Religion Topics On These Forums

[FuBai]

The main problem with religious debate is that the majority are ill informed, and, amoungst the minority who are better so, there are those of outstanding knowledge, but who can rarley be bothered to post it, as it tends either to be ignored, or very porley attacked in a brutish manner. I would advocate everyone to read the God delusion and "The Way" bible, and at least to have a basic comprehension of what the various world religions involve...even scientology.

[hohto]

That isn't a period of 20 years so it is not "decades".

 

 

 

I gave you military interventions starting from 1950s and you're still crying about that.

 

 

 

Muslims attacked Jerusalem and took it from the rightful owners. This angered the west. The Pope authorized the creation of a "Crusade" to go free the Holy Land. How is that any different than the Allies declaring war against Hitler for taking Poland and fighting to free Poland? Each has an aggressive side greedily taking property and land that is not theirs and so third parties band together to go take it back. Also the pope is not headmaster of my religion.

 

 

 

Rightful owners? First of all Jerusalem has had countless of owners, including Romans. Second, it's the holy place of 3 big religions. Saying one religion would be its rightful owner is just wrong.

 

 

 

You also didn't give an answer why Christians attacked against other religions which weren't even close to Jerusalem, didn't do any religious imperialism and so on? I'd like to find out Finland for example had anything to do with muslims, Jerusalem or anything like that. Heck, our religion wasn't even monoteistic like yours or Islam.

 

 

 

Let's see... the first Crusade never would have happened except people of a certain religion decided to go conquer all their neighbors and kill any resistance and take their land. Then all of a sudden it is bad if other people come and attack those militant people of a certain religion for doing what they did?

 

 

 

Muslims have had the most multiculturally succesful system ever when compared to their time: look at the old muslim time Spain.

 

 

 

I agree there was some screwy stuff going on with certain Crusades. Look at what happened to Constantinople. The difference is people at times have tried to exploit Christianity for their own selfish ends but the fundamental texts of Christianity condemn this as wrong. The fundamentalist texts of Islam support any warlike aggression that is waged. I don't get why you are having a problem understanding this point.

 

 

 

So now we're putting Christian extremists and muslim extremists into 2 different categories. If you ask me, there's no difference between an idiot (think that word can be used from extremists) who is part of a different religion.

 

 

 

From your writings at least I get the feeling that you are trying to say that Islam is bad because there's some aggressive parts in their holy book. Please read Joshua 4 or Samuel 15 for example and you get something about war from your own holy book.

 

 

 

What does this have to do with anything regarding Islam? What does this have anything to do with the US pressuring the Soviet Union? If you want to talk about Japan then I would say they were a brutal and murderous people until after WWII. A lot of the same flaws of Islam were there in Japan during the Shogunate and under the Emporers as well. Civilizations built on those principals are always violent and brutal and have to be stopped by force. Go read the book Flyboys if you want a history of Japan.

 

 

 

We got into Japan after you were praising the way how west has threatened other cultures and how it was so superior. I argued it with the way how west has threatened them. If you want to discuss more about imperialism, let's do it in some other thread. I'm ready to continue but if we keep doing it here, we would soon both write novels.

 

 

 

The principals I am talking about in a nutshell are those that teach a group of people are superior to the rest of the people on Earth and that killing other lesser peoples to further your power or influence is ok.

 

 

 

And all the time you are arguing against that principal. By judging muslims and accepting their different threatening in airports for example, you already have put them into 2nd category.

 

 

 

I just found that funny because your signature is the opposite of appeasement.

 

 

 

I accept defending against other nations when you are being under attack with another army. That's why I have given support for Iraq for example.

 

 

 

Wow... funny, my country got literally attacked as well...

 

How many muslim nations declared a war against you? How many troops attacked your country? Just because some terrorist groups attacked you, it doesn't mean you would be in same kind of a danger as when over 50 times bigger country waged a war and sent their troops over your boarder.

[warri0r45]

We live in a world of empiricism, faith is the complete opposite of what we as rational creatures should believe in. Thats my problem with faith, faith is nothing. It makes a belief which has less empirical evidence than myself being God look quite plausiable. When in actual fact if you really think about it. Im willing to bet no faith has the correct interpretation of God and her attributes. We assign God attributes, thats like assigning someone we have never met a personality. It doesn't make sense and the chances you are correct is tiny.

 

 

 

I admire all the work religious people do, and how the Bible may possibly help you through life at times. Just don't tell me Genesis is a valid theory for the creation of the universe. Or faith is worth all the suffering that it has created. Or that a reason for anything is "it's written in the Bible".

