Muslims' rights are being violated

[Widescreen]

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061205/LIFESTYLE04/612050368/1041


Two weeks ago, six Muslim clerics were removed from a U.S. Airways flight after three of them said their evening prayers in the St. Paul-Minneapolis International Airport.

Passengers and employees of the airline said later that their suspicions were aroused when the men were overheard making comments critical of the United States, and because the men had one-way tickets and no baggage.

The airline and the civil rights office of U.S. Department of Homeland Security are investigating that incident.

Imad Hamad, regional director of the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, which lodged a formal complaint with Fitness USA on behalf of Sultan, said the recent spate of conflicts results from a growing intolerance of Islam and a growing restiveness among Muslims that their rights to speak freely and worship are increasingly at risk.

"They (Muslims) are resenting that they are to be suppressed from expressing themselves freely, like others," Hamad said.

"It's OK for a Christian fellow or a Jewish fellow to pray, and it would be regarded highly and respected. When it comes to a person of Muslim faith, especially if a woman is wearing the head cover or a man with a typical clergy outfit, yeah, it is becoming like something that is offensive to people and making them nervous."
I wonder why that is.


"We're here in the great United States and for this happening, it truly breaks my heart," she said. "You know, things are starting to change backwards, instead of frontward. We need to keep this United States, our country, up on our shoulders. We don't want it to go down."
For those Muslims that are simply observing their faith, I do feel sad. If the manager of the fitness place said what she has indicated, he's wrong and should be fired. However, why is any perceived profiling always America's fault? If we are "changing backwards", why is racism or anti-Islamic bigotry always the culprit? Couldn't it be that people of the Muslim faith are the primary people trying to kill Americans and so when they act suspicious we have reason for concern and to look into the matter? Why is there never any anger at their fellow Muslims for creating the situation? The reason people don't get nervous when Jews start praying is because Jews aren't routinely blowing up Americans.

[Frozen Sooner]

Actually, if a bunch of Jewish people were hanging out in an airline terminal carrying on loudly in Hebrew or Yiddish, making anti-US statements, and all had one-way tickets, I'd want them off the plane as well.

[nanimonai]

I will say that if someone is planning a terror attack, they're not going to dress up in full Islamic gear and start praying on the plane right before.

[Widescreen]

Actually, if a bunch of Jewish people were hanging out in an airline terminal carrying on loudly in Hebrew or Yiddish, making anti-US statements, and all had one-way tickets, I'd want them off the plane as well.
Agreed. Have you heard of that occurring?

[Frozen Sooner]

Nope. I'm just saying that kicking those dudes off the flight had nothing to do with their religion and everything to do with their crazy-*** actions.

[Widescreen]

Nope. I'm just saying that kicking those dudes off the flight had nothing to do with their religion and everything to do with their crazy-*** actions.
Which is my point exactly. The Muslim groups are always whining about being profiled yet never tell people to stop acting like they're going to do something naughty. It's always everyone else's fault.

[fadada1]

I will say that if someone is planning a terror attack, they're not going to dress up in full Islamic gear and start praying on the plane right before.
that's exactly what they want you to think.

[crawfish]

I have a strong feeling that they PLANNED to get thrown off the plane.

[Frozen Sooner]

Which is my point exactly. The Muslim groups are always whining about being profiled yet never tell people to stop acting like they're going to do something naughty. It's always everyone else's fault.

I don't think we have an argument here.

I do want to clarify something that I think may be a misconception. Islam doesn't really have the same kind of heirarchial structure that most Christian sects have. Islam is broadly grouped into several different sects that believe sort of the same things (Sunni, Shi'a, Wahaddi, etc) but individual imams have a great deal of latitude in interpreting the Koran and commentaries. This probably has a great deal to do with a cultural difference-westerners pretty much stayed put, while in the middle east the bedouin culture was the ideal.

Anyhow, I hear people say things like "why don't they tell people to stop doing this" etc etc. The fact is that there really IS no central authority to Islamic sects. You do get imams speaking out against terrorism and murder from time to time, but they don't hold any more authority than any other imam.

I agree with crawfish-I think these guys were trying to make some sort of point. This flat-out wasn't even racial or religious profiling-it was removing people acting like jackasses from the flight.

[Widescreen]

I don't think we have an argument here.
True. I was trying to agree with you, I just didn't communicate it very well. :)


Anyhow, I hear people say things like "why don't they tell people to stop doing this" etc etc. The fact is that there really IS no central authority to Islamic sects. You do get imams speaking out against terrorism and murder from time to time, but they don't hold any more authority than any other imam.
Makes sense. When I say "Muslims", I'm not really just talking about the imams. I don't hear much talk from individual Muslims or their various organizations about what is considered acceptable behavior in public. I hear a lot more of what went on in that article with some muslim organization representative crying about how muslim rights are being violated.

[VeeJay]

I have a strong feeling that they PLANNED to get thrown off the plane.

The more I hear about this I tend to agree that this whole thing was contrived to elicit sympathy or just expose paranoia. If these people were going to pull some Osama-inspired stunt, they wouldn't have been so obvious about who they were.

I have never seen bearded fuggers in flowing robes and turbans, bent over double praying, kicking their shoes off, facing east in a damned airport before.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Which is my point exactly. The Muslim groups are always whining about being profiled yet never tell people to stop acting like they're going to do something naughty. It's always everyone else's fault.

These acts were over the top, I wonder if they were trying to PROVOKE an incident...

Either way, they need a hard throat punch, either because they were stupid or because they were being provocative...IMO.

The lady seems the same. I don't know if she was in a far corner and trying to be discrete or if she was making a point of praying so she'll get noticed.

I work with those of islamic faith, and have known people to take time out to pray, but always in a discrete and reverent manner, people acknowledging and respecting that. Never had a work-related problem as far as I know.

[C&CDean]

I don't think we have an argument here.

I do want to clarify something that I think may be a misconception. Islam doesn't really have the same kind of heirarchial structure that most Christian sects have. Islam is broadly grouped into several different sects that believe sort of the same things (Sunni, Shi'a, Wahaddi, etc) but individual imams have a great deal of latitude in interpreting the Koran and commentaries. This probably has a great deal to do with a cultural difference-westerners pretty much stayed put, while in the middle east the bedouin culture was the ideal.

Anyhow, I hear people say things like "why don't they tell people to stop doing this" etc etc. The fact is that there really IS no central authority to Islamic sects. You do get imams speaking out against terrorism and murder from time to time, but they don't hold any more authority than any other imam.

