[andyt]

ttruscott wrote:

andyt wrote:

... painting all Muslims with the same brush. In which case the argument should be no more Muslim immigration, deport those who can be and intern the rest. And it may yet come to that, as it did with the Japanese.

It is the Koran that does this,and that is why if you live apostate, (ie, like a western satanist) you are fair gain for their bombs. Because, as we all know, Moslems are not allowed to kill Moslems.

I don't follow you here? The Koran paints all Muslims with the same brush?

[KorbenDeck]

Oh I am sure the will start deporting them but not before a US city becomes the first victim of a nuclear terror attack. Let face it, it is going to happen with the amount nukes unaccounted for and with rouge states all wanting to hit the US hard its just a matter of time. Once that happens no amount of rational thought is going to stop the American people from wanting revenge.

[desertdude]

Oh darn ! How did you know about our secret plans.

When it comes to nuclear threat you should be more concerned about the couple of unaccounted broken arrows on US soil that might still have the capability to go off.

[Dayseed]

Where're my friends Commanderkai and PublicAnimal now? Did they read this?

[desertdude]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-a ... ee-no-evil

[Freakinoldguy]

Why do certain people demand that the Catholic Church be held responsible for the actions of their pedophile priests, but, when there's a terrorist attack or plot the refrain changes. Islam isn't responsible for the actions of these terrorists, Islam is a religion of peace.

If the Catholic Church is held responsible for their pervert priests, then why isn't Islam held to the same standard for the Mullah's who preach terror?

[Lemmy]

Because most Catholics abhore child abuse and are genuinely offended by pedophile priests. But I think a lot of moderate Islamics privately support terrorism. It's taboo, and they'd never say so, but I sense a tacit approval, even though it's denied.

[sandorski]

Freakinoldguy wrote:

Why do certain people demand that the Catholic Church be held responsible for the actions of their pedophile priests, but, when there's a terrorist attack or plot the refrain changes. Islam isn't responsible for the actions of these terrorists, Islam is a religion of peace.

If the Catholic Church is held responsible for their pervert priests, then why isn't Islam held to the same standard for the Mullah's who preach terror?

Islam just isn't as structured as the Catholic Church for one thing. The Catholic Church was actively suppressing release of the news and shuffling their Pedo-Priests around where they often repeated their Crimes.

[llama66]

ttruscott wrote:

andyt wrote:

... painting all Muslims with the same brush. In which case the argument should be no more Muslim immigration, deport those who can be and intern the rest. And it may yet come to that, as it did with the Japanese.

It is the Koran that does this,and that is why if you live apostate, (ie, like a western satanist) you are fair gain for their bombs. Because, as we all know, Moslems are not allowed to kill Moslems.

I'm no Muslim, but I have read the Qur'an and I have pulled a completely different meaning and interpretation from it. There are sects of Islam that believe that Jihad is conducted via pen and paper (Ahmadiyya Muslims for one). For every one radical Muslim there are ten or a hundred non-radical Muslims. This gross over generalization is the problem, people who think ALL Muslims are terrorists, I guess by the same logic ALL Protestants are either Irish terrorists or members of the Klu Klux Klan and ALL Catholics are child molesters or members of the IRA, and ALL Jews hate Christ (it must be so, after all, they had him killed). Its a pretty nonsensical line of thought, eh? Its not productive to think that everyone who has a differing view is some extremist. The only reason why we see so much of the religious extremes is because they are the most vocal. the regular Christians, Jews and Muslims just go about their days just minding their own business, not really wanting to offend or anger anyone.

Its time for people to stop looking at our differences as obstacles that tear us apart, but rather as differences that can bring us together. WE need to bridge the gap and begin to "mend fences". How can we expect other groups (not just the Muslim community) to be open with us, when we ourselves, will not bridge the gap. There needs to be a conscious effort by everyone on all sides to lay the foundation for global co-existence between all people.

Because it was the 47th Anniversary of Martin Luther King's famous "I have a dream" speech there is a quote I'd like to share with you,

Quote:

"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness in a descending spiral of destruction....The chain reaction of evil--hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars--must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation."
- Martin Luther King

[rickc]

Well it would be great if we could all sit around the campfire toasting marshmellows and singing Kumbaya.I don't think its going to happen any time soon.At least not in my lifetime.I love how the Huffington Post is trying to make this a left vs. right issue.This article is attempting to place the blame of the resistance to the mosque on the doorstep of the teaparty.Some recent polls have put the resistance to the mosque at 70%.Are you going to tell me that 70% of Americans are supporting the tea party? In my wet dreams this would be true! Most polls suggest that us rightwingers are going to be putting a big steel boot up some leftwing ass come Nov.Insulting 70% of the American population by calling them racists and teabaggers only helps our cause.Thank you Huffington Post! Keep up the good work!

Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid has came out against the mosque.He knows he is in trouble in Nevada and does not to further piss off the electorate.Leftwing nutjub Howard Dean has expressed reservations about the mosque.Blaming the resistance on the right is the greatest thing that we rightwingers have had to cheer for since Ronald Reagan.This will help turn an ass whipping into genocide come Nov.And the best part is,its not costing us a dime.Its like when Mondale was promising to RAISE TAXES!I have not been this excited in a long time.I almost feel like sending a donation to the Huffington Post.Tell them to keep up the good work.