 

 

 

Run!! he's here again!! :shock: Let people believe what they want. You can believe your evoloutionary theory, other people can believe their bible-ly stuff.

 

 

 

Accepting evolutionary theory isn't a belief. Alligning evolution and creation in the same scentance with the joining word 'belief' is just a mockery of the credentials of science. Yes, we should let people believe what they want but it does not take belief to accept evolution as true.

 

 

 

Hohto and BlueTear, are you two Muslims?

 

 

 

Atheist, officially don't belong to any religion.

 

 

 

What about humanism or materialsm? You can call those religions.

 

 

 

Sorry, not religions. Philosophies on life, ways of thinking, sure. They don't require any kind of faith in any kind of god. You're probably thinking 'but what about buddhism' at the moment too. It has it's spiritual and supernatural sides, but in my opinion is far removed from them and much more philosophical, which is why I like it. :D

[darkmage099]

I don't even bother posting in these types of topics anymore. SO much hate out there. It's just the few arrogant/ignorant people out there that just make me wanna...blow my top. My religion tells me to inform the ignorant....just cant do it anymore. :? . I might post if there's some outrageous comments that no one replies too (thanks Hohto, I was about to respond but you got it covered :) )

[Faux]

Islam "extremists" outnumber any other nation/religion at a large degree. It's foolish to not expect the people to hate them. Especially since most Muslims are too lazy to stand up against these extremists who are hijacking their religion.

 

 

 

I don't even bother posting in these types of topics anymore. SO much hate out there. It's just the few arrogant/ignorant people out there that just make me wanna...blow my top. My religion tells me to inform the ignorant....just cant do it anymore. :? . I might post if there's some outrageous comments that no one replies too (thanks Hohto, I was about to respond but you got it covered :) )

 

 

 

You talk a lot about ignorance when you haven't exactly shown intelligence, ugh

[darkmage099]

Islam "extremists" outnumber any other nation/religion at a large degree. It's foolish to not expect the people to hate them. Especially since most Muslims are too lazy to stand up against these extremists who are hijacking their religion. any suggestions??

 

 

 

I don't even bother posting in these types of topics anymore. SO much hate out there. It's just the few arrogant/ignorant people out there that just make me wanna...blow my top. My religion tells me to inform the ignorant....just cant do it anymore. :? . I might post if there's some outrageous comments that no one replies too (thanks Hohto, I was about to respond but you got it covered :) )

 

 

 

You talk a lot about ignorance when you haven't exactly shown intelligence, ugherr..okay?

[Faux]

any suggestions??

 

 

 

You need to ask? I know Muslims have experience of getting their point across.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid ... w=nb&mp=wm

[MyPurpleCrayon]

You need to ask? I know Muslims have experience of getting their point across.

 

Yeah, so do Christians.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yay for generalizations.

[unknownmasterofnothing]

inform the ignorant? thats messed up.

[Faux]

Yeah, so do Christians.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yay for generalizations.

 

 

 

I love how you compared a picture of two Christians (are they even?) and seem to think that that equals the thousands of Muslims I posted.

 

 

 

No really, I love it.

[MyPurpleCrayon]

I love how you compared a picture of two Christians (are they even?) and seem to think that that equals the thousands of Muslims I posted.

 

 

 

No really, I love it.

 

I don't really care how many there are, that's completely irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact that there are extremists in every group of people. You can't say things against the people, and the religion in it's entirety, when those comments should only be directed against a select few people. I mean, you can, but then you only make yourself out to be just as ignorant as those very people you complain about.

[Faux]

I don't really care how many there are, that's completely irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact that there are extremists in every group of people. You can't say things against the people, and the religion in it's entirety, when those comments should only be directed against a select few people. I mean, you can, but then you only make yourself out to be just as ignorant as those very people you complain about.

 

 

 

You dare call anyone ignorant when you disregard anything that proves you wrong, way to go smartman! That way, you're always right!

[MyPurpleCrayon]

I don't really care how many there are, that's completely irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact that there are extremists in every group of people. You can't say things against the people, and the religion in it's entirety, when those comments should only be directed against a select few people. I mean, you can, but then you only make yourself out to be just as ignorant as those very people you complain about.

 

 

 

You dare call anyone ignorant when you disregard anything that proves you wrong, way to go!

 

 

 

1) I didn't call anyone ignorant, stop putting words in my mouth.

 

 

 

2) Your irrelevant comment about how many people there are did not prove me wrong, you are sorely mistaken if you think so.

