Zierro

Just got done decoding your hilarious post. As for the point you're trying to get across, you're putting terrorism on the same level as terrestrial lizard men. :wall: Uhhh, you do know terrorism does happen, right? Did America get attacked by lizard men over the past ten years? Also, forgive me for not blindly assuming that religion is so docile and innocent, as you do. It's not like anyone has ever killed anyone over religion so any speculation or suspicion here would be completely ludicrous! No, religion is only about peace and community! With the constant flow of reductio ad ridiculum and strawmen, this might be one of the funniest "debates" I have seen. It's moreso just a bunch of overly sensitive people trying to expound the idea into my head that NOTHING BAD EVER COMES OUT OF ISLAM - THEY ARE ONLY AS BAD AS ANY OTHER RELIGION, LIKE CHRISTIANITY... which, guess what, can be pretty [bleep]ing bad. NO THERE ARE ONLY FEW TERRORISTS, THE REST ARE NOT LIKE THAT AT ALL. Then explain to me why I saw a video of an entire Islamic town celebrating the 9/11 event? Or you also have the option of thinking of a cop-out, and posting something along the lines of WELL OTHER RELIGIONS DO THAT TOO!, which I'm assuming will be done based on the vast majority of "rebuttals" I've been getting. And you say I'm the one who believes in lizard men? lol All thanks to years of practice, young one. :ugeek:

664

Coffee is for businessmen. You strike me as more of an apple juice guy.

I would "scrutinize" a Christian or Jewish building just as quickly as I would an Islamic one. The suspicious activity is the fact that 9/11 happened only ten years ago. Sorry, but I just don't give religion as much undeserving credit as you do. While there are some great generous deeds done in the name of religion, you can't forget about the atrocities. After some more reading, another plausible theory is that the one they are building in NY is a sign of peace. However, seeing that video of their average citizens celebrating over 9/11 is what causes suspicion. I said this in the same post you yelled about. And Bent, what are you talking about? I can't decipher any of that.

I might enjoy stirring up a little controversy, but I wouldn't call it trolling. To troll would mean I don't actually believe what I said.

The hat was what kept her from doing her job? I'm pretty sure that was all on the coach's redneckery. :) I'm aware of the repercussions you must face in today's society. However, I'm saying that this shouldn't be the case. No matter what we wear, we're still subject to be judged based solely on the clothes. We can't walk around naked. Even if we could "that would be making a statement". My proposition might be a little too progressive for society to handle lol, but I just think it's silly to correlate every accessory we wear with one specific message/statement. "That person wears Pantera. He must love their music!" This is flawed logic. There are many other reasons for wearing clothing than to make a statement.

What the hell? No, all I am doing is reading about the possibility that mosques are built as a symbol of conquest, coming on here and stating my opinion on the matter IF THAT WAS TRUE (rhetorically), and asking for some reasons why I should dismiss the idea, but only getting absolute garbage responses. That's all I am doing, yet I keep getting responses like these. That's okay. It shows how utterly biased you guys are. And Fly, where are these Christian churches in Saudi Arabia you speak of? I Googled it and only saw them talking about the possibility of a church, and with very strict regulations at that.

Yeah, what's wrong about that? I'm curious. Political threads really make TIF shine. Like I told Rocco, I was curious. I also have every right to question whatever I wish, you fascist. Plus, I'm not the one making baseless assumptions. You're claiming that I think anyone who is Muslim is automatically associated with terrorism, and you're also claiming that mosques are definitely not symbols of conquest. I'm simply trying to find out whether they are or are not. All you've been doing is preventing me from doing so and revealing the fact that you have bias running right up your spine. Great for your credibility in the future. PS: I'm a liberal. That was in response to Rocco talking about what people did thousands of years ago, but I think it's okay that you felt the need to make that jab. *Looks at score* Yeah, you could use all the points you can get at this point.