I agree with crawfish-I think these guys were trying to make some sort of point. This flat-out wasn't even racial or religious profiling-it was removing people acting like jackasses from the flight.

Nuh uh. It's the same. Under the Christian banner we've got Catholics, Baptists, etc. We've got the Pope O' Rome, Billy Graham, etc. We've got a ****pot of ways we interpret a single book.

The only difference is we're not out to kill all of the players on the other side.

[OSUAggie]

The only difference is we're not out to kill all of the players on the other side.

Well, not anymore, at least.

[Widescreen]

Hence his use of the present tense.

[Jerk]

I'm sorry, but if a bunch of dudes wearing turbins and beards start jumping up and down, running around in circles, screaming "Dirka! Dirka! Jihad!" right before take-off, either I'm getting off the mtherfkn plane, or they are.

Intolerant or not, i don't care when I'm in self-preservation mode.

[WILBURJIM]

These guys wanted to jumpstart the "profiling hearings."

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=250126364574564

[Jimminy Crimson]

Woe is Muslims. :rolleyes:

[TheHumanAlphabet]

kill 'em all. Either that or they'll kill us, just ask Glenn Beck. This PC crap has to end or we'll doom ourselves just as Europe is dooming themselves...When Christians start blowing things up and suicide bombing and making shoe bombs and drink bombs, then I'll gladly submit to profiling, until then...we have a known group of people that are predisposed to this activity, why not take advantage of that and check them out...

I have lost ALL tolerance for muslims that I once had.

[C&CDean]

Well, not anymore, at least.

Oh great. Now we've got a liberal aggy on board. Goody. Next he'll be telling us to quit hanging the brothers.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

or at least stop sticking forks in their asses

[PhilTLL]

Nuh uh. It's the same. Under the Christian banner we've got Catholics, Baptists, etc. We've got the Pope O' Rome, Billy Graham, etc. We've got a ****pot of ways we interpret a single book.

Right, but even within individual Muslim sects and groups, there just aren't the levels of doctrinal or institutional authority you find in Christianity. There's no Pope for the Sunnis, no Archbishop of Canterbury for Wahhabists, no Patriarch of all Shiites, regional conventions, dioceses, etc.

[C&CDean]

Right, but even within individual Muslim sects and groups, there just aren't the levels of doctrinal or institutional authority you find in Christianity. There's no Pope for the Sunnis, no Archbishop of Canterbury for Wahhabists, no Patriarch of all Shiites, regional conventions, dioceses, etc.

Yeah, and there's no Osama bin Swaggert on our side screaming for us to behead the infidels either.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Right, but even within individual Muslim sects and groups, there just aren't the levels of doctrinal or institutional authority you find in Christianity. There's no Pope for the Sunnis, no Archbishop of Canterbury for Wahhabists, no Patriarch of all Shiites, regional conventions, dioceses, etc.

Exactly!! Any ole body can set up an "interpretation" and get followers and there you go. Its almost as if every aspect of Islam is a cult and lead by dynamic persons. There are no checks and balances and no muslim imam is willing to correct another imam, becuase they all are not exactly legitimate. Christianity has been much better on this with hierarchical structures and defined doctrines. This has a great power to set up performance standards and prevents the wack-jobs from going out and saying weird-a$$ things. Even keeps the kooky fringe non-denominational Christians in line as the "mainstream" Christians officials will speak about how kooky that stuff sounds. Remember 900 foot Jesus, etc.

This is not happening with islam and people are getting out of hand and very fringe becuase there is no one to stop them or question their actions, only encouraging them...

[Frozen Sooner]

Right, but even within individual Muslim sects and groups, there just aren't the levels of doctrinal or institutional authority you find in Christianity. There's no Pope for the Sunnis, no Archbishop of Canterbury for Wahhabists, no Patriarch of all Shiites, regional conventions, dioceses, etc.

Exactly.

[Frozen Sooner]

Yeah, and there's no Osama bin Swaggert on our side screaming for us to behead the infidels either.

There are. To their credit, Christians are generally pretty good about ignoring them.

I mean, I presume you've heard of that whack-job Phelps, right?

[C&CDean]

There are. To their credit, Christians are generally pretty good about ignoring them.

I mean, I presume you've heard of that whack-job Phelps, right?

Last time I checked, Phelps wasn't financing/ordering the murders of thousands of people. Dingbat that he is, he's not that crazy.

[Frozen Sooner]

I have a feeling that if he had the resources, he'd be pretty OK with financing the murder of thousands of people.

Like I said, though, to the credit of Christianity as a whole, Christians do a really good job of ignoring whack-jobs. There are and have been Christian terror groups present day and in the past.

Christian Identity is one.

The Irish Republican Army was responsible for the death of thousands.

God's Army in Myanmar.

The KKK purports to be a Christian organization

There's also Jewish terror organizations, such as the Kahane Chai.

Again, both Christians and Jews have done a better job of marginalizing these a-holes than Muslims.

[Jerk]

I have a feeling that if he had the resources, he'd be pretty OK with financing the murder of thousands of people.

Like I said, though, to the credit of Christianity as a whole, Christians do a really good job of ignoring whack-jobs. There are and have been Christian terror groups present day and in the past.

Christian Identity is one.

The Irish Republican Army was responsible for the death of thousands.

God's Army in Myanmar.

The KKK purports to be a Christian organization

There's also Jewish terror organizations, such as the Kahane Chai.

Again, both Christians and Jews have done a better job of marginalizing these a-holes than Muslims.

Yeah. The dealio is that Christian extremists who blow up abortion clinics and gay bars have not been embraced by the mainstream of their religion. At least here in the U.S., they always seem to end up on trial and in prison. In the Muslim world, their bombers get "martyrdom status" and become pothsumus heros in their home towns: (sorry can't spell the big words. It's the truck driver in me) and are even state-sanctioned in many M.E. states. Every religion has their nut-cases, but the Muslims are doing a good job at staying #1 in that category.

Look at all the wars around the globe today. Almost every one of them has something to do with Islam.

[usmc-sooner]

Right, but even within individual Muslim sects and groups, there just aren't the levels of doctrinal or institutional authority you find in Christianity. There's no Pope for the Sunnis, no Archbishop of Canterbury for Wahhabists, no Patriarch of all Shiites, regional conventions, dioceses, etc.

so you're saying Muslims are unorganized, they sure seem to organize these bombings pretty well.

actually if you're saying they are unorganized you'd better take it back or they'll kill you. :D

[BajaOklahoma]

Did anyone see the article about the Muslim school "boys" in Australia who ****ed on and spat on a Bible?
Very interesting read. Sorry, I don't have the link.