Just for the record,I could not care less about the mosque in NYC.I served several months in Turkey in the service.I had a great time!Turkey was EASILY the most interesting place I have ever been.I would love to return to visit today.If there was not so much turmoil,I would like to see a lot more of that region.99% of what I had been told about that region was total B.S.I found the people interesting and hospitable.I have no problem with Islam or any other religeon.I do care strongly about right wing economics.I firmly believe that right wing economics benefit my country and its populace.If the Huffington Post and other left wing magazines want to make this issue [that 70% of the population is against] left vs. right issue,than God bless them!

[Freakinoldguy]

Lemmy wrote:

Because most Catholics abhore child abuse and are genuinely offended by pedophile priests. But I think a lot of moderate Islamics privately support terrorism. It's taboo, and they'd never say so, but I sense a tacit approval, even though it's denied.

Maybe I should have clarifed the question I was asking.

I understand your theory on the Muslims secretly supporting it and agree, but, why would any "non Muslim" take the stance of actually going out of their way to avoid condemning Islam for the excesses of their radicals and yet feel completely at ease condemning another religion, quite possibly even their own, for it's digressions?

It just seems a little weird that people would be willing to play the apologist for one religion and not another.

[sandorski]

Freakinoldguy wrote:

Lemmy wrote:

Because most Catholics abhore child abuse and are genuinely offended by pedophile priests. But I think a lot of moderate Islamics privately support terrorism. It's taboo, and they'd never say so, but I sense a tacit approval, even though it's denied.

Maybe I should have clarifed the question I was asking.

I understand your theory on the Muslims secretly supporting it and agree, but, why would any "non Muslim" take the stance of actually going out of their way to avoid condemning Islam for the excesses of their radicals and yet feel completely at ease condemning another religion, quite possibly even their own, for it's digressions?

It just seems a little weird that people would be willing to play the apologist for one religion and not another.

Like I said above, there are some big differences in your comparison.

[Thanos]

Freakinoldguy wrote:

I understand your theory on the Muslims secretly supporting it and agree, but, why would any "non Muslim" take the stance of actually going out of their way to avoid condemning Islam for the excesses of their radicals and yet feel completely at ease condemning another religion, quite possibly even their own, for it's digressions?

If we don't call out those on our "own" side for their illegal and evil behaviours first then what right do we have to call out others for their own transgressions later? You'll find me defending Muslims very infrequently, for a lot of various reasons. But I'm not going to go against history itself to say that any crimes some Muslims are committing right now are the worst crimes that have ever been committed by man against man. It'd be a total lie and the only sort of person who would ever say it would have to be either a paid propagandist or an ideologue so drenched in pure hatred that they shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone who is still rational.

There's no way that even a casual reader of genuine and honest history can't come away from it without being fully aware that the worst killers and worst warmongers of the past thousand years have mostly been Christians, or at least those chameleons who successfully disguised themselve in the trappings of Christian society. And they weren't just maniacally barbaric towards Muslims or Jews either but, going by the Catholic-vs-Protestant and Catholic-vs-Orthodox history of Europe alone, were even worse against their fellow Christians. If we're going to demand that the Muslims step back and repudiate this sort of behaviour then how about the Christians do the "Christian" thing for a change and stop their own crazy and dangerous behaviours first? It's not like leading by example was ever the wrong thing to do.

[Freakinoldguy]

sandorski wrote:

Maybe I should have clarifed the question I was asking.

I understand your theory on the Muslims secretly supporting it and agree, but, why would any "non Muslim" take the stance of actually going out of their way to avoid condemning Islam for the excesses of their radicals and yet feel completely at ease condemning another religion, quite possibly even their own, for it's digressions?

It just seems a little weird that people would be willing to play the apologist for one religion and not another.

Like I said above, there are some big differences in your comparison.[/quote]


What's so different between a pedophile and a cleric that embraces terrorism? Both of them ruin peoples lives. One in the name of their religion and one for personal pleasure but the outcome of their actions are pretty similar.

Are people holding the Church to account because it's structured and witheld information about their priests, which put peoples children in danger or is it because they're a western religion, which seems to be out of vogue at the present time?

Or are certain people giving Islam a pass because they're not structed the same as a western religion and their Mullah's radicalism hasn't affected most of us in the same way the pedophile priests did, which, was a personal breech of trust, something most of us haven't experienced with Islam yet.


Either way it seems a little odd that people would think that way. Both qualify as religions and both have problem adherents, yet in certain circles one gets a pass. Maybe a segment of our society considers pedophilia a more henious crime than murder, which might explain the attitude.

[CanadianJeff]

You will forgive me if i play a bit of devil's advocate here.

No non Muslim person is ever allowed inside Mecca. The justification is that we are unclean and would pollute the city.

Sura 9:28 is my source on this one and the source that the Saudi government quotes as well.

Why on earth when the Muslims won't even allow a non believer into their city would we want to hear a lecture on how bigoted we are being by not allowing a mosque near a site where a huge atrocity was made?

This isn't just a matter of insults we are declaring that they shouldn't built it because of how much pain it may cause others. They choose to label us all as unclean.

why should we listen to such bigots?


I would like to point out that I don't believe in any of what I just said above and I am playing devil's advocate but how do you deal with such an argument. Honestly it's likely the best argument I've heard as to why we shouldn't allow a mosque to in a way show how silly the laws of Islam are in terms of tolerance.