RetiredGySgt
Diamond Member
I want Islam to have a reformation. Until they do I want them recognized as our enemy and contained.
Islam - Tolerance and Peace
- Thread starter Jaguar
- Start date
I want Islam to have a reformation. Until they do I want them recognized as our enemy and contained.
Sky Dancer
Rookie
- Jan 21, 2009
- 19,307
- 1,320
- 0
- Banned
- #102
Actually, some Christians are dominionists and they seek to rule America. They don't plan to do it forcibly, just by stealth.
We have to fear Islamic terrorists.
Enjoy the rapture.
I have other plans.
Last edited:
Kalam
Senior Member
- Mar 5, 2009
- 8,866
- 785
- 48
Nobody worships Muhammad (SAWS) you silly Mormon motherfucker. You're too stupid to understand even the most basic tenets of the religion you're trying to demonize and you think you can call someone else an ignorant dumbass? Learn to keep quiet when grown folks are talking.
Last edited:
RetiredGySgt
Diamond Member
No worship? Really? What happens when someone draws a cartoon of Mohammad? You are the liar. But then that is explained by the Koran which allows you to lie to us Kafer. We are simply to be used until killed or converted.
Sky Dancer
Rookie
- Jan 21, 2009
- 19,307
- 1,320
- 0
- Banned
- #105
Fair enough. That's the most moderate (for you) stance I 've seen so far.
Islam and Muslims are not MY enemy. With the exception of a few friends, they are mostly strangers to me. Religious and Islamic extremists are in the enemy category.
Buddhists take a broad view of the category of enemy. We strive to develop an equal kind regard to all regardless of whether the individual is a friend, an enemy or a stranger. We do so because we know that the categories of friend, enemy and stranger are impermanent. Before we make a friend, that person is a stranger. If we have a falling out with a friend, temporarily that person falls into the enemy category. Then if we cease to have contact with the enemy he or she falls into the stranger category again. If that person comes back into our life again, the category shifts again. Perhaps with reconcile with the enemy and the enemy becomes a friend.
All these categories are self referencing. If you examine what makes someone a friend, enemy or stranger it all has to do with me, me, me, me.
Truth is we exaggerate the good qualities of friends and we ignore or minimize their negative qualities. With the enemy we do the opposite. We exaggerate their flaws and we minimize their positive qualites. With the stranger, we don't care one way or another. It's all a function of ego.
Contemplating the categories of friend, enemy and stranger is a Buddhist meditation practice. When successful, it develops the quality of equanimity or equal kind regard for all beings.
Last edited:
Calm down big boy, or you'll pop like a zit.
Commanded..huh....Christians are indeed commanded to convert, why do you think it's a proselytizing religion?
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world"
Well, right here we have identified the problem and it is a failure of communication...or a bit of religious hypocrisy.
You want to be able to condemn Islam based on a literal interpretation of their holy books. But you expect us to take a more nuanced view of the bible.
Kalam
Senior Member
- Mar 5, 2009
- 8,866
- 785
- 48
Yes, moron, no worship.
And Muhammad is nothing but a Messenger; certainly, other Messengers passed away before him. So if he died or is slain, will you turn back on your heels? And whoever turns back on his heels, then never will he harm Allah in anything. And Allah will reward the grateful ones. - 3:144
Those who worship anyone or anything but Allah (SWT) are committing a grave sin - this includes worship of his messengers:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdxzirDgtUA]YouTube - Shaykh Bilal Philips - Beware Of Nuh Hamim Keller (Reliance Of The Traveller)[/ame]
Show me in the Qur'an where I'm allowed to "lie to kuffar." Maybe you'd believe it if I wrote it on golden plates and read it from my hat, huh?
Where are these 'wars' happening? How long have these same 'areas' been at war? Is it as long as islam has been present? What does it take for you to see that when muslims are ruling, there is violence, intimidation, and suppression of the individual spirit? "Each" muslim seeks their own freedon, but will not stand up to those in power. The religion mixed with the law, make it punishable to disagree with those in power. These people in these countries are subjugated and live in terror for their families, and themselves. How can they ever grow, if we do nothing to break this cycle?