The whole Spaghetti Monster argument is literally the worst piece of logic I have ever heard in my entire life. It's called appeal to ridicule, and what you're actually doing is drawing a parallel between the subject being argued over and the most ridiculous subject thinkable. Nothing more. Do you really just pick and choose what is true and what isn't, without any logical or empirical grounds? Lol I just made it up? Actually, I've been reading about it across a few different sites and heard it from a friend prior to that. If this is seriously the only rebuttal you can spout, I think the whole argument speaks for itself. You have nothing of importance to say and so you try to ridicule me (someone who is merely trying to get to the bottom of this, and not picking any sides) to compensate for your lack of logical tact. Maybe if you didn't make the claim that mosques are not symbols of conquest, I wouldn't ask for evidence or proof. ;-) This is why you should read up a little more before jumping to conclusions. I do support the erection of this building, on legal grounds. I'm merely questioning the motives behind erecting the mosque. True, but I don't see any Christian churches in Saudi Arabia, so it obviously is a big deal to them. Back then we also lived in a more physical manner than the secular one we see today, so when a church was built over enemy land, there were no enemy survivors to complain about it - it physically wasn't their land anymore because no one was alive to claim it. Compare that to today where our territories have remained pretty stagnant over the past couple of decades/centuries. Physical conquests are unheard of now. The only possible way to spread your symbol of conquest would be to work from the inside, stealthily, rather than forcefully. Not saying that the Christians were justified (some of the crap they did was disturbing) - it's just not a very good comparison. Wow, that sounds even worse.

Sports clothing, yes. You wear clothing with sports team logos to show support for that team, like you wear a shirt with a band's logo to show you like that band. I wear Pantera and Danzig and don't like them. I also remember wearing a Steelers jacket because it was cold and that was the only jacket I could find. However, I don't really care whether Steelers win or lose.

I guess hinting at you giving me some evidence instead of your mere hearsay wasn't enough. Many mosques were originally "worship houses" for the people that the Muslims have defeated. Go look it up - there is a strong correlation between defeating enemies and then building mosques over the conquered's land. Now I'm not claiming to know whether this actually is symbol of conquest or not (hence why I specifically said the words "IF this is true"), but I am definitely not going to completely dismiss the idea if the best rebuttal you can come up with is literally, "NO TATS NOT TRUE," twice in a row now. If I can recall correctly, I remember seeing a video where thousands of regular Muslim citizens (elderly, young, and surprisingly even children) were rejoicing and celebrating over their "victory" during the week of 9/11. Obviously not every Muslim condones in these actions, but it would be silly to think the whole terrorist regime is only limited to the ones who hijack planes and kill people.

...isn't that a troll? Or are you trolling by purposely not acknowledging his trolling? Or maybe he was serious, but you perceived it as trolling, and in turn tried trolling us. Or maybe you're both serious. Too many possibilities. AHHHHHHH!! :shock:

Okay then... What should I think if somebody says, "It is."? Claims are just hollow words unless they have reasoning or evidence backing them. *hint*

I just read up more on the idea behind building Mosques, and apparently they are built in areas where Muslims have had military victories - a symbol of conquest. So, by allowing them this right, wouldn't America be admitting their defeat? Actually, if making the building is really your way of thinking you won - by all means, tell yourself that you "won". Show the world your building that symbolizes exactly how sick and demented you are. At least America gives you the right to show the world how much of an ass you are. Note: This is of course is based on the assumption that this really is the reason they build mosques.

When two different friends make plans with me on the same day - and none of my friends get along with each other. They can get quite territorial over me. Hey, now I'm not depressed anymore. :)

686

688

On this note, I agree. Bigotry goes both ways, and this has been shown time and time again. It's just a shame some people can't see that and have extremely selective opinions on what is bigotry and what is not (accepted bigotry). Such as BLACK ONLY COLLEGES.

I have. Now you read in between the lines - I was pointing out the strawman you're making. Dusty never said bigotry was alright. He's just saying if someone's going to threaten to murder somebody else over their religion, it's acceptable to get angry about that. It isn't the "muslim" aspect that set people off (therefore no racism or bigotry) - it's the fact that they threatened to kill someone. Would it be racist to oppose a black organization that robbed banks? PS: I don't get the joke, Nicholas.

I guess killing artists is okay in your book then. :roll:

690

693

Liquid sex? What's the point if there's no friction? Just had some generic microwavable Chinese thing. I've been living off of gross food for a while. Now I'm depressed.

695

Iron Maiden and Metallica do have a world of difference between them, but surely there has to be something about them that brings the same bunch of people to these same two bands? They're like the peanut butter and jelly of music.