[PhxSooner]

Did anyone see the article about the Muslim school "boys" in Australia who ****ed on and spat on a Bible?
Very interesting read. Sorry, I don't have the link.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20879483-2702,00.html

[Frozen Sooner]

Did anyone see the article about the Muslim school "boys" in Australia who ****ed on and spat on a Bible?
Very interesting read. Sorry, I don't have the link.

Yep. It was a all-Muslim school and happened at a school camp, right? Saw that the school administration expelled the kids and called imams in to explain to the students that all religions are worthy of respect.

[Stoop Dawg]

And Christian rights are violated by saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas".

Who's the really ***** here?

[Widescreen]

Sounds like the school handled it appropriately. One interesting thing I saw in that article is that the school receives several million dollar of government funding. That's quite a difference from the way parochial schools are handled here - unless they're talking about the equivalent of our Pell grant or something.

[Dio]

Yeah, and there's no Osama bin Swaggert on our side screaming for us to behead the infidels either.

Isn't he Cat Stevens' cousin?

[Frozen Sooner]

Sounds like the school handled it appropriately. One interesting thing I saw in that article is that the school receives several million dollar of government funding. That's quite a difference from the way parochial schools are handled here - unless they're talking about the equivalent of our Pell grant or something.

I think that schools in Australia are very similar to the British model. "Public" schools are boarding schools that can actually cost parents a good chunk of change.

There's also not the traditional separation of church and state in the Commonwealth countries, I guess. The whole Anglican church deal and all.

[Mongo]

And Christian rights are violated by saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas".

Who's the really ***** here?

Tis the season to make dumb remarks.

It is not like we are being pussies about it. Christmas is a Christian Holiday and non believers are changing the meaning of it.

Do you celebrate Christmas? And you do realize that you can call it a different name, but Holiday= Holy Day?

Take your intolerance elsewhere.

[Sooner_Bob]

I'll bet one of them farted before they left the terminal.

[Jerk]

And Christian rights are violated by saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas".

Who's the really ***** here?


You're pathetic.

[Stoop Dawg]

Tis the season to make dumb remarks.

It is not like we are being pussies about it. Christmas is a Christian Holiday and non believers are changing the meaning of it.

Do you celebrate Christmas? And you do realize that you can call it a different name, but Holiday= Holy Day?

Take your intolerance elsewhere.

Wow, where to start? You think that every time a Brit goes on "holiday" it's for religious purposes?

How about here: http://www.holidays.net/christmas/story.htm
Or here: http://www.locksley.com/6696/xmas.htm
Or even here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas

Regardless of whether "Christmas" is actually a Christian "Holy Day" or not, there is absolutely no denying that there are other "Holy Days" from other religions that occur at the same time of the year. Feeling persecuted because someone recognizes ALL religions instead of just yours is pathetic. So, who is the intolerant one? Take your ignorance elsewhere.

And regardless, that's not even the point of my post. I can't even imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth that would occur if Christians in this country actually were persecuted in some fashion. "Oh, you don't recognize my holiday" and "Oh, some people don't say under God while pledging their allegiance to a government that is supposed to be free from religion" - what a joke. Then you get on here and accuse other religions of being babies.

[Stoop Dawg]

You're pathetic.

So eloquent and articulate. I wouldn't expect anything less from you.

:sheep:

[Mongo]

Wow, where to start? You think that every time a Brit goes on "holiday" it's for religious purposes?

How about here: http://www.holidays.net/christmas/story.htm
Or here: http://www.locksley.com/6696/xmas.htm
Or even here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas

Regardless of whether "Christmas" is actually a Christian "Holy Day" or not, there is absolutely no denying that there are other "Holy Days" from other religions that occur at the same time of the year. Feeling persecuted because someone recognizes ALL religions instead of just yours is pathetic. So, who is the intolerant one? Take your ignorance elsewhere.

And regardless, that's not even the point of my post. I can't even imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth that would occur if Christians in this country actually were persecuted in some fashion. "Oh, you don't recognize my holiday" and "Oh, some people don't say under God while pledging their allegiance to a government that is supposed to be free from religion" - what a joke. Then you get on here and accuse other religions of being babies.

You called out Christians as pussies. Simple fact. That is intolerance, good job.

please point out where I accused other religions of being babies.

Do you celebrate Christmas?

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Well the one problem is Suzy Jane McChristian walks into Target and sees Happy Holidays on the wall...she starts a leaflet campaign, calls her congressman and leads a 3 woman boycott of Target. If Allah Bin McIslam opens his paper and sees a Happy Holidays and a picture of Allah below it...he gets his cronies, the proceed to burn down half the Middle East and set explosive devices throughout Target that might kill a 4 year old Islamic girl just as easily as a philthy infidel.

[handcrafted]

And regardless, that's not even the point of my post. I can't even imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth that would occur if Christians in this country actually were persecuted in some fashion. "Oh, you don't recognize my holiday" and "Oh, some people don't say under God while pledging their allegiance to a government that is supposed to be free from religion" - what a joke. Then you get on here and accuse other religions of being babies.

You might want to get your facts straight first, before spouting off, but then again, this is your pattern, so I shouldn't expect more than for you to express your utter ignorance of the truth. Leaving aside for the moment the impossibility of the concept or any reasonable application of it, you show me one single law anywhere in this country that says that the "government shall be free from religion".

As for the stores, I really couldn't care less what decorations they put up or what they say. They are out to sell stuff and make money and that is the reason behind whatever they do. No store is required to cater to my religious beliefs or anyone elses. Now, if I think a certain merchant is going out of its way to be anti-Christian, I probably will not spend my money there, but it's my choice. If they want to alienate a large segment of the population and get themselves boycotted, that is a business decision. Free-market economics will take care of it, not government intervention or cries of "persecution". The stores are not violating my "rights", only certain people can do that, i.e., the government, my employer, etc. Some store's silly decorations and slogans do not have any power to "take the Christ out of Christmas", as if anything really could other than our own greed and materialism. The merchants actions are the symptom, not the disease.

FWIW, I know some people who don't celebrate Christmas (or do it minimally) because, well, Jesus never commanded us to celebrate his birthday (and we don't know the exact date anyway). Christmas is a tradition, not Biblical, but a creation of the Roman church which was adopted into mainstream Protestantism and eventually institutionalized as a national holiday, first in England and Europe, then here. If you are not a Christian, don't celebrate Christmas. If you are, then do it to the degree with which you feel comfortable. In my family, we de-emphasize the gifts/Santa Claus stuff. We have a tree, but I could do without it. We concentrate on church activities and giving to missions and to the needy. The seasonal music is nice, too.

[OhU1]

Some good points re stores and free enterprise. But...


Jesus never commanded us to celebrate his birthday (and we don't know the exact date anyway). Christmas is a tradition, not Biblical, but a creation of the Roman church which was adopted into mainstream Protestantism and eventually institutionalized as a national holiday...... If you are not a Christian, don't celebrate Christmas.

So Christmas was really a pagan celebration which the early church decided to take over. Right, I follow. So non Christians should not celebrate this time of year even though the ancient celebrations are not really Christian? Christmas tree - pagan. Gifts - pagan. December 21st proximity - pagan.

I'll celebrate. I will choose to celebrate what I want to celebrate and you can celebrate what you choose to celebrate. Christmas is a cultural tradition with many different meanings to different people.

[sitzpinkler]

You called out Christians as pussies. Simple fact. That is intolerance, good job.

please point out where I accused other religions of being babies.

Do you celebrate Christmas?

I fail to see where Stoop Dawg called anyone a *****.

[Jerk]

Yep, Christmas is an old pagan tradition put into Christianity by the Romans, kind of like Plato's Immortal Soul which replaced the true Biblical teachings of the resserrection of the dead. December 25th is very close to winter solstice, and that is no coincidence. This kind of made the transition in Rome back in those early days a little easier.

It's the politically-correct leftist attacks on Christmas that Irk me. I bet if you put a truth sirum in the comrads, the reason for these attacks is because 'Christmas' has the word Christ in it.

[Jerk]

So eloquent and articulate. I wouldn't expect anything less from you.

:sheep:

It was short and to the point :texan:

[1stTimeCaller]

C'mon folks. The offseason doean't start for a few more weeks.

[OhU1]

Christ[/b] in it.

I agree. The whole Holiday/Christmas debate is silly as far as I'm concerned. How can someone be offended by the word Christmas? And if they are, so what? The Mass of Christ. I get it. I enjoy going to "Body of Christ" Texas to the beach too (Corpus Christi).

I think people on both "sides" are really trying a little too hard to be offended and persecuted. If being concerned about the nomenclature of what we call the end of the year celebration is all of you have to worry about you are pretty damn lucky.

BTW this thread got totally jacked. We were supposed to be talking about the persecution of Muslims ;)

[Jerk]

It was fine until some genius showed up and reminded us all who the true evaaaal of the world is...those pesky Christians!!! "Why!!! Can't they just shut-up and stop using words like "Christmas"! It hurts my dainty little ears."

[handcrafted]

Some good points re stores and free enterprise. But...



So Christmas was really a pagan celebration which the early church decided to take over. Right, I follow. So non Christians should not celebrate this time of year even though the ancient celebrations are not really Christian? Christmas tree - pagan. Gifts - pagan. December 21st proximity - pagan.

I'll celebrate. I will choose to celebrate what I want to celebrate and you can celebrate what you choose to celebrate. Christmas is a cultural tradition with many different meanings to different people.

Sorry, when I said "don't celebrate Christmas" I didn't mean "don't celebrate". Celebrate whatever you want. You should just probably consider calling it something else.

[OSUAggie]

What about when the local governments spend tax dollars on Christmas decorations for their town and depict Christ in a manger and have crosses splattered throughout in an effort to celebrate the season? Should that be considered some sort of violation of church/state or is that OK, too? Then the city donates their electronic road work messenger sign to the Baptists to notify all that drive by that the Passion Play is next Tuesday @ 7 o'clock. Just wondering...

[Frozen Sooner]

Well, is the Passion Play protecting the town from the plague? 'Cause I'm down with that if that's the case.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I think there is no problem with the city helping the church out now if the Jewish or Muslim churches wanted to borrow the same thing and got shot down...then there would be an issue. As for decorations, if you have a problem with that then go complain or ask for something from your religion to be put up.

[C&CDean]

Hey. Stop it. Now. This is a thread about the ****edupedness of Islam and the crazy cocksucking muslims who blow people up. It's not about Christ, Christmas, decorations, or anything else related to what's good, decent, and holy.

**** a bunch of muslims. The End.

[handcrafted]

I agree. The whole Holiday/Christmas debate is silly as far as I'm concerned. How can someone be offended by the word Christmas? And if they are, so what? The Mass of Christ. I get it. I enjoy going to "Body of Christ" Texas to the beach too (Corpus Christi).

I think people on both "sides" are really trying a little too hard to be offended and persecuted. If being concerned about the nomenclature of what we call the end of the year celebration is all of you have to worry about you are pretty damn lucky.

BTW this thread got totally jacked. We were supposed to be talking about the persecution of Muslims ;)

Nobody move, I've got a stick of dynamite in my shorts. I hereby jack this thread and order its pilot to fly to Wittenberg, Germany, the Holy City of the Reformation. You are all my hostages in the name of Martin Luther. Those who wish to convert, may do so now. You will be rewarded with beer. Those who refuse will be strapped down and forced to listen to gregorian chants backed by a house beat until you repent. Any attempt to alter the course of this flight or interfere with the controls will be met with immediate and lengthy Biblical quotations. That is all.

:D :texan: :cool:

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Did I mention the WWE is in Iraq!!!

[Widescreen]

Hey. Stop it. Now. This is a thread about the ****edupedness of Islam and the crazy cocksucking muslims who blow people up. It's not about Christ, Christmas, decorations, or anything else related to what's good, decent, and holy.

**** a bunch of muslims. The End.
You probably should've locked the thread after that. There's not much else to say. :)

[OCUDad]

I've got a stick of dynamite in my shorts.Explains your popularity with women. :eek:

[OhU1]

Those who wish to convert, may do so now. You will be rewarded with beer. ......forced to listen to gregorian chants :D :texan: :cool:

Take me the Belgium monastery that makes Chimay and I'll think about it for a good long while. :D

[Stoop Dawg]

We were all having a good time making fun of muslims until someone showed up and reminded us how loudly we cry when we perceive an attack on our own religious beliefs.

Fixed.

[C&CDean]

Fixed.

So, you're the local muslim apologist? You're the one they hired to point out the shortcomings of the christian church? How about going and ****ing yourself. Thank you.

[Stoop Dawg]

I fail to see where Stoop Dawg called anyone a *****.

I asked who the real pussies were. You can see for yourself who responded. :)

Ain't it amazing how worked up they get about who does and/or doesn't celebrate Christmas? Imagine if someone did something really bad, like not allow them onto a plane or something! :eek:

This thread has far exceeded my expectations. Thank you, thank you all.

[Stoop Dawg]

So, you're the local muslim apologist? You're the one they hired to point out the shortcomings of the christian church? How about going and ****ing yourself. Thank you.

If only ... if only.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

You are still not understanding the basic difference..if Target says Happy Holidays and ****es Christians off we don't fly planes into buildings....case closed!!! If Spain doesn't give itself back to the Muslims...they fly buildings into planes...now do you see why they might get a little tighter security.

[Stoop Dawg]

We've moved on to the prospect of one ****ing one's self. How do you feel on THAT subject?

[C&CDean]

We've moved on to the prospect of one ****ing one's self. How do you feel on THAT subject?

Praise Allah?

[Frozen Sooner]

You are still not understanding the basic difference..if Target says Happy Holidays and ****es Christians off we don't fly planes into buildings....case closed!!! If Spain doesn't give itself back to the Muslims...they fly buildings into planes...now do you see why they might get a little tighter security.

Can you point to an instance of a Muslim flying a plane into a building over being told to have a happy holiday?

I was pretty sure that the stated reason for al-Qaeda's attacks on the U.S. were to get U.S. Troops out of Saudi Arabia (which I realize is a smokescreen).

I could be wrong, though.

[Jerk]

Come on guys, let's get real:

Who is more likely to attack and kill you because of your religous beliefs?

Is it a...

A) Muslim
B) Christian
C) I can't honestly say

[Widescreen]

Come on guys, let's get real:

Who is more likely to attack and kill you because of your religous beliefs?

Is it a...

A) Muslim
B) Christian
C) I can't honestly say
<Insert reference to some event from 1000 years ago here> :rolleyes:

[Jerk]

Who is commanded by their "bible" to kill unbelievers?

A) Muslims
B) Christians
C) I don't know

[Jerk]

<Insert reference to some event from 1000 years ago here> :rolleyes:

You still didn't answer the question. You can't. It just irks you, doesn't it?

I'm telling you, after the Muslims detonate a nuke in NYC or LA, maybe some of you will pull your head out of your asses.

[C&CDean]

You still didn't answer the question. You can't. It just irks you, doesn't it?

I'm telling you, after the Muslims detonate a nuke in NYC or LA, maybe some of you will pull your head out of your asses.

Dude, I'm pretty sure Widescreen is on our side.

[Jerk]

Sorry, I'm a little jacked up..

It's the lortab!!

[Frozen Sooner]

Who is commanded by their "bible" to kill unbelievers?

A) Muslims
B) Christians
C) I don't know


"Proclaim ye this among the Gentiles; Prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up: Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong." (Joel 3:9-10)

"Surely thou will slay the wicked, O God: depart from me therefore, ye bloody men. For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain. Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies." (Psalms 139:19-22)

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27)

Both, it looks like.

[Stoop Dawg]

Who thinks it's crazy that a muslim would be upset about not being let on a plane because of his religious beliefs - but is offended by someone saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"?

A) Muslims
B) Christians
C) This is the dumbest thread on the board right now.

<Insert contention that it's okay to profile people based on religion - as long as it's not MY religion - here> :rolleyes:

[Jerk]

Who thinks it's crazy that a muslim would be upset about not being let on a plane because of his religious beliefs - but is offended by someone saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"?

A) Muslims
B) Christians
C) This is the dumbest thread on the board right now.

<Insert contention that it's okay to profile people based on religion - as long as it's not MY religion - here> :rolleyes:


You're not talking about the 6 immans who got kicked off a flight a few weeks ago?

It is pretty well established that the whole event was staged.

Furthermore, if YOU were on an airpane, and a bunch of old dudes with turbins and beards started running around in circles screaming "Allah Akbar!!!" wouldn't you be a little nervous? Or are you more afraid of the old lady saying "Praise Jesus!"

[Stoop Dawg]

Dude, I'm pretty sure Widescreen is on our side.

Debating with Jerk is a lot like hunting with Cheney.

[Frozen Sooner]

I don't know that the staging of the event is "established" Jerk. I'd give it a high probability, but has anyone given any evidence that it actually was?

[Stoop Dawg]

Furthermore, if YOU were on an airpane, and a bunch of old dudes with turbins and beards started running around in circles screaming "Allah Akbar!!!" wouldn't you be a little nervous? Or are you more afraid of the old lady saying "Praise Jesus!"

Mostly I'm afraid of foul weather.

[Frozen Sooner]

Debating with Jerk is a lot like hunting with Cheney.

Nuh-uh. If it was, I'd have been on the Supreme Court like MONTHS ago.

[C&CDean]

So, let me get this straight. dawg and Froze love muslims and think what they're doing is righteous - since all christians are pretty much ****ed up for being ****ed that Christ has been taken out of Christmas?

It's OK if you guys hate christians, Christmas, and anything/everything it stands for. It's OK if you feel the need to protect your beloved muslims from us filthy christians. However, please discontinue trying to lump us in with murdering filth sporting wannabe beards and headrags just cause we're ****ed about "happy holidays."

[Frozen Sooner]

So, let me get this straight. dawg and Froze love muslims and think what they're doing is righteous - since all christians are pretty much ****ed up for being ****ed that Christ has been taken out of Christmas?

It's OK if you guys hate christians, Christmas, and anything/everything it stands for. It's OK if you feel the need to protect your beloved muslims from us filthy christians. However, please discontinue trying to lump us in with murdering filth sporting wannabe beards and headrags just cause we're ****ed about "happy holidays."

Dean, I find it impressive that you've managed a career like yours without the ability to read. I say that because functional illiteracy is the only way you could take what you just attributed to me out of why I've said. I haven't said a single thing approaching any of that in this thread-and in fact, I said that the actions of the airline were absolutely correct in keeping those dudes off the plane.

In fact, I've been very careful to be nothing but complimentary about Christianity except in answering a question about whether the Bible commands people to kill non-believers-which it does, in more places than I quoted.

[Stoop Dawg]

So, let me get this straight. dawg and Froze love muslims and think what they're doing is righteous - since all christians are pretty much ****ed up for being ****ed that Christ has been taken out of Christmas?

It's OK if you guys hate christians, Christmas, and anything/everything it stands for. It's OK if you feel the need to protect your beloved muslims from us filthy christians. However, please discontinue trying to lump us in with murdering filth sporting wannabe beards and headrags just cause we're ****ed about "happy holidays."

It appears that you've had a hard day - or two.

At no time have I proclaimed any affinity for muslims.

At no time (in this thread) have I made negative remarks about Christianity.

At no time have I tried to remove Christ from Christmas (although I have suggested that there is more than one winter holiday).

All I've done is pointed out that muslims aren't the only one's with a "persecution complex" in this country. All you have to do is read this thread to see my point in action.

[SCOUT]

<Insert contention that it's okay to profile people based on religion - as long as it's not MY religion - here> :rolleyes:

That was addressed in post 19

When Christians start blowing things up and suicide bombing and making shoe bombs and drink bombs, then I'll gladly submit to profiling

[C&CDean]

Dean, I find it impressive that you've managed a career like yours without the ability to read. I haven't said a single thing approaching any of that in this thread-and in fact, I said that the actions of the airline were absolutely correct in keeping those dudes off the plane.

In fact, I've been very careful to be nothing but complimentary about Christianity except in answering a question about whether the Bible commands people to kill non-believers-which it does, in more places than I quoted.

I reed just fin.

Here's my point. Muslims are killing us every chance they get. They're murdering cowardly **********s. You posting scripture about how the Bible tells us to go kill them (I think that's what you're trying to do) pretty much just reeks of being a muslim lover/christian hater. How? You're saying "it's not just them people, it's us too."

Personally, I have lost every single last shred of patience and tolerance for islam that I had tried to hold on to. You act like these idiots did on my airplane and you're gonna a) be dead, or b) wish you were. Profiling is the only hope of protecting ourselves from these psychopaths. If blonde haired, green eyed guys start blowing up planes then we'll profile them too.

I'm a little more sensitive to this crap because I fly nearly every week. Being Ex. Plat. I board first. I watch every single person who boards after me. If they even look like a muslim, I watch them the whole flight. Trust me, I've had some shady looking dudes on some flights that I've watched like a hawk. I've also had a couple flights where terrorist looking dudes sat in the terminal, then didn't board the plane.

I ****ing hate me a muslim right now. Sorry, but they've brought it on themselves.

[Frozen Sooner]

Dean, I posted passages from the Bible commanding Christians to kill unbelievers in response to a direct question asking whose holy book contained such commands.

Both the Koran and the Bible contain such commandments. This is a statement of fact. All of a suddent I'm a Christian-hater because I've read the Bible?

I've said at least twice in this thread that Christian whack-jobs are much more marginalized than Islamic whack-jobs and that Christians and Christianity deserve praise for this.

I'm not sure what else you think I need to do to show that I tend to agree with Christians more than Muslims other than going ahead and converting to Christianity.

[Mjcpr]

What's an Ex. Plat.?

[Jerk]

Mike, I have nothing against you personally (I can't stay the same for others) so let me explain to you the way I see this:

We are in a world-wide war against a large element of Islam. You can call it 'radical Islam' or 'Wahabi Islam' or whatever it is, but there are lots of em'. This will most likely be like another Cold War, lasting for decades, flaring up into regional wars, but add the terrorists attacks and the enemy's lack of a will to preserve themselves (back in the Cold War, at least the commies wanted to live) and it seems even worse, even though we don't have thousands of nukes pointing at each other. The commies had nukes for years and never used them against us. If our current enemies can get nukes, all bets are off. We have a real threat to our survival. You can see it by their actions (9-11) and their words (just watch CNN or Fox).

So, here we have a thread discussing this problem, and sure enough, we've just got to have someone throw in the "but! but! Christians are just as bad!!!" It's a bunch of bullcrap. It doesn't belong in the same discussion. These people like Dawg have agendas, and they don't like it that most people don't share their view that Christianity is the #1 evil on the planet. It bothers them, so they gotta post silly little comments on serious threads.

That's where I'm coming from.

[Jerk]

BTW- Do a search of Dawg's posts here in SO.

Almost every single one is an attack or a bash of Christianity.

The guy is confused. He has no idea what the true enemy is. It's not the Methodists who are going to try and sneak a nuke into your city. geeze.

[Frozen Sooner]

Jerk, I understand your position. The thing is I don't think anyone in this thread has made the argument that Christians are just as bad as Muslims about killing innocent people. The argument has been advanced that Christians get pretty touchy about some pretty petty stuff.

I agree that the majority of those we're fighting are Muslim. That's a problem. The issue, though, isn't necessarily Islam-it's petrocracy. Before you think I'm going to go on an "Oil is Evil" rant, hear me out. Trust me, I don't think that we're fighting a war over oil or that oil is the root cause.

The war we're fighting and will continue to fight is the petroleum-importing nations vs. the petroleum-exporting nations. The petroleum-exporting nations have used their money to finance a lavish lifestyle for their upper classes, while ignoring the infrastructure to support a broad, educated middle class.

When the lower classes saw this, the upper classes needed something to blame the general suckitude of the lower classes' life on-and they chose the West as a scapegoat. The lower and what passes for middle classes of Arabic culture truly think that we're the reason they don't have the things that the West has. The governments in these cases have used a ready-made justification for hatred of the west-Islam.

You can see this happening in a couple of non-Islamic states, by the way. Hugo Chavez is pulling the same kind of stunt, he's just not using Islam as his justification.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I don't know about them flying planes into building over Happy Holidays...however when literature is written or pictures made that talk about their religion they issue fatwas and start burning **** down. I haven't seen Christians declare in unison that we should kill a person for writing a book that may have shown their religion in a negative light. And a small drawing caused them to destroy and destroy.

[Stoop Dawg]

The guy is confused. He has no idea what the true enemy is. It's not the Methodists who are going to try and sneak a nuke into your city. geeze.

Who is the only country to have actually used a nuclear weapon? What is the majority religion in that country?

Rwanda was 90% Christian in 1994, when almost 900K people were slaughtered in a matter of days. Who needs nukes when you've got millions of people willing to kill in cold blood?

You won't read them, but here are some links:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_8_121/ai_n6003109
http://www.geocities.com/missionalia/rwanda1.htm

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Who is the only country to have actually used a nuclear weapon? What is the majority religion in that country?

Who is the only country in the world to have used a nuclear weapon in conflict for the express purpose of the PRESERVATION of hundreds of thousands of lives? Bone up on your history, pal.


Rwanda was 90% Christian in 1994, when almost 900K people were slaughtered in a matter of days. Who needs nukes when you've got millions of people willing to kill in cold blood?

Don't know about what you've read, but every ounce of research I've done on the topic has the genocide seated more in tribal conflict and the power vacuum of the Belgian departure in the early 60's than some twisted 'I'm Christian! Die, infidel!' BS. Maybe my research is flawed. But time and time again, it's Hutu versus Tutsi, not Christian versus Muslim.

