When it comes to religion... can we all agree...

[Sherry]

I haven't studied the religion, and while I have been inclined to believe that the religion has been hijacked by a group of extremists, I have a real problem with the billions of "moderates" who overwhelming keep silent...that is a form of condoning and/or encouraging the evil behavior. Watching all of those Muslims openly cheering in the streets of the ME after 9/11, has made me wonder how many silently cheered and continue to cheer at acts of terrorism directed towards the West. Christians of all political persuasions openly and vehemently object to radical Christians, such as Westboro Baptists, and they are ill-mannered versus murderers.

 

[westwall]

No. Extremists of any stripe are terrible though. That much I'll grant you.

Islam merely has hundreds upon hundreds of millions of them.

Now, I realize you are a fanboy and all, but could you please refer me to any passage in other religions that instructs its followers on beheading people?

I'm not a "fanboi" of any religion. I have worked with many Muslims over the years who I would trust with my life, while I would not with loads of Christians, atheists etc.
I have never bothered to research any of the various religions, but I will grant you that a quick skim through the Bible would reveal all sorts of violent examples that would please you. Especially the Old Testament.

That's not the point though.

Religions are made up of people. PEOPLE warp the religion to suit their individual goals and desires. PEOPLE are fucked up.

 

[Treeshepherd]

Ostensibly, the Bhagavad Gita is about a war, with Krishna compelling Arjuna (a general) to play his part and fight. Of course, those parts of the text are metaphorical, relating to an internal war within oneself and one's duty (dharma) to fight.

The Bible is best understood as an evolution of understanding, from Genesis to Revelation. And characters like David and Moses are far from perfect.
The disciples (and even John the Baptist) constantly misunderstand Jesus. They don't get it, at all, until the Pentecost. They were following the J man day after day, and still didn't get it. You've picked up a Bible a couple times, or listened to a Ted talk on religion, and assume you've got it all figured out.

Don't think you can understand the meanings of the world's sacred texts by selecting out some verse where dudes got stoned to death, or where Moses lit some fools up.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No. Extremists of any stripe are terrible though. That much I'll grant you.

Islam merely has hundreds upon hundreds of millions of them.

Now, I realize you are a fanboy and all, but could you please refer me to any passage in other religions that instructs its followers on beheading people?

So?

If a religion demands that you kill people (and there are plenty of passages in the OT that do that) who cares if it's by decapitation or by stoning or whatever? Dead is dead.

People seem to have this bizarre idea that decapitation is worse than any other death and they seem to forget that these books were written over a thousand years ago when that was one of the popular means of execution. If conducted competently (apparently Saudi Arabia has had fewer decapitations due to a shortage of professional decapitators...) - it's quick. Beats stoning. Beats hanging. Yet people have this bizarre irrational reaction to it. The bible is full of stoning as a remedy for all kinds of misbehavior. Stoned or decapitated? Actually...there's interesting potential in combining that concept.

Remind me of the last stoning done at a Christians order? So because 600 years ago the Catholic church wised up and stopped the message and acts of murder we can still compare it to a religion today that actively teaches murder lying and subjugation of any one that does not believe that religion? You are beyond idiotic.

 

[westwall]

No. Extremists of any stripe are terrible though. That much I'll grant you.

Islam merely has hundreds upon hundreds of millions of them.

Now, I realize you are a fanboy and all, but could you please refer me to any passage in other religions that instructs its followers on beheading people?

So?

If a religion demands that you kill people (and there are plenty of passages in the OT that do that) who cares if it's by decapitation or by stoning or whatever? Dead is dead.

People seem to have this bizarre idea that decapitation is worse than any other death and they seem to forget that these books were written over a thousand years ago when that was one of the popular means of execution. If conducted competently (apparently Saudi Arabia has had fewer decapitations due to a shortage of professional decapitators...) - it's quick. Beats stoning. Beats hanging. Yet people have this bizarre irrational reaction to it. The bible is full of stoning as a remedy for all kinds of misbehavior. Stoned or decapitated? Actually...there's interesting potential in combining that concept.

