Another 'Religion of Peace' moment, brought to you by.....yep, ISLAM!
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 15:05
VIEWED: 23038
PAGE 10 of 25
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:Quote:
So...on one hand we have McVeigh and Rudolph, and on the other Al-Qaeda, Al-Shahab, the Taliban, et al. Those scales don't balance--no matter how hard I squint or press with my thumb.
I think the scales balancing exercise is pretty pointless: even if we could add up every bad thing done by a christian versus every bad thing done by a muslim, and somehow measure the difference - it's still not a fair test for a hundred reasons. A christian or muslim can do bad things out of ordinary human vices and flaws. Similarly 'Christian' or 'Muslim' nations can carry out genocide, not necessarily 100% inspired by their religion (Nazi Germany, Ottoman Turkey). So EVERY SINGLE act of evil we add to the scales really needs to be dissected and squabbled over to determine what fraction of its weight of evil should be attributed to Christianity/Islam...
The question of religions' innate peacefulness, or otherwise, is one that we can only really judge with our guts, looking as honestly as we can at the world, and through history. BUT THEN (here's the test), if we conclude that all religions are equally violence-prone, or if we choose to arrange a violence-proneness hierarchy - either way we must explain it.
I personally view Islam as more violence-prone than other religions, and explain it in my mind by highlighting some of its doctrines, for example:
1) It's political in nature (christianity is much more apolitical)
2) It aims for world conquest (so does christianity, but not in a political way as much)
3) It has a doctrine of holy war (no such doctrine in new testament christianity)
By my knowledge and calculations Buddhism and Hinduism can be said to have none of these traits, Christianity has one (2), Judaism has two (1 and 3), and Islam has all three. Though I welocme other people's views on this. But I think this makes a difference.
That's how I make sense of things. People that believe all religions inspire humans to evil to the same extent (including Buddhism?), how do you explain this idea? Because unexplained, it's a bit of a freakish coincidence. Different religions have different assessments of what is evil, and try different ways of prohibiting it - but you're saying that they all succeed to the exact same extent?
One explanation might be that it is something about the conviction (common to all religions) that God is on your side - and therefore must hate your enemies as much as you do.
It's not personal. It's just war.
My soulmate does it again. KPO your number system, as cute and fuzzy as it is, is a tad off. You've attributed #2 with the Christians. "It aims for world conquest". Really? In fairness, I have to ask are you talking about the crusades hundreds of years ago when using the word conquest? I'm sure that's what you meant, seeing you are my soulmate, I am positive you are WAY to intelligent to equate missionaries peacefully bring Jesus(as silly as that concept is) to people around the world with the word conquest.
I would also ask you to retract your statement about scale and balance. And punish yourself privately in the manner and proper degree that you see fit for your error. Surely you can see the difference in what these two religions are trying to do NOW. See you on the other-side.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
We are in absolutely no danger, demonstrable or implicit, from this Community Center going up in NYC. But our values are being eroded by this continued despicable opposition to it.
Do you think all opposition to it is based on people thinking Islam=Terrorists?
I'm also curious about the message this sends to the world... certainly it's many messages depending on what part of the world. Some say it shows our strength and our faith in our constitution and Freedom and The American Way, but how would it play in China? France? Taliban? I wonder how Islamic extremists would view the mosque/C-Center going up there?
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
You don't really wonder. You already know the answer. I think this is a Jedi mind trick.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
The city council already voted unanimously to allow it. This issue was over as far as the locals were concerned, a year ago.
Not when they are not representing the will of the locals. Put it to referendum in the city. End of story.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by kaneman:
You don't really wonder. You already know the answer. I think this is a Jedi mind trick.
Daaamn, the Force must be with me... it even worked on the nytimes... as if on cue:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/26/world/26islamic.html?_r=1&hp
"Looking at Islamic Center Debate, How the World Sees U.S."
good read, some excerpts:
"For more than two decades, Abdelhamid Shaari has been lobbying a succession of governments in Milan for permission to build a mosque for his congregants — any mosque at all, in any location.
In that light, the furor over the precise location of Park51, the proposed Islamic community center in Lower Manhattan, looks to Mr. Shaari like something to aspire to. “At least in America,” Mr. Shaari said, “there’s a debate."
“America hates Islam,” said Mohaimen Jabar, the owner of a clothes shop in Baghdad, Iraq. “If America loved us, it would help the Palestinians and stop the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq,” he said. “It would stop Iran and Israel from distorting the image of Islam.”
China’s state-run news media has used the story to elaborate on the need for a secular state strong enough to police extremism, a matter near and dear to its own ideology.
But “the harmonious image of the melting pot, of the ability to integrate all immigrant ethnicities is tottering dangerously,” Federico Rampini wrote in the Italian newspaper La Repubblica.
