your gender?"

One day I'm going to prove that wrong..

In fact I'm going ask every new person I meet just to spite you!

Not that I don't like you..

Trilby63;12069487']One day I'm going to prove that wrong..

In fact I'm going ask every new person I meet just to spite you!

Not that I don't like you..

Wow... Talk about cutting off the penis to spite the face.

Trilby63;12069487']One day I'm going to prove that wrong..

In fact I'm going ask every new person I meet just to spite you!

Not that I don't like you..

You can do that but I doubt it would prove anything. I'd just say the relationships that resulted were not worth having. :)

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?



"Intolerance" is one of the great crimes of liberalism. A thoughtcrime, in fact. The Party of liberalism demands the eradication of thoughtcrime in all its forms, and so the liberal attacks anything that looks like "intolerance". Or anything the Party of liberalism considers "intolerance."

Now, the Party of liberalism presently considers Christians to be "intolerant," and so they must be attacked at every opportunity. The Party of liberalism also remembers that funny-looking Austrian paperhanger and what he did about 60 years ago, and also those bad, bad "Crusaders" from about 1000 years ago. And since they came from a "Christian" country, that means that the whole of "Christian", and thus Western, civilization, is "intolerant". So anyone who is an enemy of those "intolerant" Christians and Westerners must be good, and must be favored by liberal Party members. Islam, being presently the most violent and most widespread enemy of Christians and Westerners, is therefore most to be favored by liberal Party members.

And don't bother trying to explain to a liberal Party member why you oppose Islam, or why its teachings are themselves "intolerant", not to mention violent and oppressive, as is its history from day one. You see, the liberal Party member practices the technique called crimestop. Crimestop is "the facility of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest of arguments if they are inimical to" the dogma of the Party of liberalism. So no matter how logical your argument, and no matter how many facts you adduce in support of your argument, the liberal Party member will not be receptive because your argument is inimical to the liberal Party dogma of "tolerance."

Oh, yes. It doesn't matter that Islam is itself "intolerant." The Party of liberalism is at war with Christianity. The Party of liberalism has always been at war with Christianity.

So there you have it. And if you are a Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, agnostic or unbeliever who opposes Islam, you are an oldthinker, and oldthinkers unbellyfeel the dogma of the Party of liberalism.

2+2=5!

"Intolerance" is one of the great crimes of liberalism. A thoughtcrime, in fact. The Party of liberalism demands the eradication of thoughtcrime in all its forms, and so the liberal attacks anything that looks like "intolerance". Or anything the Party of liberalism considers "intolerance."

Sorry, what "The Party" is this? Democrats? Oops, you don't want to be specific because then you look like a shameless partisan whore instead of some internet prophet. And because idiotic generalizations make you feel so, so right.

Now, the Party of liberalism presently considers Christians to be "intolerant," and so they must be attacked at every opportunity.

It's all a conspiracy against Christians.

The Party of liberalism also remembers that funny-looking Austrian paperhanger and what he did about 60 years ago,

Yeah, a conspiracy by the Jews.

and also those bad, bad "Crusaders" from about 1000 years ago.

They weren't all that bad. They were just killing Muslims!

And since they came from a "Christian" country, that means that the whole of "Christian", and thus Western, civilization, is "intolerant". So anyone who is an enemy of those "intolerant" Christians and Westerners must be good, and must be favored by liberal Party members. Islam, being presently the most violent and most widespread enemy of Christians and Westerners, is therefore most to be favored by liberal Party members.

It's a Jewish-Islamic conspiracy to persecute Christians. At last, someone who knows THE TRUTH! And isn't afraid to tell it! Where, oh where, New Mitanni, can I read more? Stormfront perhaps?

And don't bother trying to explain to a liberal Party member why you oppose Islam, or why its teachings are themselves "intolerant", not to mention violent and oppressive, as is its history from day one.

They just don't understand the sweet, sweet taste of irrational hatred.

...they're obviously very fucked up people. Non-Christians, you see.

You see, the liberal Party member practices the technique called crimestop. Crimestop is "the facility of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest of arguments if they are inimical to" the dogma of the Party of liberalism. So no matter how logical your argument, and no matter how many facts you adduce in support of your argument, the liberal Party member will not be receptive because your argument is inimical to the liberal Party dogma of "tolerance."

Nice 1984 references. Make you look like you're actually saying something.

Of course, what I am posting - anything I ever post that contradicts your bigotry - is just part of the global conspiracy. We just don't understand the utter logic and argument of your hatred. You are an artiste, ah! And the world does not understand!

Oh, yes. It doesn't matter that Islam is itself "intolerant." The Party of liberalism is at war with Christianity. The Party of liberalism has always been at war with Christianity.

I blame the Jews. Don't you?

So there you have it. And if you are a Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, agnostic or unbeliever who opposes Islam, you are an oldthinker, and oldthinkers unbellyfeel the dogma of the Party of liberalism.

You're only saying that because that's what the Jews want you to say.

Snip with out-of-context 1984 references.

Nice attempt of Reductio Ad Orwellium there. (I just coined that, didn't I?)

Actually, we RESEARCH something before kneejerking to it, as you can see by the beating your friend got in this thread. Your intollerance makes you impervious to logic or research. Very well, but it doesn't help you at all when YOU try to compare US to the Party, especially since you are the one that despises the "unorthodox thoughts" us liberals have.

Also, I study 1984, I know 1984, and I'm making a final paper on 1984, and, sir, 1984 was all about how intollerance worked. But keep dreaming and using 1984 as a way to attack us, if it's all you have to make up for your lack of a point. Let's see here, though, to which side of the political spectrum 1984 applies:

Bush:

-State of perpetual war, check.
-Torture, check.
-Wants to annihilate dissent, check.
-Wants to deify the state, check.
-Hates privacy, check.
-Use of language to achieve his ends, check.

I could go on, but I don't need to. You might do well not to mention 1984 against someone that studied it thoroughly. Since you did, your loss. I know so much more about this subject than you, it's not even funny.

*snip*I blame the Jews. Don't you?


I blame Bill Clinton.

I blame Bill Clinton.

Oh, you oldthinker, you. Double plus ungood. LOL 1984 REFERENCE! FTW!

Yeah, I can't believe the sheer arrogance - the fucking GALL - that a nutjob like NewMit has to even THINK of trying to use 1984 to make him seem correct. Next we'll have slugs creating weapons made entirely of salt to further the plan to wipe out mankind.