[1stTimeCaller]

to be honest with everyone, I don't really care about Rwandans, Iraqis, Mexicans, Canadians, Alaskans, etc. Just Americans.

[Frozen Sooner]

to be honest with everyone, I don't really care about Rwandans, Iraqis, Mexicans, Canadians, Alaskans, etc. Just Americans.

I'm this close to peeing on the carpet in a plane right now. :mad:

[1stTimeCaller]

I'm this close to peeing on the carpet in a plane right now. :mad:

:D

You caught that, I guess? ;)

I don't know why but I thought it was funny and that maybe this thread could use a break.

[Frozen Sooner]

Heh. Yeah, I did.

DURKA DURKA JIHAD!!!

[Stoop Dawg]

Who is the only country in the world to have used a nuclear weapon in conflict for the express purpose of the PRESERVATION of hundreds of thousands of lives? Bone up on your history, pal.

My history is just fine. Your reading comprehension, however, is suspect.

I'm not claiming that using nuclear weapons was wrong. I only pointed out that they have only ever been used twice on live civilians. Ever. And those two times, it was a "Christian" nation that pulled the trigger.



Don't know about what you've read, but every ounce of research I've done on the topic has the genocide seated more in tribal conflict and the power vacuum of the Belgian departure in the early 60's than some twisted 'I'm Christian! Die, infidel!' BS. Maybe my research is flawed. But time and time again, it's Hutu versus Tutsi, not Christian versus Muslim.

Again, I'm not saying that the violence was motivated by religion. But these people's "Christian values" didn't stop them from chopping up their neighbors with machetes.

[1stTimeCaller]

My history is just fine. Your reading comprehension, however, is suspect.

I'm not claiming that using nuclear weapons was wrong. I only pointed out that they have only ever been used twice on live civilians. Ever. And those two times, it was a "Christian" nation that pulled the trigger.



Again, I'm not saying that the violence was motivated by religion. But these people's "Christian values" didn't stop them from chopping up their neighbors with machetes.


So basically what you're saying is that the only point you have is the one on your head? You're really reaching with those two arguments.

Let's get back to the real enemy, Alaskans. They're trying to take over the country. We need to build a wall between them and us. Maybe we could put another country between them and us as a buffer zone or something. Whatever we do we need to act fast.

;)

[Stoop Dawg]

And let me try to just be SUPER DUPER clear for those of you who can't see a point unless it's spelled out for you in no uncertain terms.

I am NOT saying that Christianity is bad. Nope. I AM saying that Christianity suffers from the same issues that other religions suffer from.

Maybe the Christians in Rwanda weren't "real" Christians. Maybe the Muslims that flew those planes into the WTC weren't "real" Muslims. Maybe dropping nukes on Japan was justified. Maybe ... well, there's no equivalent yet, but when there is, maybe it will be justified.

I don't expect anyone to admit that their viewpoint is wrong. I only hope that some will at least try to see another viewpoint, whether they agree with it or not.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

I'm not claiming that using nuclear weapons was wrong. I only pointed out that they have only ever been used twice on live civilians. Ever. And those two times, it was a "Christian" nation that pulled the trigger.

Thusly implying that Christianity is a root cause in either A) the decision making process of action, B) the action in and of itself, or C) influenced the thought process of enough to sway a decision in this topic manner in a certain way. Implication. And regardless if my 'reading comprehension' is suspect, it doesn't take an English Doctorate to realize implied intent. In fact, it smells a lot like troll stank.


Again, I'm not saying that the violence was motivated by religion. But these people's "Christian values" didn't stop them from chopping up their neighbors with machetes.

So if the violence was NOT motivated by the religious set, why is it even part of the discussion of religious moral and ethical boundaries as anything more than fuel for a fire you're stirring? Let us learn by example...

100% of people die.

100% of people sh*t.

Therefore, 100% of people that sh*t, die. Also a corrolary to the evidence, sh*tting will kill you.

We all know this is stupid. But this is the vein of your logic, my friend. 90% of those responsible are classified as Christians. 100% of those classified as Christians are responsible for the genocide. Therefore, of the 100%, 90%, the Christians, must be responsible in some shape, form, or fashion, even if it is as simple as their lack of holding to the tenets of their religion decreasing their moral standard to the extent of allowing such heinous crimes to be carried out forthwith. Therefore, as a corrolary to the evidence, Christians are responsible, though the religion in and of itself is not.

Which doesn't even remotely touch on the reasons why. It's a simple means to rub mud in the face of something that's incongruent with your current set of morals and ethics. Call a spade a spade, man. Don't try and veil it in 100% sh*t and death.

[Vaevictis]

Islam isn't the problem right now, any more than Christianity has ever been the problem when Christians did this kind of stuff.

The problem is, as always, that there are a bunch of people who are in power, who use whatever means they can to accomplish the f*cked up things they want accomplished.

Currently, it's Islam. In the past, it's been Christianity. Or patriotism/nationalism. Or scapegoating someone -- Jews, Gypsies, Catholics, Protestants, whatever. It's always the same ****, it's the means and justification that are different.

[Frozen Sooner]

So basically what you're saying is that the only point you have is the one on your head? You're really reaching with those two arguments.

Let's get back to the real enemy, Alaskans. They're trying to take over the country. We need to build a wall between them and us. Maybe we could put another country between them and us as a buffer zone or something. Whatever we do we need to act fast.

;)

Dude! The wall is already there. See?

http://www.reali-slim.com/images/us_map.gif

[Stoop Dawg]

Let us learn by example...

100% of people die.

100% of people sh*t.

Therefore, 100% of people that sh*t, die. Also a corrolary to the evidence, sh*tting will kill you.

Do the people who sh*t claim that sh*tting will prevent you from dying? If not, your analogy falls apart.

Edit: Let me reiterate - it's not Christianity itself that is so ugly, it's the hypocracy of those claiming to be Christians. Many Christians act as if their religion is the answer to everything. It wasn't the answer to sh*t in Rwanda. No pun intended.

[1stTimeCaller]

Dude! The wall is already there. See?

http://www.reali-slim.com/images/us_map.gif


HO LEE CRAP!! Those bastages really put a box around Alaska! Why was this not on the news?

[Stoop Dawg]

It's a simple means to rub mud in the face of something that's incongruent with your current set of morals and ethics. Call a spade a spade, man. Don't try and veil it in 100% sh*t and death.

Is this directed at the original post, or at me?

[Frozen Sooner]

I'm just wondering why we don't get the nice weather our latitude would seem to imply.