 

 

 

and seem to think that that equals the thousands of Muslims I posted.

 

I don't think the numbers equal each other, but I think the principle of the situations are the same. Just because a large majority of Mexicans are poor doesn't give me the right to say "All Mexicans are poor!" You are ignoring simple logic, quit.

[Faux]

I don't really care how many there are, that's completely irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact that there are extremists in every group of people. You can't say things against the people, and the religion in it's entirety, when those comments should only be directed against a select few people. I mean, you can, but then you only make yourself out to be just as ignorant as those very people you complain about.

 

 

 

You dare call anyone ignorant when you disregard anything that proves you wrong, way to go!

 

 

 

1) I didn't call anyone ignorant, stop putting words in my mouth.

 

 

 

2) Your irrelevant comment about how many people there are did not prove me wrong, you are sorely mistaken if you think so.

 

 

 

and seem to think that that equals the thousands of Muslims I posted.

 

I don't think the numbers equal each other, but I think the principle of the situations are the same. Just because a large majority of Mexicans are poor doesn't give me the right to say "All Mexicans are poor!" You are ignoring simple logic, quit.

 

 

 

Oh man, you're too humble. You totally owned me with your crazy "logic"

[MyPurpleCrayon]

Oh man, you're too humble. You totally owned me with your crazy "logic"

 

 

 

There is a MAJOR difference between calling someone ignorant and telling someone that they CAN say something to make themselves appear to be ignorant. I never said you were ignorant Carlo. And quit responding to 1/4 of my posts, try to address the topic a little bit. I know you hate me and all, but seriously, grow up. And humble? What does that have to do with anything? I never claimed to be humble, and even if I did, you are far from it.

 

 

 

I didn't say anything about "owning" you and I'm not arguing in an antagonistic way at all, quit trying to make yourself out to be a victim. You have completely drifted off from the original topic because you're too childish to actually discuss something without bringing up insults to defend your case. Do you realize all you have accomplished is attacking me, rather the the topic at hand? Now, if you will:

 

 

 

I don't think the numbers equal each other, but I think the principle of the situations are the same. Just because a large majority of Mexicans are poor doesn't give me the right to say "All Mexicans are poor!" You are ignoring simple logic, quit.

[Satenza]

There is always something wrong with prejudging a race based only on their faith or skin color. However the question really comes down to does the ends justify the means. As in does holding a predujice against Muslims when it comes to security checking justify that less atrocities could happen.

 

 

 

I'm going to say no it does not justify it. If there is such a problem with security that they have to rely on prejudice to stop such acts there is a problem with security. Tighten it up on everybody in airports and those types of places. One day a white man will blow himself up in the name of his religion, then people will agree that it is better to fix security than it is to temporarily fix a permenant problem like terrorism by classing problems on specific races of individuals.

[Locke]

I'm going to say no it does not justify it. If there is such a problem with security that they have to rely on prejudice to stop such acts there is a problem with security. Tighten it up on everybody in airports and those types of places. One day a white man will blow himself up in the name of his religion, then people will agree that it is better to fix security than it is to temporarily fix a permenant problem like terrorism by classing problems on specific races of individuals.

 

 

 

Your argument assumes that security can be tightened to be 100% failsafe, which I do not believe it can. No matter how much you tighten security, a white man could still blow himself up in the name of his religion.

 

 

 

The reason that's important is because you also assume that security isn't being tightened up along with racial profiling. No one is disputing that security needs to be tightened all around, but since it will never be 100% safe - we might as well look at the facts. And the facts say that arab muslims have attacked us the most in the past - and arab muslims still plan on attacking us in the future. Therefore, arab muslims should be given the most attention.

[Faux]

Discuss what MPC? The straw man argument that you set up? You posted a whole load of BS when it's not even directed to my point. My point is not that most Muslims are extremists, my point is that most Muslims know enough to relay their views to the world- something they should use for positive gain rather than a negative one.

 

 

 

And I'll give you a tip, never play a game of chance. Probability doesn't sound like something you're good at.

[Locke]

Discuss what MPC? The straw man argument that you set up?

 

 

 

I'm curious. I read through the discussion between you and MyPurpleCrayon and cannot figure out where his straw man argument is. Could you point it out to me more directly because I feel pretty silly not being able to find it myself.

[MyPurpleCrayon]

Discuss what MPC? The straw man argument that you set up? You posted a whole load of BS when it's not even directed to my point. My point is not that most Muslims are extremists, my point is that most Muslims know enough to relay their views to the world- something they should use for positive gain rather than a negative one.

 

And I agree, a lot of them are. But when you decide to direct your comments about Muslims towards Darkmage, and try to turn it against him, that's a different story.

 

 

 

And I'll give you a tip, never play a game of chance. Probability doesn't sound like something you're good at.

 

I don't know what you're talking about, but you really do enjoy making this obnoxious cuts at people don't you? If you want, we can discuss how big of a tool you are rather than the topic at hand. Or we can talk about how I think all Hispanic, Filipino, and Mexican people are trashy, then I'll just use that against you without thinking twice, because apparently that's really easy for you to do.

[Faux]

Discuss what MPC? The straw man argument that you set up?

 

 

 

I'm curious. I read through the discussion between you and MyPurpleCrayon and cannot figure out where his straw man argument is. Could you point it out to me more directly because I feel pretty silly not being able to find it myself.

 

 

 

He made it out like I was stereotyping Muslims as extremists, which I wasn't?

[MyPurpleCrayon]

I'll repeat myself because apparently you skipped over what I wrote:

 

 

 

Discuss what MPC? The straw man argument that you set up? You posted a whole load of BS when it's not even directed to my point. My point is not that most Muslims are extremists, my point is that most Muslims know enough to relay their views to the world- something they should use for positive gain rather than a negative one.

 

And I agree, a lot of them are. But when you decide to direct your comments about Muslims towards Darkmage, and try to turn it against him, that's a different story.

 

 

 

And I'll give you a tip, never play a game of chance. Probability doesn't sound like something you're good at.

 

I don't know what you're talking about, but you really do enjoy making this obnoxious cuts at people don't you? If you want, we can discuss how big of a tool you are rather than the topic at hand. Or we can talk about how I think all Hispanic, Filipino, and Mexican people are trashy, then I'll just use that against you without thinking twice, because apparently that's really easy for you to do.

[Locke]

He made it out like I was stereotyping Muslims as extremists, which I wasn't?

 

 

 

I actually disagree with you there.

 

 

 

You wrote:

 

 

 

You need to ask? I know Muslims have experience of getting their point across.

 

 

 

And then proceeded to post pictures and a news link about the violence of Muslims.

 

 

 

If that post is not stereotyping Muslims, I don't know what is.

 

 

 

I'm not saying you're wrong for doing so, but to claim that you weren't simply ignores the reality of your posts.

[Faux]

I actually disagree with you there.

 

 

 

You wrote:

 

 

 

You need to ask? I know Muslims have experience of getting their point across.

 

 

 

And then proceeded to post pictures and a news link about the violence of Muslims.

 

 

 

If that post is not stereotyping Muslims, I don't know what is.

 

 

 

I'm not saying you're wrong for doing so, but to claim that you weren't simply ignores the reality of your posts.

 

 

 

Here's the funny part, I perceive those pictures as just protests, not acts of violence. So yes, I wasn't stereotyping the Muslims at all. I didn't even mention the word violence yet :? I should've been clearer then I guess. But the only thing that I was trying to say was that Muslims are capable of protesting to show the whole world their disagreement. Why can't they do it one more to prove that they're not "extremists" as most people say?

[Locke]

So yes, I wasn't stereotyping the Muslims at all. I didn't even mention the word violence yet :?

 

 

 

Violence is irrelevant. There are ways of stereotyping people without talking about violence. For instance, here in the United States, Asian people are stereotyped as being tech savvy. That has nothing to do with violence but is still a stereotype.

 

 

 

Your assertion that you didn't stereotype is incorrect. Let me put this in chronological order for you. You first said:

 

 

 

Islam "extremists" outnumber any other nation/religion at a large degree. It's foolish to not expect the people to hate them. Especially since most Muslims are too lazy to stand up against these extremists who are hijacking their religion.

 

 

 

You then said:

 

 

 

You need to ask? I know Muslims have experience of getting their point across.

 

 

 

You are clearly stereotyping Muslims as something. If you want further proof that you stereotyped, this was posted next:

 

 

 

Yeah, so do Christians.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yay for generalizations.

 

 

 

I love how you compared a picture of two Christians (are they even?) and seem to think that that equals the thousands of Muslims I posted.

 

 

 

No really, I love it.

 

 

 

After MyPurpleCrayon pointed out the "generalization," you seemed confident enough in your stereotype to brag that was much more obvious than his stereotype. In that post, you aren't even backing away from your stereotype, you are proudly supporting it.

 

 

 

You stereotyping Muslims is plainly evident, and therefore, no straw man argument exists.