The reason that I used "selectively", is because that when Christians today do an extremists act, other Christians will denounce them or even stop them. That is not so in the muslim faith. If a person in your muslim family or your community does a horrible crime, you do not denounce him, you protect him. That just doesn't happen that much (I am sure you can find a few demonstrations in the last century) in the Christian faith. It is common in the muslim faith.
Using 'logic': if countries that have large muslim population are typically at war, and when a population of mulims moves into a relatively peaceful country and then that country starts having trouble, it just might be the 'faith' causing the problems. If this can be demonstrated, repeatedly over the fourteen hundred years the muslim faith has been in existence, rationally, there must be some questions asked.
Defending 'islam', does nothing but perpetuate violence. If you surround muslims with a strong force, and tell them to behave, suddenly, they will be the most peaceful people on earth. Show one sign of weakness and they will try to rule you. There is no peace for muslims, go into any community and see for yourself. It is a faith of intimidation and supression (it is perfectly understandable why the far, far left would embrace the followers). Supporting islam is like supporting domestic violence.
Question: If there are 1.5 billion muslims, why don't you see them standing up to the terrible extremists' acts that occur worldwide? If they are not condemming this type of behavior, they are 'encouraging' (violent acts). If they are giving money to these groups, they ARE supporting the violence.
Why do they demonstrate at any imagined slight to their prophet, but sit quietly in their homes when terror acts are done? Their demonstrations are full of violent threats, and acts that degrade the county's symbol (this is done with absolute hatred by the muslims).
Why when a "courageous" muslim comes forward to denounce these terrible acts (that have nothing to do with "peace"), why don't large groups of muslims demonstrate for them? Instead, muslim leaders will denounce the denouncer, and possibly call for a 'fatwa' (not sure on the spelling), or for violence to be done to them.
Learn to read, I said you were using passive aggressive behavior. Look it up since you want to get all bent out of shape.
Yes, it will be terrible when Yeshua returns. He will have the truth and use it to slay His enemies (he will kill them by telling them the truth). He will have armies with him, but they will be 'extraterestial'. He will come to stop the world-wide cries for help. Evil will be reigning, and most people will be suffering. And yes there will be a "sweeping, overwhelming change in the world order....", He will do away with wars and bring world-wide peace (something that everyone says they want).
He will not give unchecked power to corrupt people to do His dirty work. He has encouraged us to treat our enemies as our friends. We have done that. He has told us: do not tolerate evil (some of us are just begging to understand what that means). He hold us responsible for naming evil, and denouncing it. When the muslims do not denounce evil and protect those that do evil, they should be named. The truth should be told. To do otherwise will let evil grow and spread.
Yes, people that live in the shadow of evil, rarely see it coming.
Do you thing covert, kill or subjgate is a different message than:
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world"
Can you show in the NT where Christians are told to do violence to anyone that does not want to be "taught"?
Instead, it tells the apostles that if they do not want to be taught, then shake the dust from your feet (basically, they will have to answer to Yeshua). Where does the Quran tell the followers that Mohammed will take care of anything in the future?
The quran authorizes unchecked violence against anyone that isn't of the specific muslim faith being followed.
I can understand why you fear Christianity over islam; you have been taught, you have rejected the teaching, and you know your time will come. Christianity supports the truth, what does islam support (other than violence and destruction)?
You need to look at specific areas and periods of history to evaluate that. To simply assume that IF it's been as long as Islam is present, and THEREFORE Islam is the cause, is itself a logical fallacy.
Most of those regions have long histories of alternating periods of empire building, stability, strife and conquoring by foreign powers prededing Islam, a relative new-comer. You also had various Islamic empires that ruled over long periods of stability and prosperity as well as periods of conflict ,such as Moghul and Ottoman. There seems little difference between them and non-Islamic empires in that regard.
If you want to look at commonalities in a broad way - many of those regions undergoing chronic instability and ethnic or religious conflict were also regions under former colonial rule enclosed by borders drawn to satisfy foreign powers, not ethnic realities. Iraq is a good example of just that.
What it "takes" are aguements that are logical, and address the complexities of history, culture, religion, geography and modern reality - not just broad and often unsupported generalizations.