Yeah, I can't believe the sheer arrogance - the fucking GALL - that a nutjob like NewMit has to even THINK of trying to use 1984 to make him seem correct. Next we'll have slugs creating weapons made entirely of salt to further the plan to wipe out mankind.

o_O;

Erm...

Okay.

Yeah, I can't believe the sheer arrogance - the fucking GALL - that a nutjob like NewMit has to even THINK of trying to use 1984 to make him seem correct. Next we'll have slugs creating weapons made entirely of salt to further the plan to wipe out mankind.

Yes, but we have a fool-proof defense against salt-wielding slugs: moats filled with beer! They'll never get past those!

Yes, but we have a fool-proof defense against salt-wielding slugs: moats filled with beer! They'll never get past those!

If we wanted to be equally as stupid as the slugs, we'd have to equip our armies with guns made entirely out of hardened protein created from a derivative of the ebola virus.

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?

I have a serious problem with judging people in groups. If you have to judge people (and usually you can get by without doing so) judge them one-on-one based on their actions, and not on their opinions. I've known some people that were basically good at heart that believed somethings I strongly disagreed with, but I could still see that they were good people.

I think the prevailing world cuture teaches people to judge others much too hastily, and far too harshly. Give people the benefit of the doubt, you'll feel better about yourself and be more at peace if you do.

Yeah, I can't believe the sheer arrogance - the fucking GALL - that a nutjob like NewMit has to even THINK of trying to use 1984 to make him seem correct. Next we'll have slugs creating weapons made entirely of salt to further the plan to wipe out mankind.

Get used to it, Sparky ;)

Seeing libs cry "Arrogance!" is always good for a laugh.

But congratulations on recognizing a literary allusion when you saw one. I've got plenty more. Plenty more sarcasm, too :p

Get used to it, Sparky ;)

Seeing libs cry "Arrogance!" is always good for a laugh.

But congratulations on recognizing a literary allusion when you saw one. I've got plenty more. Plenty more sarcasm, too :p

Gotta love the playful puppet trolls.

<3


Crazy bastard.

Get used to it, Sparky ;)

Seeing libs cry "Arrogance!" is always good for a laugh.

But congratulations on recognizing a literary allusion when you saw one. I've got plenty more. Plenty more sarcasm, too :p

It's not arrogance if one KNOWS what they're talking about, so we're not arrogant.

And a literary allusion does not a point make, especially when it boils down to reductio ad orwellium.

Gotta love the playful puppet trolls.

<3


Crazy bastard.

Read the sig, baby.

Read the sig, baby.

Your mind is in a pitiful state if you think anyone here fears you, Mit.

Fundamentalists of every stripe are intolerant. They can be Islamic, Christian or Jewish.

EXAMPLE: In the Roman Catholic doctrine, until recently, followers of the Church of Islam were on the Papal list for automatic excommunication. In other words, followers of Islam were outside the blessings of the Church, period.

Orthodoxy is a pretty poor way to keep followers in the modern era, the vast majority of followers of the three major religions are moderate to liberal, not fundamentalist.

You will find much evidence of religious intolerance in all three major holy books. The Koran is just convenient and currently "in vogue" to dissect.

The Torah and Bible have spectacular examples of intolerance in them as well.

This is why I'm pagan.

What's Oderint dum metuant mean?

What's Oderint dum metuant mean?

It's Latin for, "Member of the 101st Keyboarding Division. OOH RAH! LOL!"

What's Oderint dum metuant mean?

"Let them hate so long as they fear."

"Let them hate so long as they fear."

Well it doesn't apply, then. It's neat, though. I neither hate nor fear much of anything, though I like to exaggerate my dislikes every now and then.

Well it doesn't apply, then. It's neat, though. I neither hate nor fear much of anything, though I like to exaggerate my dislikes every now and then.

Meh. Pretty adequate that Mit would sig Caligula...

It wasn't the Muslims that began the war either...

Lets look at that comparison.

When Jesus's life was threatened, he took up the cross and went and died without resistance

When Mohammads life was threatened he fled, rose an army and struck back

I'd say Jesus was the less intolerant and more peace loving of the two

The Torah and Bible have spectacular examples of intolerance in them as well.

This is why I'm pagan.

And of course the Pagan attacks on Mohammad and his followes are conviently ignored from your memory.

Lets look at that comparison.

When Jesus's life was threatened, he took up the cross and went and died without resistance

When Mohammads life was threatened he fled, rose an army and struck back

I'd say Jesus was the less intolerant and more peace loving of the two

Considering the MECCANS performed the first attack?

Plus, it doesn't make Islam intollerant. o_o

And of course the Pagan attacks on Mohammad and his followes are conviently ignored from your memory.

You might have a point if "pagan" were only one group. :p

Considering the MECCANS performed the first attack?

Plus, it doesn't make Islam intollerant. o_o

Yes it does.

Mohammad couldnt simply accept that other people had diffrent beliefs, he had to kill them. Had he truely believed God was on his side, he would have simply let what would have happened, happen, as Jesus did.

The Romans struck Jesus first, but he didnt strike back

You might have a point if "pagan" were only one group. :p

Ah yes, the "they arnt REAL *insert relgious group*" ploy.

If your going to employ that against one group, you have to apply it against all.

Yes it does.

Mohammad couldnt simply accept that other people had diffrent beliefs, he had to kill them. Had he truely believed God was on his side, he would have simply let what would have happened, happen, as Jesus did.

The Romans struck Jesus first, but he didnt strike back

So, let me get this straight: Muhammad was intollerant because he wanted to LIVE?

Find me a quote that promotes freedom of religion.


Quran 5:69 says (Arberry): "Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Christians, and those Sabeaans, whoso believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness--their wage waits them with their Lord, and no fear shall be on them, neither shall they sorrow."


Little bit late, I know.

Ah yes, the "they arnt REAL *insert relgious group*" ploy.

If your going to employ that against one group, you have to apply it against all.

A pagan is ANY religion that isn't the major, organized ones. So, yes, I have a point.

So, let me get this straight: Muhammad was intollerant because he wanted to LIVE?

He was intollerant because he rose an army to kill those who opposed him.

If he had truely been tollerant, the kind of tollerant that Jesus displayed, he would have let them do as they wished.