Remind me of the last stoning done at a Christians order? So because 600 years ago the Catholic church wised up and stopped the message and acts of murder we can still compare it to a religion today that actively teaches murder lying and subjugation of any one that does not believe that religion? You are beyond idiotic.

Oh, it's such a short distance. Here's one imbecile who thinks that stoning gays is just the right thing to do. This is the definition of extremism....

Oklahoma Republican thinks stoning gay people is okay

Oklahoma Republican thinks stoning gay people is okay WashingtonExaminer.com

 

[hobelim]

Eu

No. Extremists of any stripe are terrible though. That much I'll grant you.

especially the extreme atheists

tough call....Who can really say which extremest is the worst.?

Of all the moderates though, atheists are by far much more fun at parties.

 

[Treeshepherd]

In medieval times, you could be drawn and quartered for poaching a rabbit, dismembered for stealing, drowned for adultery, disemboweled for heresy, etc. what atheists assume, often, is that these punishments were handed down by the Church, as if a bishop held sway over Henry 8, or the king of France, or Queen of Spain.

The truth is, these punishments were invented by secular powers. Local lords and dukes made the legal codes, including moral crimes. If anything, the Church saved lives during the Inquisition by intervening (when possible) and establishing a system of due process.

Yes, there were a few Caligula-like Popes. That was far and away the exception to the rule. Temporal authorities have always been in charge of who gets beheaded.

 

[JQPublic1]

View attachment 35374

Just what are you implying with this photograph of Christian Nazis and Muslim leaders collaborating? That picture offers no new revelation that would soften the impact for earnest Christians who came to realize the scope of evils their national German Christian base was involved in. Many Muslims hated the Jews as much as the Christian Nazis did;but so, too, did the "good Christian" citizens of many European countries.

Considering the anti-Semitic waves of hatred that enveloped much of Europe at the time, it is doubtful that the killing of the Jews,especially at the hands of fellow Christians, was enough to propel a nation to war. Had the typical physiognomy of the Ashkenazi Jew been more Semitic, other European nations may have offered even less resistance to Nazi Aggression than they did. However, most of those Jews were physically indistinguishable from other Europeans, including the Germans. Prudent governments saw no benefit to risking a Nazi usurpation of their power where ethnic cleansing and perverted euthanasia would be imposed ruthlessly and arbitrarily. That might affect leaders and their families.

Other European Christian nations and atheistic Soviet Russia were forced to become allies in an attempt to arrest the armed aggression of Christian Germany. The USA reluctantly entered the war when most of the fighting was over even as their domestic Christian brothers in the South were conducting pogroms similar to kristal nacht on blacks.

So, in contemplating the Indian massacres, slavery, an attempted genocide on the Jews, atomic bombings and other" conservative traditions I think I'd rather have Muslims for neighbors than White Christians.

 

[Treeshepherd]

View attachment 35374

Just what are you implying with this photograph of Christian Nazis and Muslim leaders collaborating? That picture offers no new revelation that would soften the impact for earnest Christians who came to realize the scope of evils their national German Christian base was involved in. Many Muslims hated the Jews as much as the Christian Nazis did;but so, too, did the "good Christian" citizens of many European countries.

Considering the anti-Semitic waves of hatred that enveloped much of Europe at the time, it is doubtful that the killing of the Jews,especially at the hands of fellow Christians, was enough to propel a nation to war. Had the typical physiognomy of the Ashkenazi Jew been more Semitic, other European nations may have offered even less resistance to Nazi Aggression than they did. However, most of those Jews were physically indistinguishable from other Europeans, including the Germans. Prudent governments saw no benefit to risking a Nazi usurpation of their power where ethnic cleansing and perverted euthanasia would be imposed ruthlessly and arbitrarily. That might affect leaders and their families.

Other European Christian nations and atheistic Soviet Russia were forced to become allies in an attempt to arrest the armed aggression of Christian Germany. The USA reluctantly entered the war when most of the fighting was over even as their domestic Christian brothers in the South were conducting pogroms similar to kristal nacht on blacks.

So, in contemplating the Indian massacres, slavery, an attempted genocide on the Jews, atomic bombings and other" conservative traditions I think I'd rather have Muslims for neighbors than White Christians.