You state: "When Muslims are ruling there is violence, intimidation, and suppression of the individual spirit"
The problem is three-fold.
It is a problem of mixing religion and government - societies and laws based on religious doctrine rather than secular law. I don't think I can find any examples of theocratic societies either existing or, waiting in the wings in hopes of fruition - that do not tend towards the most fundamentalist and intolerant interpretations of their religion and that includes Christianity who's more fundamentalist sects believe in a literal Kingdom of God on earth.
...and that brings us to the second problem - extremism, which when it comes to religions tends to be fundamentalist. Extremism in Islam is the spreading of the more puritanical sect of Islam - Wahhabi, which is what you see in Saudi Arabia. This sort of extremism is not unique to Islam, but many Islamic countries lack the democratic foundations and principles (which are largely secular) that characterize many countries of the west and those principles allow us to keep our government and laws independent of our religious leaders' desires.
...and lastly, anytime you have a fundamentalist rule (whether it's religiously or politicaly fundamentalist) - you have violence, intimidation, and suppression of the individual spirit. Look at apartheid South Africa, Zimbabwe then and now, Iran, Soviet Union, and others.
That's a myth perpetrated by a media that chooses not to report such denunciations and, it's somewhat hypocritical because Christians and Jews can be as spotty as Muslims in their denunciations of violence. Anti-abortion violence, for example or the massacre of Bosnian Muslims by the Christian Bosnian Serbs
For some reason, there is this expectation that all Muslims must denounce all acts of violence perpetrated by one of their own. There is no such similar expectation upon the Jew as a whole or the Christian as a whole. Because this does not occur and make it into the MSM, denounciations are largely ignored.
That isn't logic, it's a fallacy and not everything is connected or causal in the way you seem to think.
When countries are at war, refugee problems occur and large numbers of people are forced to flee and relocate. That in itself is destabilizing to the countries surrounding them who have to absorb the populations and who very likely may have ethnic conflicts of their own that are exacerbated by the refugee crisis for example: Ethiopia, Eritrea, Rwanda, Burundi, the Congo, Somalia. Another example would be the (many) Balkan conflicts.
When a complex situation has a simple answer (ie - the problem is Islam) - it's usually wrong.
The only accurate statement you made is: there must be some questions asked. I agree. But I would hope when you look for answers you look further than the "simple" answers that seem so "obvious".
Questions such as - is it Islam? (strangely, Muslims live peacefully and productively in such countries as the U.S., Canada, Australia, Mali (Sufi and Sunni), Gambia (predominately Sufi) and Bangladesh among many. Since you also try to tie in your conclusion with history, then your case is even weaker because if you are going to go through 1400 or more years of history there is significant Christian conflict, conquest, bloodshed, and intolerance that can not all be laid at the feet of Islam. How do you explain that? How do you explain other questions like conflicts that have in common a heritage of colonialism? How do you account for all the political instability, a history of dictatorial governmence - caused by Islam? If so, why do we see the same things in non-Islamic African countries? South America?
You call that "logical"? Sounds like "emotional" to me.
No. Supporting extremism is like supporting domestic violence, but I wouldn't expect you to understand those distinctions.
Probably for the same reason that the approximately 2.1 billion Christians worldwide didn't stand up and condemn the violence during the Irish Troubles, or the Serbian massacre of the Bosnian Muslims...or the acts of the Lords Liberation Army in Uganda.
Guess they must be supporting the violence eh?
Unfortunately, it's impossible to answer a question who's premises are false.
I think you need to learn to read. Oh look - here's one recent article that I bet didn't make it into your righwing websites: Somali clerics work to denounce radical al-Shabab - Yahoo! News
Problem is, articles like these aren't as interesting as articles about blood, guts, fatwa and Islamic extremism.
Nope. What's hogwash is a reply reflecting a mind too lazy (or closed) to explore beyond the boundaries of ignorance.
Again, a typical response. Rather than explore and hash out any points - you just label opponents "apologists".
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Ketanji Brown Jackson sharply condemns Trump's attacks on judges- Started by C_Clayton_Jones
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
Ketanji Brown Jackson sharply condemns Trump's attacks on judges
- Latest: C_Clayton_Jones
-