I'm not saying it is unacceptable behaviour, but it isnt the behaviour of someone whose teachings I'd want to base my life around. I'd want someone who was far more diffrent and beyond acceptable.

A pagan is ANY religion that isn't the major, organized ones. So, yes, I have a point.

And a Christian is someone who believes that Jesus was the son of God

A Muslim is someone who believes that Mohammad was the last great profit and revealed the word of God through what Gabreil told him.

They dont have to be part of an institutional structure

No you dont have a point

Ah yes, the "they arnt REAL *insert relgious group*" ploy.

If your going to employ that against one group, you have to apply it against all.

You seem really ignorant to just about anything related to this subject, so I'll say it plainly: pagans aren't all one people. There is no singular "pagan" religion. You're thinking of a group of people that all worship similarly, when in reality "pagan" is mostly a word to describe people who are part of a small and unpopular if a bit eccentric religion.

To say the "pagans" attacked Mohammad would be as vague as saying "humans" attacked him.

He was intollerant because he rose an army to kill those who opposed him.

You mean, those who attacked, pursued and tried to kill him. Repeatedly. With style.

If he had truely been tollerant, the kind of tollerant that Jesus displayed, he would have let them do as they wished.

I'm not saying it is unacceptable behaviour, but it isnt the behaviour of someone whose teachings I'd want to base my life around. I'd want someone who was far more diffrent and beyond acceptable.

Reacting isn't intollerance...

He was intollerant because he rose an army to kill those who opposed him.


They were trying to kill him. They put a price on his head and sent an army after him an his followers, Mohammed was not a pacifist.

And a Christian is someone who believes that Jesus was the son of God

A Muslim is someone who believes that Mohammad was the last great profit and revealed the word of God through what Gabreil told him.

They dont have to be part of an institutional structure

No you dont have a point

Wow, so you're lumping me together with thelema, wicca, chaos magick, druidism, shamanism, and, basically, all mystical traditions that have completely different sets of beliefs?

And a Christian is someone who believes that Jesus was the son of God

A Muslim is someone who believes that Mohammad was the last great profit and revealed the word of God through what Gabreil told him.

They dont have to be part of an institutional structure

No you dont have a point

Jesus Christ, you're -REALLY- not getting it. The word "pagan" doesn't actually MEAN anything other than those particular people have one thing in common: They're not Christians, Jews, or Muslims. That's basically what pagan meant at the time. They might not have been allied with eachother, and they might not even have known the other parts of the pagan group even existed - it's a pointless thing to say.

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." (Psalm137:9)

"For every one who curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death!" (Leviticus 20:9)

And if a women approaches unto any beast, and lie down thereto thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast." (Leviticus 20:16)

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son... bring him unto the elders of his city... And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones,that he die." (Deuteronomy 21: 18-21)

"Suffer not awomen to teach, nor to usurpauthority over a man, but to be in silence." (1 Thimothy 2:12)

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." (Psalm137:9)

"For every one who curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death!" (Leviticus 20:9)

And if a women approaches unto any beast, and lie down thereto thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast." (Leviticus 20:16)

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son... bring him unto the elders of his city... And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones,that he die." (Deuteronomy 21: 18-21)

"Suffer not awomen to teach, nor to usurpauthority over a man, but to be in silence." (1 Thimothy 2:12)

I never understood the bible's obsession with the use of the word "surely".

Dammit Criik,I thought I told you.No more silly threads.
*Canes Criik.*
Bad bad Criik.

So are many other religions.
All as bad as eachother in my opinion.

i agree all religions is violent, deluding, intolerant and on and on and on and on and on...

muslims are back in the middle ages. maybe 1000 years later muslim countries will be like today's Europe, but still with all the advancements the civilised world will make, they will still be left back in the dark.

muslims are back in the middle ages. maybe 1000 years later muslim countries will be like today's Europe, but still with all the advancements the civilised world will make, they will still be left back in the dark.
Just the extremists, as are the fundamentalist Christians are in thought.

Amish are a fine example of Christians stuck in the dark.

muslims are back in the middle ages. maybe 1000 years later muslim countries will be like today's Europe, but still with all the advancements the civilised world will make, they will still be left back in the dark.

Which means the world will still have a guilt and calorie-free good time denouncing all Muslims as backwards and savage alien monsters 1000 years from now.

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?

Newsflash: Whether or not Islam is intolerant is irrelevant. Because all organized religions are intolerant.

Islam is tolerant. Jihad is a commonly misinterpreted statement - or, rather, can be interpreted in many ways.

If Islam preached violence and intolerance, surely one of the European countries or America would have made it illegal or told people explicitly to stay away from it. Have they? No.

Are you being swayed by suicide bombers blowing themselves up everywhere? Did you know that suicide is haram (bad) in Islam, for the same reasons as Christianity (only He may choose to take a person's life, or something to that phrase). These suicide bombers print a distorted view of Islam. In any religion, there should be no killing of any kind, and nor should it be tolerated.

Are you being swayed by the protests given by the cartoons issue by Jyllands-Posten? That was a bunch of people who love their God but got out of control - I love how the foreign media are incapable of showing peaceful protests in the news (see Malaysia: there were peaceful protests going on there).

There are tons of things being shown that don't help portray Islam in a peaceful light. However, I think it is just wrong to think that Islam is bad as a direct consequence of Osama bin Laden preaching death to Americans and plotting 9/11. Surely one has better things to do than listen to him - when most of us might have lost people we know due to these attacks.

Look at Malaysia - it is religiously tolerant and a peaceful nation, and the official religion is Islam. Do not say that Islam is intolerant - a religion is only as tolerant as you make and think of it.

- SNIP -
First off, bravo! Excellent first post!

Secondly, I agree with you. Those are very excellent points.

Christians hate being associated with their extremists and fundamentalist counterparts (including those whacko Evangelicals and the Batshit Church). Just as moderate Muslims hate being associated with their extremist trigger-happy suicide bomber, wannabe-martyr counterparts.

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?

If you've ever read the Qu'ran you'd have an entirely different view. Yet you haven't because your a bigot and a racist. You went out of your way already with your mind made up about the situation- and found whatever that is. Islam is acutally more equal than christainity could ever be. Particulary towards women.