"A pre-war critic of Nazism, Pius XII lobbied world leaders to avoid war and, as Pope at the outbreak of war, issued Summi Pontificatus, expressing dismay at the invasion of Poland, reiterating Church teaching against racial persecution and calling for love, compassion and charity to prevail over war.[2]"
- wiki

It's a fallacy to call Pius XII 'Hitler's Pope'.
The fact is, Hitler initially sought to run the Church completely out of Germany. Hitler wanted to create a national church within state control. A. compromise was made, a treaty between Hitler and the Vatican (Reichskonkordat) which allowed the Church to exist in Germany. Almost immediately, Hitler violated the treaty.

Hitler was a Christian only for public consumption. In private, the Nazi system was more based on the occult, Vikingism, and the philosophy of someone like Plotinus.

Religion can be used as a tool, just as patriotism can. But the causes of the World Wars were not religious. Today, we sell the modern 'humanitarian' war by appealing to secular humanism. But, war is always essentially about territory, resources, and economic competition.

"Hitler's public relationship to religion has been characterised as one of opportunistic pragmatism.[8] His regime did not publicly advocate for state atheism, but it did seek to reduce the influence of Christianity on society. Hitler himself was reluctant of public attacks on the Church for political reasons, despite the urgings of Nazis like Bormann. Although he was skeptical of religion,[9][10] he did not present himself to the public as an atheist, and spoke of belief in an "almighty creator".[11][12] In private he could be ambiguous.[13][14] Evans wrote that Hitler repeatedly stated that Nazism was a secular ideology founded on science, which in the long run could not "co-exist with religion"
-wiki

 

[Coyote]

So?

If a religion demands that you kill people (and there are plenty of passages in the OT that do that) who cares if it's by decapitation or by stoning or whatever? Dead is dead.

People seem to have this bizarre idea that decapitation is worse than any other death and they seem to forget that these books were written over a thousand years ago when that was one of the popular means of execution. If conducted competently (apparently Saudi Arabia has had fewer decapitations due to a shortage of professional decapitators...) - it's quick. Beats stoning. Beats hanging. Yet people have this bizarre irrational reaction to it. The bible is full of stoning as a remedy for all kinds of misbehavior. Stoned or decapitated? Actually...there's interesting potential in combining that concept.

Jesus never told His followers to kill. That is a fact. There are no similar instructions as Mohammad's in the New testament. That is a fact

You are here to defend Islam by any dishonest means possible. Also a fact.

You confuse opinion with fact. Also a fact.

 

[Coyote]

No. Extremists of any stripe are terrible though. That much I'll grant you.

Islam merely has hundreds upon hundreds of millions of them.

Now, I realize you are a fanboy and all, but could you please refer me to any passage in other religions that instructs its followers on beheading people?

So?

If a religion demands that you kill people (and there are plenty of passages in the OT that do that) who cares if it's by decapitation or by stoning or whatever? Dead is dead.

Have you watched any of the ISIS beheading videos, because I watched the Daniel Pearl beheading years ago and the sawed his head off with a knife. This has happened to many people at the hands of ISIS and I am sure it was a terrible way to die. These people are barbarians and we must fight them.

That's why, presumably, countries like Saudi Arabia have clear professional standards for decapitation as their means of carrying out the death penalty. I fail to see how a fast, clean decapitation is any more barbaric than the electric chair, lethal injection or hanging.

Any deliberate killing of another human being is barbaric. Burning people alive is barbaric. Sawing off their heads with a knife is barbaric. Hanging them, and waiting while they dance, jerk and choke until they die, is barbaric. Stoning people is barbaric. The death penalty is barbaric. So why is it we assign just one element of murder to the term "barbaric"?

 

[Carla_Danger]

Eu

No. Extremists of any stripe are terrible though. That much I'll grant you.

especially the extreme atheists

Atheists don't bother you at your private residence while you're eating dinner, Mormon's do.

 

[westwall]

Eu

No. Extremists of any stripe are terrible though. That much I'll grant you.

especially the extreme atheists

Atheists don't bother you at your private residence while you're eating dinner, Mormon's do.