That was echoed by Pierre Rousselin, a French columnist writing in Le Figaro: “America is discovering that its Constitution and liberal principles don’t protect her from the debates that the practice of Islam stirs up in our countries.”
Far more common, however, was a sort of shrug of the shoulders from clerics and observers accustomed to far more unpleasant debates. While extremists have presented the controversy as proof of American hostility toward Islam, some religious leaders have taken quite a different stance, arguing against placing the center close to ground zero.
Dalil Boubakeur, head of the Grande Mosquée of Paris and one of the most senior Islamic clerics in France, told France-Soir: “There are symbolic places that awaken memories whether you mean to or not. And it isn’t good to awaken memories.”
A senior cleric at Egypt’s Al Azhar, the closest equivalent in the Sunni Islamic world to the Vatican, said that building at the proposed location sounded like bad judgment on the part of American Muslims.
“It will create a permanent link between Islam and 9/11,” said Abdel Moety Bayoumi, a member of the Islamic Research Institute at Al Azhar. “Why should we put ourselves and Islam in a position of blame?”
He referred to Newt Gingrich’s widely reported statement that there should not be a new mosque in Lower Manhattan until Saudi Arabia allows construction of churches or synagogues.
“How can they compare building a mosque in N.Y. with building whatever in Mecca?” Mr. Tarek wrote. “I thought they viewed themselves better than that country of Saudi Arabia with its many human rights violations, as they love to put it.”
If the mosque were built, many Lebanese commentators said, it would increase the influence of the ideal of the secular state. Many Lebanese, however, seemed more interested that Miss U.S.A., Rima Fakih, a Lebanese-American, had suggested that Park51 seek another location, than in the debate itself.
No quotes from Taliban or Islamic extremists though - maybe they'd bomb NY if it isn't built?
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by kaneman:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
The city council already voted unanimously to allow it. This issue was over as far as the locals were concerned, a year ago.
Not when they are not representing the will of the locals. Put it to referendum in the city. End of story.
In other words, when you don't like the outcome of the game, change the rules.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
You've attributed #2 with the Christians. "It aims for world conquest". Really? In fairness, I have to ask are you talking about the crusades hundreds of years ago when using the word conquest? I'm sure that's what you meant, seeing you are my soulmate,
No, though I guess I could've been less controversial with my choice of words. Islam and Christianity both have world missions - the aim of spreading themselves to every corner of the world. Not every religion does. The difference with christianity I think is that it isn't inherently political like Islam, so when it talks about 'onward christian soldiers, marching as to war', it's talking about spiritual conquest of the world, not physical/political.
Another thing, I don't think Islam has a doctrine of free will - another thing that might make it inherently more controlling over the individual.
Quote:
I would also ask you to retract your statement about scale and balance.
What don't you like about the scales statement?It's not personal. It's just war.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello Mike,
Listen, people who want to put it to a local vote just want to restore the power to the local people.
All construction in the city is traditionally put up for a local vote, after all. Nobody is asking for special rules to be put in place for this individual structure. Treating this structure differently in any way from the other structures in the city just because Muslims are building it would probably violate freedom of religion.
You know about freedom of religion, don't you, Mike? It's protected by the Constitution. The Constitution, Mike. That goddamned piece of paper that lets the Feds shit all over the state and local governments. Universal rights enforceable throughout the nation.
As per the Founding Fathers, Mike.
And that's what this is all about, right, Mike?
So let's have a vote from the neighborhood, just like we always do.
--Anthony
Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
The city council already voted unanimously to allow it. This issue was over as far as the locals were concerned, a year ago.
And yet, those darn people still have that damn freedom of speech thing.
go figure.
Sure they do. They have the right to complain all they like. Doesn't mean they can't build.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Actually, some are denying the existence of Muslim extremists,
Prove it, chump.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
Bump.
Where's your proof Rappy - or have you been caught yet again in a blatant lie you're too cowardly to address?
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anthony: No, from what you said I'd call you a THINKING Christian. I feel exactly the same about the Bible; a bunch of MEN decided what should go in and not, and I'd like to know more about what was excluded. I found that Tom Hanks movie fascinating; not that I necessarily believe it, but it's an intriguing thought regarding Mary Magdalene, and DEFINITELY ticks me off that they DECIDED what should be added and what left out!
Leaving an open mind is the trait of one who THINKS about their faith; I'm the same way with buddhism. I'll be on the fence the rest of my ife about reincarnation, no doubt, tho' I like the idea of the opportunity to grow with each life, and there are things I question, but it "fits" me and I'm pretty rabid about organized religion, so we get along. Aside from the fact that buddhism, as more a philosophy than a religion, grows and evolves in each culture.
So to me, you're a thoughtful Christian, which I respect...people who blindly swallow ANYTHING seem foolish to me. Just my opinion. Also, I've had enough experience with prosletizers because of my own faith that I highly respect anyone who isn't!
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME