RIP Thai Democracy

[MyPurpleCrayon]

Is that a bird? Is that a plane? NO! That's GhostRanger getting in another argument!

 

 

 

I don't understand how you can STILL skip over the posts insulting Christianity, but make a snide remark everytime Ghost decides to voice his opinion.

 

 

 

What a hypocrite...

[BlueLancer]

 

Im a westerner and personally feel we have the worst history in the world.

 

 

 

I have similar feelings sometime, and it's pretty sad. European history at it's best is the Roman Empire which was still brutal but so many huge advancements took place, religious freedom at least until the christian reforms, immense advance in the legal field which still affects laws and constitutions around the world...

 

 

 

On the other hand, our near-history is pretty saddening to read from an objective perspective (but fortunately the whole of Europe can't be grouped into one group of people), because what really is Europe after Rome is plundering, wars, rape of foreign countries and their populations, exploitation, etc. while huge advances were taking place in the fields of mathematics, medicines, sanitation in China, Japan and Arab countries.

[Guest GhostRanger]

a lot

 

 

 

1)Actually there were two parts to darkmage's question. I understand what he wants, but I was just telling him the reasons that Muslims are characterized. I'm not making a good or bad point out of it, just the facts. He asked why people do it so I listed the facts that cause people to do it. I didn't even say it was or was not justified as you suggest.

 

 

 

2) It's perfectly acceptable to characterize a religion by what people do in the name of it. You should then, of course, look into what the faith actually says, but by being a member of a certain faith, you have to hold a certain ideaology - and those extremists seem to think that what they do is part of their faith. You need to investigate further to see if it is, but if large groups of people do something in the name of their faith (Christains and the crusades) it's perfectly fair to say "I don't want to be a Christian because they go to other countries and kill people because they're infidels."

 

 

 

What you're saying is like me giving money to charity and someone saying, "He's doing that because he's a Christian and Christians believe they should do things like that," and then you saying "NOT ALL CHRISTIANS THINK THAT!" When clearly, I was in fact doing it because I'm a Christian. Sure, some people do it that aren't Christians, and some Christians don't do it - but there are certain principles that guide followers of a faith and followers of a faith can be "lump summed" into their religion.

 

 

 

I am NOT saying that terrorism is part of Islam, but the terrorsits seem to think so, and people who are ignorant of the Muslim faith have very good reasons to believe so.

 

 

 

How can you say that you can't judge a person's actions by their religion, when their religion is suppose to dictate their actions?

 

 

 

3) I didn't answer your question because it's nonsensical. Of course it's possible for the same thing to happen with atheists. But atheists give money to charity and Christians give money to charity. One because they personally want to and think it's right, another because they personally believe in a religion that thinks it is what you should do. The "what if' scenario works everywhere and is compeltely ridiculous. Atheists can kill people for power, and Muslim extremists can kill people in the name of their religion. The fact that atheists do it as well don't discount the fact that it was in fact done in the name of Islam (or switch that with the crusades and Christianity). Once again: your point about atheists doing the same thing is nonsensical.

[protist911]

a lot

 

 

 

1)Actually there were two parts to darkmage's question. I understand what he wants, but I was just telling him the reasons that Muslims are characterized. I'm not making a good or bad point out of it, just the facts. He asked why people do it so I listed the facts that cause people to do it. I didn't even say it was or was not justified as you suggest.

 

 

 

2) It's perfectly acceptable to characterize a religion by what people do in the name of it. You should then, of course, look into what the faith actually says, but by being a member of a certain faith, you have to hold a certain ideaology - and those extremists seem to think that what they do is part of their faith. You need to investigate further to see if it is, but if large groups of people do something in the name of their faith (Christains and the crusades) it's perfectly fair to say "I don't want to be a Christian because they go to other countries and kill people because they're infidels."

 

 

 

What you're saying is like me giving money to charity and someone saying, "He's doing that because he's a Christian and Christians believe they should do things like that," and then you saying "NOT ALL CHRISTIANS THINK THAT!" When clearly, I was in fact doing it because I'm a Christian. Sure, some people do it that aren't Christians, and some Christians don't do it - but there are certain principles that guide followers of a faith and followers of a faith can be "lump summed" into their religion.

 

 

 

I am NOT saying that terrorism is part of Islam, but the terrorsits seem to think so, and people who are ignorant of the Muslim faith have very good reasons to believe so.

 

 

 

How can you say that you can't judge a person's actions by their religion, when their religion is suppose to dictate their actions?

 

 

 

3) I didn't answer your question because it's nonsensical. Of course it's possible for the same thing to happen with atheists. But atheists give money to charity and Christians give money to charity. One because they personally want to and think it's right, another because they personally believe in a religion that thinks it is what you should do. The "what if' scenario works everywhere and is compeltely ridiculous. Atheists can kill people for power, and Muslim extremists can kill people in the name of their religion. The fact that atheists do it as well don't discount the fact that it was in fact done in the name of Islam (or switch that with the crusades and Christianity). Once again: your point about atheists doing the same thing is nonsensical.

 

 

 

I disagree on about 75% of the post

 

 

 

reason for terrorism

 

 

 

Barely any of it is in the name of religion. I'd like to know where you got that from. Just because some ignorant people believe this doesn't mean it's true. Ghost, I love the way how you argue :wink: sooo...logical....usually.

[jak722]

Stay on topic... :-$