Which means the world will still have a guilt and calorie-free good time denouncing all Muslims as backwards and savage alien monsters 1000 years from now.

yeah. i forgot to add that in.

First off, bravo! Excellent first post!

Secondly, I agree with you. Those are very excellent points.

Christians hate being associated with their extremists and fundamentalist counterparts (including those whacko Evangelicals and the Batshit Church). Just as moderate Muslims hate being associated with their extremist trigger-happy suicide bomber, wannabe-martyr counterparts.

I agree, excellent 1st post.

I would call on moderate Muslims everywhere to take a stand against the extremists in their midst who blow themselves up and commit atrocities and misuse the Quran. Take a stand and take action against them. And I would also hope that Islam as a culture would grow out of its defensive posture towards the West: the Crusades are long over and the Muslims won. By rejecting everything associated with Europe and America as a crusader plot for hundreds of years, Muslims have done themselves and their posterity a huge disservice.

If you've ever read the Qu'ran you'd have an entirely different view. Yet you haven't because your a bigot and a racist. You went out of your way already with your mind made up about the situation- and found whatever that is. Islam is acutally more equal than christainity could ever be. Particulary towards women.
The only thing that stops any pre-existing equality is fundamental interpretation of the Qu'ran, which is designed to inherently strip women of their rights and persecute those who don't follow Islam.

The only thing that stops any pre-existing equality is fundamental interpretation of the Qu'ran, which is designed to inherently strip women of their rights and persecute those who don't follow Islam.

Exactly, those fundamentalists don't know anymore about thier own religion than 75% of the western world....quite sad.

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?

Stupid thread. Now let this fall into the deep pits of the spammy abyss.

maybe 1000 years later muslim countries will be like today's Europe, but still with all the advancements the civilised world will make, they will still be left back in the dark.

that seems like a possibly silly prediction, given the state of things 1000 years before now.

Exactly, those fundamentalists don't know anymore about thier own religion than 75% of the western world....quite sad.
The same could be said about any other fundamentalist group.

Islam only gets more coverage because it's got such unbelievable assholes issuing fatwas that it makes headlines. Besides, the media likes morons more than intelligent people (why do you think the moderates are never heard?).

All religion is intolerant: Fact.

All religion is intolerant: Fact.

People who say "fact" after issuing a statement are annoying...


...


... fact.




Damnit.

Detol protects, and thats a fact! :p

People who say "fact" after issuing a statement are annoying...


...


... fact.




Damnit.

I know this. I was only following the spirit of the thread.

Detol protects, and thats a fact! :p

http://forums.maxima.org/images/smilies/rofl.gif

Finally a real fact in this thread...

I know this. I was only following the spirit of the thread.

I feel sorry for you, having to grow up in VA. What part are you in?

I know this. I was only following the spirit of the thread.

Fact.

:D

I feel sorry for you, having to grow up in VA. What part are you in?

The southwest corner. Redneck land.

The southwest corner. Redneck land.Ouch. The little tip down there?

Not true, Judaism does not get spread by the sword. You cannot say they are particularly violent yet they follow the old testement the closest.

Someone hasn't read the bible much.

Check out the passages about the Isrealites return to Canaan in the book of Joshua.

Ouch. The little tip down there?

Yeah, the part that borders Tennessee, Kentucky, and North Carolina.

Almost all religions are intolerant of something.

Not Buddism. Or nihilism, but that's technically a philosophy.

Oh, but Christianity is so warm and fuzzy! :D

When to stone your whole family (http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_stone_your_whole_family/dt13_06-08.html)
Teach the Bible to your children! (http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/how_to_keep_the_law/dt06_06-07.html)
And if ever your testicles get crushed, well... You'll not be welcome in the Church any more (http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/male_genital_injury/dt23_01a.html).

Please note that I have no wish to bash Christianity. But the major monotheistic religions in their literal, "traditional" form are all violent and quite frankly bonkers at times.

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?

Well -----traditional Hinduism isnt exactly nice either - caste system, burning widows - in fact its far worse than either Islam or christianity in that sense....

Traditional Christianity is tolerant, but it's still a duty as a Christian to enlighten others. It is only when people start to change 'love' into 'fear' when they start becoming intolerant. I blame the Catholic church for much of that. They pretty would scare people into becoming Christians since, if you weren't, you'd be ostracized or worse.

Yeah, the part that borders Tennessee, Kentucky, and North Carolina.

Yeesh. I'm lucky(?) enough to be in the northeast quadrant, up near DC and Maryland. Metro access ftw.

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?

Conservative Christian here...
And as a Soldier of Christ I would like to be the first to forgive your bigotry and hatred for your fellow man. Old Testament Malice is not the solution to anything. Christ led by example, not by jackbooting his way through the crowd...and NO ONE he ran into was Chrisitian...think about it.


Jabbering about what certain passages in the Qu'ran say mean nothing, it proves nothing.

Men are violent and use whatever excuse they can get their hands on to jusitfy their lust for power.

Your desperate attempt to be superior, and rightegeous is damning.
Who are you to pass judgement upon anyone?

Be a real fundamentalist and make an effort to keep the commandments Christ said were most important.

I would call on moderate Muslims everywhere to take a stand against the extremists in their midst who blow themselves up and commit atrocities and misuse the Quran.Ah, but they do - it doesn't get covered much. Every time a terrorist or terrorists attack something or do something stupid, nations like Malaysia, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and even other religious-driven countries condemn the attacks.

However, I don't think it's the fault of the terrorists that they are doing so. There are thousands of versions of the English Bible, and the Quran is no different. There are branches of Islam just as there are Catholics and Protestants, and as Northern Ireland demonstrates, it's not always the case that a peaceful religion can unite two similar beliefs. What the terrorists learn is a version of Islam that (apparently) teaches people to fight against others (Zionists? Americans? White people? Infidels? etc.). Could this be infused by an interpretation of the Quran, or just plain hate?

I am no fan of people who use religious texts to justify their actions. These people should do actions to justify the religious text(s). This is slightly disturbing for suicide bombers, to me.

And I would also hope that Islam as a culture would grow out of its defensive posture towards the West: the Crusades are long over and the Muslims won. By rejecting everything associated with Europe and America as a crusader plot for hundreds of years, Muslims have done themselves and their posterity a huge disservice.Ah, now we come to a problem that seems highly hypocritical to the East: Israel and Palestine. Oh, yes, Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe Iran too. Oh yeah, Lebanon.

These things are just the few things that have infuriated Muslims and the East as a whole. I'm sure moderate Muslims are willing to forget the Crusades and stuff but these issues seem to be highly biased against Israel and America. One sees an ally, the other lot see this as an excuse to allow thousands to be killed and displaced with no end in sight.

I have had the luxury of living in both Malaysia and the United Kingdom and the views taken by the press contrast drastically, even horribly. Malaysia routinely screens news reports condemning Israel, the United Kingdom seldom does. In fact, it ignores the conflict quite a bit, only highlighting it when a politician is killed. :-/ This is not helping the Muslim view that the West is a friendly place.

There was a news report reporting that 9/10 Muslims in the United Kingdom would not report a suspicious (potential terrorist) neighbour to the authorities - such is the deep mistrust of the Muslim community in this country. Sure, Muslims could always move first - but Palestine will never accept Israel's current boundaries/military/prejudice/whatever-you-wish-to-call-it. Stubbornness? Not really - Israel is technically stealing from Palestine. However, that conflict is another matter. The problem is, Muslims are much more distrustful after 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq and potentially Iran in the future.

which is designed to inherently strip women of their rights and persecute those who don't follow Islam.Islam is designed to be equal to both genders (despite the fact I don't really think so - but gender equality transcends religion). Muhammed himself apparently helped his wife with the washing and told his followers to respect their wives and daughters.

Islam doesn't persecute those who don't follow Islam - but some countries do for their citizens. I don't believe that Islam should have any forcible control of non-Muslims but non-Muslims would do well not to offend Muslims in a place like Saudi Arabia - for obvious reasons.

Islam only gets more coverage because it's got such unbelievable assholes issuing fatwas that it makes headlines. Besides, the media likes morons more than intelligent people (why do you think the moderates are never heard?).Some might think it's weird for a country to issue these on the basis of religion, but it's the law of a country. Not all fatwas are bad. It's simply a method of governing a country.

All religion is intolerant: Fact.To a certain extent, yes. However, it depends on how you see it.

I will admit that Islam does have some flaws for the modern world, especially direct interpretations from the Quran. Malaysia is pushing for Islam Hadhari, a form of Islam suited for the modern world. However, it is hard for this to be implemented because some people consider this a stain upon the religion - a corruption, a problem, a change, and it makes it less pure. For most religions, change is a difficult thing. Let's just say the Bible tells people to drink their water in a specific way. What if, 10000 years in the future, water does not exist? Should the Bible stick with water? Or should it change? Things like this are a question of sticking with the past and moving forward - and things, not just religion, have problems moving forward, and for good reason.

Conservative Christian here...
And as a Soldier of Christ I would like to be the first to forgive your bigotry and hatred for your fellow man. Old Testament Malice is not the solution to anything. Christ led by example, not by jackbooting his way through the crowd...and NO ONE he ran into was Chrisitian...think about it.


Jabbering about what certain passages in the Qu'ran say mean nothing, it proves nothing.

Men are violent and use whatever excuse they can get their hands on to jusitfy their lust for power.

Your desperate attempt to be superior, and rightegeous is damning.
Who are you to pass judgement upon anyone?

Be a real fundamentalist and make an effort to keep the commandments Christ said were most important.

Nice to know we have more than just a few of your kind.

Islam is designed to be equal to both genders (despite the fact I don't really think so - but gender equality transcends religion). Muhammed himself apparently helped his wife with the washing and told his followers to respect their wives and daughters.

Islam doesn't persecute those who don't follow Islam - but some countries do for their citizens. I don't believe that Islam should have any forcible control of non-Muslims but non-Muslims would do well not to offend Muslims in a place like Saudi Arabia - for obvious reasons.

I agree.

I was merely saying that it is misinterpretation of various elements of the Qu'ran that have led to the reduction in rights for women of Islam. It is not the religion itself, but rather how the mullahs have decided it should be based on their flawed interpreation of scripture.

Of course, in a society dominated by one religion, it is expected that the ruling one is respected so that the minor one can be respected.

It's like a parent and child. A parent who is respected, will respect the child.

Some might think it's weird for a country to issue these on the basis of religion, but it's the law of a country. Not all fatwas are bad. It's simply a method of governing a country.
As a method of governing, it's fine, even it is strange to those who are on the outside.

Again, I'm blaming misinterpreation and media sensationlism for the wild and outrageous views on Islam. (Maybe I should have lynched the media as I usually do here)... It doesn't help that the media only likes the fatwahs, which are with negative intent and ignore the basic principle of a fatwah in favour of ratings.

Nice to know we have more than just a few of your kind.

What "kind" would that be?

And of course the Pagan attacks on Mohammad and his followes are conviently ignored from your memory.

Not at all. No religion is perfect and I certainly don't think paganism is any better or worse than your brand of religion.

I addressed the THREE MAJOR religions in my post. Between Wicca and neo-pagan worship (meaning NEW) in the modern era, we account for a very small minority of people.

Let us also remember that Christianity in it's infancy stole worshippers and holidays (to acclimatize the new followers into the faith) from the major pagan holidays. Familiarity breeds comfort.

Perhaps we should also remember that paganism over the centuries has been given very short shrift; it's worshippers killed like so many sheep for shearing, and for those not killed, the inevitable whispering campaign that pagans somehow all worship Lucifer/Satan...or are into demon worship and studies of the darker arcane arts.

I prefer paganism, at least it does not pretend to be adherent to one strict divine path, you have many different paths to enlightenment. Finally, for the most part, you can do what you feel is right as long as you don't hurt anyone.

The Wiccan Rede

"Do as ye will, and do ye no harm."

Not bad words to live by, hmm?

Not true, Judaism does not get spread by the sword. You cannot say they are particularly violent yet they follow the old testement the closest.

Have you read the Old Testament?

Jesus Christ, you're -REALLY- not getting it. The word "pagan" doesn't actually MEAN anything other than those particular people have one thing in common: They're not Christians, Jews, or Muslims. That's basically what pagan meant at the time. They might not have been allied with eachother, and they might not even have known the other parts of the pagan group even existed - it's a pointless thing to say.

Correct.

"Pagans" were the country folk who had different systems of belief from any of the three major groups.

In the modern era, it is used (inaccurately I might add) to refer to Wiccans and their various subsects.

There are many "pagans" on this board, quite a number of us follow different traditions, some are Wiccan but I would venture that would be the only group most folks here are truly familiar with and then likely only in a very cursory way.

Correct.

"Pagans" were the country folk who had different systems of belief from any of the three major groups.

In the modern era, it is used (inaccurately I might add) to refer to Wiccans and their various subsects.

There are many "pagans" on this board, quite a number of us follow different traditions, some are Wiccan but I would venture that would be the only group most folks here are truly familiar with and then likely only in a very cursory way.

I'm a pagan, but not wiccan, for instance. And I have a hard time thinking of myself as "pagan" if I don't remind myself it's by definition.

Have you read the Old Testament?

"Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the Lord's side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. And he said unto them, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor. And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men" (Exodus 32:26-28).

"And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab. And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods. And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor: and the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel. . . . And those that died in the plague were twenty and four thousand" (Numbers 25:1-9).

"And Judah went up; and the Lord delivered the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand: and they slew of them in Bezek ten thousand men" (Judges 1:4). "And he said unto them, Follow after me: for the Lord hath delivered your enemies the Moabites into your hand. And they went down after him, and took the fords of Jordan toward Moab, and suffered not a man to pass over. And they slew of Moab at that time about ten thousand men, all lusty, and all men of valour; and there escaped not a man" (Judges 3:28-29).

“They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up...And he said...They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger...For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains. I will heap mischiefs upon them; I will spend mine arrows upon them. They shall be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat, and with bitter destruction: I will also send the teeth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents of the dust. The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy both the young man and the virgin, the suckling also with the man of gray hairs” (Deuteronomy 32:17-25). “Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel” (Psalms 2:8).

It's not just the Old Testament, either...

“And, behold, thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak . . . because thou believest not my words” (Luke 1:20). “And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost” (Acts 12:23). “But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me” (Luke 19:27).

One musn't forget Numbers 31

31:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
31:2 Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites: afterward shalt thou be gathered unto thy people.
31:3 And Moses spake unto the people, saying, Arm some of yourselves unto the war, and let them go against the Midianites, and avenge the LORD of Midian.
31:4 Of every tribe a thousand, throughout all the tribes of Israel, shall ye send to the war.
31:5 So there were delivered out of the thousands of Israel, a thousand of every tribe, twelve thousand armed for war.
31:6 And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand of every tribe, them and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, to the war, with the holy instruments, and the trumpets to blow in his hand.
31:7 And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.
"As the Lord commanded Moses, they slew all the males."
Did the Israelites kill every male in Midian?
31:8 And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.
31:9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. They took the women and children captives, and burnt all their cities.
31:10 And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire.
31:11 And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts.
31:12 And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and unto the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the camp at the plains of Moab, which are by Jordan near Jericho.
31:13 And Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and all the princes of the congregation, went forth to meet them without the camp.
31:14 And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle.
31:15 And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?
31:16 Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.
31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

Moses tells the Israelites to kill every male and all the non-virgin females, but to keep the virgins for themselves.
Is it wrong to commit adultery?

31:18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
31:19 And do ye abide without the camp seven days: whosoever hath killed any person, and whosoever hath touched any slain, purify both yourselves and your captives on the third day, and on the seventh day.
31:20 And purify all your raiment, and all that is made of skins, and all work of goats' hair, and all things made of wood.
31:21 And Eleazar the priest said unto the men of war which went to the battle, This is the ordinance of the law which the LORD commanded Moses;
31:22 Only the gold, and the silver, the brass, the iron, the tin, and the lead,
31:23 Every thing that may abide the fire, ye shall make it go through the fire, and it shall be clean: nevertheless it shall be purified with the water of separation: and all that abideth not the fire ye shall make go through the water.
31:24 And ye shall wash your clothes on the seventh day, and ye shall be clean, and afterward ye shall come into the camp.
31:25 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, God tells Moses to make an offering of "man and beast" as a "heave offering of the Lord."
Does God approve of human sacrifice?
31:26 Take the sum of the prey that was taken, both of man and of beast, thou, and Eleazar the priest, and the chief fathers of the congregation:
31:27 And divide the prey into two parts; between them that took the war upon them, who went out to battle, and between all the congregation:
31:28 And levy a tribute unto the Lord of the men of war which went out to battle: one soul of five hundred, both of the persons, and of the beeves, and of the asses, and of the sheep:
31:29 Take it of their half, and give it unto Eleazar the priest, for an heave offering of the LORD.
31:30 And of the children of Israel's half, thou shalt take one portion of fifty, of the persons, of the beeves, of the asses, and of the flocks, of all manner of beasts, and give them unto the Levites, which keep the charge of the tabernacle of the LORD.
31:31 And Moses and Eleazar the priest did as the LORD commanded Moses.
31:32 And the booty, being the rest of the prey which the men of war had caught, was six hundred thousand and seventy thousand and five thousand sheep, (31:32-40)

The booty included 32,000 virgins and 16,000 persons, of which God got 32.

31:33 And threescore and twelve thousand beeves,
31:34 And threescore and one thousand asses,
31:35 And thirty and two thousand persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him.
31:36 And the half, which was the portion of them that went out to war, was in number three hundred thousand and seven and thirty thousand and five hundred sheep:
31:37 And the LORD's tribute of the sheep was six hundred and threescore and fifteen.
31:38 And the beeves were thirty and six thousand; of which the LORD's tribute was threescore and twelve.
31:39 And the asses were thirty thousand and five hundred; of which the LORD's tribute was threescore and one.
31:40 And the persons were sixteen thousand; of which the LORD's tribute was thirty and two persons.
31:41 And Moses gave the tribute, which was the LORD's heave offering, unto Eleazar the priest, as the LORD commanded Moses.
31:42 And of the children of Israel's half, which Moses divided from the men that warred,
31:43 (Now the half that pertained unto the congregation was three hundred thousand and thirty thousand and seven thousand and five hundred sheep,
31:44 And thirty and six thousand beeves,
31:45 And thirty thousand asses and five hundred,
31:46 And sixteen thousand persons;)
31:47 Even of the children of Israel's half, Moses took one portion of fifty, both of man and of beast, and gave them unto the Levites, which kept the charge of the tabernacle of the LORD; as the LORD commanded Moses.
31:48 And the officers which were over thousands of the host, the captains of thousands, and captains of hundreds, came near unto Moses:
31:49 And they said unto Moses, Thy servants have taken the sum of the men of war which are under our charge, and there lacketh not one man of us.
31:50 We have therefore brought an oblation for the LORD, what every man hath gotten, of jewels of gold, chains, and bracelets, rings, earrings, and tablets, to make an atonement for our souls before the LORD.
31:51 And Moses and Eleazar the priest took the gold of them, even all wrought jewels.
31:52 And all the gold of the offering that they offered up to the LORD, of the captains of thousands, and of the captains of hundreds, was sixteen thousand seven hundred and fifty shekels.
31:53 (For the men of war had taken spoil, every man for himself.)
31:54 And Moses and Eleazar the priest took the gold of the captains of thousands and of hundreds, and brought it into the tabernacle of the congregation, for a memorial for the children of Israel before the LORD.

The booty included 32,000 virgins and 16,000 persons, of which God got 32.
No wonder God is pissed off... :D

No wonder God is pissed off... :D

He's Lord of all Pimps. ;)

I think if you compare the numbers of deaths caused or inspired by religions over the years, Islam still has a lot of catching up to do before it reaches Christianity's count.
How do you know this?

Christianity never killed anyone, and neither did Islam. Christians and Muslims have killed people, though I don't consider that very relevant to the religions themselves.

If the "New Testament" preached peace, rather than intolerance, then homosexuals would be treated better than they are in the US by Christians
Unfortunately a lot of people are hypocrites. And a lot of Christians aren't homophobic.

You found one bad thing in the Qu'ran, I counter with this, a list of good stuff the Qu'ran preaches.
Double standard, much? I think the OP is right about you, if not others.

You refuse to acknowledge the content of the NT that inspires love, charity and pacifism, but highlight the same ideas in the Qu'ran. Not fair, and not logical.

Regardless, the general theory is this: "While the others might have some truth to them, my religion is the only way to heaven, and the others will get you sent to hell".
The last sentence is untrue, and the others are questionable.

No, all religions claim that they are 100% true. But very few claim that all others are 100% wrong.
Islam makes room for Christianity and Judaism as not being entirely wrong. Christianity doesn't return the favour, though.
How is it a "favour"? It's a chronological necessity.

Do you actually think that Christians believe that Judaism and Islam are entirely wrong? Even though they contain many of the same ideas?

That's Christianity, mostly.
See, here we go; the bias that the OP was talking about.

You know, I went into this thread thinking the OP was talking bullshit, but people like you have just proven him right.

Last I checked, roughly 90% of Christians follow more John or Paul than they do Jesus, whether they know it or not.
Where are you checking? It really annoys me that so many people on this forum think that Christians are mostly right-wing conservatives.

The Quran itself. I'm an occultist; I study many, MANY religions.
You seem to be very very biased against Christianity.

Both holy books have a lot of both violence and pacifism in them. However, you like to exaggerate the violence in the Bible and ignore it in the Qu'ran.

Christ led by example, not by jackbooting his way through the crowd...and NO ONE he ran into was Chrisitian...think about it.

Jabbering about what certain passages in the Qu'ran say mean nothing, it proves nothing.

Men are violent and use whatever excuse they can get their hands on to jusitfy their lust for power.

Your desperate attempt to be superior, and rightegeous is damning.
Who are you to pass judgement upon anyone?

Be a real fundamentalist and make an effort to keep the commandments Christ said were most important.
Hear here! I agree.

HDouble standard, much? I think the OP is right about you, if not others.

You refuse to acknowledge the content of the NT that inspires love, charity and pacifism, but highlight the same ideas in the Qu'ran. Not fair, and not logical.
If people can say that the Qu'ran is a tool for preaching violence and hatred, I can say the same thing about NT.

I know that the NT does have good stuff in it, but for the sake of this debate, I'm showing the negative side because for every good bit, there is a bad bit.

Besides, everything I am using comes from the OT, not the NT.

As there are good things in the Qu'ran, there are those in the New Testament, and vice versa, as there are bad elements in the Qu'ran, there are bad elements in the New Testament. I have chosen to focus on the bad, since the OP has chosen to ignore the good parts of the Qu'ran.

Hardly a double standard when one uses the same type of argument to show the bad in a similar instance.

Then again, I'm an Atheist and all religion is bullshit. I was only trying to show that there isn't just bad stuff in the Qu'ran. Like the NT, there is plenty of good, but for my argument, I had no need to focus on the NT.

It's perfectly logical when you have a stance to argue from.

This article written by a Hindu sums it up well:

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html

why do liberals constantly defend the religion of Islam when it is so blatently an intollerant and violent religion. Now I wouldn't mind so much if they tried to defend or attack all abrahamic religions, but they only choose Islam which is 10 times more violent then Judaism and Christianity. It is a fact that the Quran commands that you "Kill the idolaters and unbelievers and make Islam the conqueror of religions" yet liberals still use feeble arguments to avoid the truth.

So why do the hypocritical christian attacking liberals love to defend Islam so much?

zealots of any religion are intolerant.....Christians and Jews lived for centuries in Islamic nations in relative safety, loving Christian countries of Europe is where the most persecution took place, Christians love a good barbecue of opposing Christian sects, jews, gypsies and muslims......regardless what it says in the Koran or bible most people are tolerant it's the nut's that start waving holy books around that are intolerant........BAN organized religion I say!!!

You seem to be very very biased against Christianity.

Both holy books have a lot of both violence and pacifism in them. However, you like to exaggerate the violence in the Bible and ignore it in the Qu'ran.

Actually, I was pointing out in the other thread that NEITHER religion is the cause of violence...

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12067430&postcount=129

The reason I pointed out the details in Christianity are due to the fact that most people that attack Islam in a bigoted way happen to be WASP.

If it were atheists raving against Christians, I'd likely try to use the good details of Christianity.

Actually, I was pointing out in the other thread that NEITHER religion is the cause of violence...

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12067430&postcount=129

The reason I pointed out the details in Christianity are due to the fact that most people that attack Islam in a bigoted way happen to be WASP.

If it were atheists raving against Christians, I'd likely try to use the good details of Christianity.

Perhaps the religion is not the direct cause of the violence, but I daresay the authority figures within the religion certainly have no qualms about using violence to attain their goals.

Anytime the words "Holy Crusade" or "Most Holy Jihad" are used, I simply think about the 11 or so Christian Crusades and the innumerable jihad declared after a nice intifadah (roughly means "popular uprising") and get sobered.

The reason I pointed out the details in Christianity are due to the fact that most people that attack Islam in a bigoted way happen to be WASP.

O RLY? Most of the anti-Muslim people here (e.g. New Mitanni, Criik) don't really appear to exude Christianity.

And even if they are WASPs, that group only makes up about 4% of Christians.

If it were atheists raving against Christians, I'd likely try to use the good details of Christianity.
Because atheists never rave against Christians here. :rolleyes:

O RLY? Most of the anti-Muslim people here (e.g. New Mitanni, Criik) don't really appear to exude Christianity.


They do however, enjoy making the comparison of Islam to Christianity to show how much worse the former is. I.e, "You don't see Christians rioting in the streets, burning embassies and blowing up buildings when someone makes a funny picture of Jesus."

Also, New Mitanni has lately taken a rather "it's all a liberal-PC conspiracy against Christianity" stance with his more paranoid rantings.

Where is this "Massive amount of Liberals" That say Islam is the only peaceful religion around?

Perhaps the OP is advised not to take an out-dated book such as the Qu'ran too litterally or he might end up loooking silly.

For example, if we were to follow to the bible up the letter...

On Family (http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_teachings_of_jesus/on_family/lk12_51.html)

on Forgiveness (http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_teachings_of_jesus/on_forgiveness/lk06_37a.html)

On Giving (http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_teachings_of_jesus/on_giving/mt05_41.html)

....it would be a hard religion to follow indeed.

PS: Isn't lego just the best thing since sliced bread?

If people can say that the Qu'ran is a tool for preaching violence and hatred, I can say the same thing about NT.

I know that the NT does have good stuff in it, but for the sake of this debate, I'm showing the negative side because for every good bit, there is a bad bit.

Besides, everything I am using comes from the OT, not the NT.

As there are good things in the Qu'ran, there are those in the New Testament, and vice versa, as there are bad elements in the Qu'ran, there are bad elements in the New Testament. I have chosen to focus on the bad, since the OP has chosen to ignore the good parts of the Qu'ran.

Hardly a double standard when one uses the same type of argument to show the bad in a similar instance.

Then again, I'm an Atheist and all religion is bullshit. I was only trying to show that there isn't just bad stuff in the Qu'ran. Like the NT, there is plenty of good, but for my argument, I had no need to focus on the NT.

It's perfectly logical when you have a stance to argue from.

Why not...instead of defacing the New Testament by attempting to bring it to the level that someone "claims" another set of holy text is at...you elevate both, by using what is good in the "NT" to defend the other material00in this case the Qu'ran?
I do you see your point but, by mounting a counter-attack instead of merely a counter-arguement you provoke yet another attack from some Christian dfending the Bible the way a Muslim would defend the Qu'ran.

I do you see your point but, by mounting a counter-attack instead of merely a counter-arguement you provoke yet another attack from some Christian dfending the Bible the way a Muslim would defend the Qu'ran.

Why not? I find it perfectly acceptable in this case for the sake of relativity. When somebody says religion A is basicly evil and you turn the tables around by saying that Religion B which is seen as the foundation of your civilisation can be seen as evil too then it puts things into perspective.

For example, the Aztecs sacrifice rituals were quite bloody and widely seen as a fact for the barbarism of the Aztecs. Perhaps, but roughly the same time Europe had it's infamous Inquesitions going which hardly can be viewed as comfortable for the victims involved.

O RLY? Most of the anti-Muslim people here (e.g. New Mitanni, Criik) don't really appear to exude Christianity.

And even if they are WASPs, that group only makes up about 4% of Christians.


Because atheists never rave against Christians here. :rolleyes:

So you're proposing I show up at every atheist thread just to prove I don't have a bias against Christianity? Nah. Think what you will. But I find it remarkable that you ignored the link I pointed out in which I said what I actually meant: That NEITHER religion is responsible.

Fact: this is a boring thread subject what's been hashed and re-hashed to the point of near-painful tedium.

Fact: this is a boring thread subject what's been hashed and re-hashed to the point of near-painful tedium.

Fact: Myrmidonisia and others intend to re-hash it to the point of ACTUALLY PAINFUL tedium. :D

FACT: Islam is intolerant of you in Soviet Russia.

FACT: Islam is intolerant of you in Soviet Russia.

In Soviet Russia, FACT states YOU!

http://randomweirdness.comicgenesis.com/d/20061127.html

http://www.johnberman.com/pics/funny/not_this_shit_again.jpg

Funny that threads like Nutjobs and ha! get locked, but this just goes on and on and on . . .

Why not? I find it perfectly acceptable in this case for the sake of relativity. When somebody says religion A is basicly evil and you turn the tables around by saying that Religion B which is seen as the foundation of your civilisation can be seen as evil too then it puts things into perspective.

For example, the Aztecs sacrifice rituals were quite bloody and widely seen as a fact for the barbarism of the Aztecs. Perhaps, but roughly the same time Europe had it's infamous Inquesitions going which hardly can be viewed as comfortable for the victims involved.

SO by your ligic like begets like.
If I smash your child's head with a hammer it is by your line of thought equal to reciprocate and smash my childs head with a hammer.

Extreme--but the same idea.

Pointing fingers doesnt do anythign but make people point more fingers.

SO by your ligic like begets like.
If I smash your child's head with a hammer it is by your line of thought equal to reciprocate and smash my childs head with a hammer.

Extreme--but the same idea.

Pointing fingers doesnt do anythign but make people point more fingers.

How about pointedly pointing fingers to point out a point about pointless fingerpointing?

(Wow. Look at the wordplay on that thing. But you did get my point.)

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/1856/1cl1.jpg

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/1856/1cl1.jpg

What the hell...?

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/1856/1cl1.jpg

Exactly. I agree mostly with the particular issue you have presented, and it does prove a valuable commodity against criik. I'm not quite sure how he will be able to counter this argument.

Not true, Judaism does not get spread by the sword.

And what do you suppose the 200 foreskins David brought to Saul were cut off with?

And what do you suppose the 200 foreskins David brought to Saul were cut off with?

http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/shunter/wolverine.gif

David is the best at what he does!