No, that's true. But I've had atheists butt into a philosophical discussion I was having with colleagues on far more than one occasion. They seem to think it OK to be rude in that situation.

 

[Coyote]

No. Extremists of any stripe are terrible though. That much I'll grant you.

Islam merely has hundreds upon hundreds of millions of them.

Now, I realize you are a fanboy and all, but could you please refer me to any passage in other religions that instructs its followers on beheading people?

I'm not a "fanboi" of any religion. I have worked with many Muslims over the years who I would trust with my life, while I would not with loads of Christians, atheists etc.
I have never bothered to research any of the various religions, but I will grant you that a quick skim through the Bible would reveal all sorts of violent examples that would please you. Especially the Old Testament.

That's not the point though.

Religions are made up of people. PEOPLE warp the religion to suit their individual goals and desires. PEOPLE are fucked up.

Your last sentance sums it up. Truth.

 

[DriftingSand]

...that Islam is fucking terrible?

All religions that reject Christ are "effing" terrible! They're nothing more than glorified cults.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Oh, it's such a short distance. Here's one imbecile who thinks that stoning gays is just the right thing to do. This is the definition of extremism....

Oklahoma Republican thinks stoning gay people is okay

Oklahoma Republican thinks stoning gay people is okay WashingtonExaminer.com

and find a few hundred million just like him, and you would be right to compare Christianity to Islam.

As is, you are just a desperate idiot indulging in dishonest moral equivalencies.

 

[Coyote]

No. Extremists of any stripe are terrible though. That much I'll grant you.

Islam merely has hundreds upon hundreds of millions of them.

Now, I realize you are a fanboy and all, but could you please refer me to any passage in other religions that instructs its followers on beheading people?

So?

If a religion demands that you kill people (and there are plenty of passages in the OT that do that) who cares if it's by decapitation or by stoning or whatever? Dead is dead.

People seem to have this bizarre idea that decapitation is worse than any other death and they seem to forget that these books were written over a thousand years ago when that was one of the popular means of execution. If conducted competently (apparently Saudi Arabia has had fewer decapitations due to a shortage of professional decapitators...) - it's quick. Beats stoning. Beats hanging. Yet people have this bizarre irrational reaction to it. The bible is full of stoning as a remedy for all kinds of misbehavior. Stoned or decapitated? Actually...there's interesting potential in combining that concept.

Remind me of the last stoning done at a Christians order? So because 600 years ago the Catholic church wised up and stopped the message and acts of murder we can still compare it to a religion today that actively teaches murder lying and subjugation of any one that does not believe that religion? You are beyond idiotic.

PRIEST TELLS CHRISTIANS TO STONE GAY PEOPLE - MambaOnline - Gay South Africa online
James David Manning advocates stoning gay people to death.

Murray Seidman, 2011, a 70 year old senior in Lansdowne, PA was stoned to death by John Thomas because, according to Thomas, the Bible says to stone homosexuals.

Good thing these people live in countries ruled by secular law.

Then again, there is also death by hanging. Pretty barbaric and still the means of execution in a number of countries. For some reason folks like you think it's less barbric then decapitation. Go figure.

 

[westwall]

Oh, it's such a short distance. Here's one imbecile who thinks that stoning gays is just the right thing to do. This is the definition of extremism....

Oklahoma Republican thinks stoning gay people is okay

Oklahoma Republican thinks stoning gay people is okay WashingtonExaminer.com

and find a few hundred million just like him, and you would be right to compare Christianity to Islam.

As is, you are just a desperate idiot indulging in dishonest moral equivalencies.

You, or one like you said that it DIDN'T occur. Here I am showing you an example of an extremist. It's not a moral equivalency at all. It is a fact.

Live with it.

 

[TheOldSchool]

...that Islam is fucking terrible?

All religions that reject Christ are "effing" terrible! They're nothing more than glorified cults.

Jews too?

 

[Coyote]

Extremism is dangerous - whether it's religious or political (and I would consider athiesm in with religious), whether it's pro-something or anti something. The cause is more important than the human cost of bringing that cause to fruition. I think there is also an element of insanity involved sometimes because in order to do this, you have to be able to discard human lives or convince yourself that some lives or groups of people, are less than.