We've also apparently lost quite a bit of landmass. It probably melted in the warm South Pacific waters.

[1stTimeCaller]

I'm just wondering why we don't get the nice weather our latitude would seem to imply.

We've also apparently lost quite a bit of landmass. It probably melted in the warm South Pacific waters.

Continental drift? Maybe the box is plexiglass and they pipe in the cool air so nobody would realize they were moved.

Did you use your 3l33t haxor skillz to get that map from the CIA?

[WILBURJIM]

Jerk, I understand your position. The thing is I don't think anyone in this thread has made the argument that Christians are just as bad as Muslims about killing innocent people. The argument has been advanced that Christians get pretty touchy about some pretty petty stuff.

I agree that the majority of those we're fighting are Muslim. That's a problem. The issue, though, isn't necessarily Islam-it's petrocracy. Before you think I'm going to go on an "Oil is Evil" rant, hear me out. Trust me, I don't think that we're fighting a war over oil or that oil is the root cause.

The war we're fighting and will continue to fight is the petroleum-importing nations vs. the petroleum-exporting nations. The petroleum-exporting nations have used their money to finance a lavish lifestyle for their upper classes, while ignoring the infrastructure to support a broad, educated middle class.

When the lower classes saw this, the upper classes needed something to blame the general suckitude of the lower classes' life on-and they chose the West as a scapegoat. The lower and what passes for middle classes of Arabic culture truly think that we're the reason they don't have the things that the West has. The governments in these cases have used a ready-made justification for hatred of the west-Islam.

You can see this happening in a couple of non-Islamic states, by the way. Hugo Chavez is pulling the same kind of stunt, he's just not using Islam as his justification.

But how does this explain the other 1300 years of Islamic jihad? The conquering, raping, pillaging and subjugation of infidels, and their land.

[Stoop Dawg]

I rarely get PMs, even in controversial threads like this one. But this is excellent:



So you think i am a ***** for responding to you on the internet, thank you very much. It is a compliment coming from a hypocritical bigot. You made my day.

Mongo

PS-Way to hide behind the internet and call someone a *****, you must have huge balls.


I'm not sure what the "*****" is, and I'm 100% certain that I haven't called anyone a name. And now, one evidently needs to have huge balls to debate religion on the internet. Who knew?

I also like the "bigot" comment - especially since that's exactly what I'm opposing here. Gotta love internet message boards. Ain't they great?

[handcrafted]

Hey Froz,

I'm not gonna go back and quote your entire big long post, but both you know and I know that you took those Bible quotes so blatantly out of context that your argument is completely discredited. The quote from Luke was from a parable! A story meant to illustrate a point. The verse you quoted deals with God/Jesus (the king) judging unbelievers. It's not a command for us to kill them. The quote from Joel is a prophetic passage and the Psalm is poetry, both of which use vivid imagery to portray ideas. Not enough space to exposit them here.

I know you have a low view of the Bible, but being an apostate you must have some remembrance of what you were formerly taught. Of course, maybe you weren't taught how to read the Bible properly. But the foregoing is pretty obvious to anyone who can actually, well, you know, READ.

[handcrafted]

I rarely get PMs, even in controversial threads like this one. But this is excellent:



I'm not sure what the "*****" is, and I'm 100% certain that I haven't called anyone a name. And now, one evidently needs to have huge balls to debate religion on the internet. Who knew?

I also like the "bigot" comment - especially since that's exactly what I'm opposing here. Gotta love internet message boards. Ain't they great?

so now we're all bigots, huh? I guess you can go hang out with Kaiser now.

[Frozen Sooner]

Hey Froz,

I'm not gonna go back and quote your entire big long post, but both you know and I know that you took those Bible quotes so blatantly out of context that your argument is completely discredited. The quote from Luke was from a parable! A story meant to illustrate a point. The verse you quoted deals with God/Jesus (the king) judging unbelievers. It's not a command for us to kill them. The quote from Joel is a prophetic passage and the Psalm is poetry, both of which use vivid imagery to portray ideas. Not enough space to exposit them here.

Ah. So when it's in the Bible, it's a parable and not the literal truth. Except when it is. When it's in the Koran, it's the literal truth, except when it's not.

Tell you what:

Explain to me the context of this as not meaning that Christians should kill nonbelievers:

Exodus 18 and 20

"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"

"He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed."

[Stoop Dawg]

so now we're all bigots, huh?

Touche. I recant, to whatever extent one can recant such a comment.

[Stoop Dawg]

Ah. So when it's in the Bible, it's a parable and not the literal truth. Except when it is. When it's in the Koran, it's the literal truth, except when it's not.

You forgot the part where people are inherently sinners and cannot live perfect Christian lives. It is perfectly reasonable that one may falter, as long as they are trying. I have a PM that can clarify this, if necessary.

However, if someone proclaiming to be a Muslim commits such a crime, it is an indictment against the entire religion and an excuse to profile and/or hate all Muslims.

[Mongo]

I asked who the real pussies were. You can see for yourself who responded. :)

Ain't it amazing how worked up they get about who does and/or doesn't celebrate Christmas? Imagine if someone did something really bad, like not allow them onto a plane or something! :eek:

This thread has far exceeded my expectations. Thank you, thank you all.

Yes, you did not flat out call me a *****, but you use you a sly way of slamming people to deflect responsibility.

And hating Christians does make one a bigot. You celebrating Christmas makes you a hypocrite.

[Stoop Dawg]

Ah. So when it's in the Bible, it's a parable and not the literal truth. Except when it is. When it's in the Koran, it's the literal truth, except when it's not.

Tell you what:

Explain to me the context of this as not meaning that Christians should kill nonbelievers:

Exodus 18 and 20

"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"

"He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed."

That's easy, even I can answer that.

Exodus is Old Testament so it doesn't apply.

(except when it does apply, you know)

[mdklatt]

And hating Christians does make one a bigot.

You don't understand, he doesn't hate the believers just the belief.

[Stoop Dawg]

And hating Christians does make one a bigot. You celebrating Christmas makes you a hypocrite.

Read one or two of my posts, please. I am far, far, far from hating Christians. Far. Far.

Do you have a Christmas tree? Any Santa's in or around your house?

[Stoop Dawg]

You don't understand, he doesn't hate the believers just the belief.

Nope, wrong answer. I actually like the believers and understand the belief (even though I don't believe it myself). What I hate are the posers. Those who say they believe, but then behave in a way that clearly indicates that they don't.

[Widescreen]

However, if someone proclaiming to be a Muslim commits such a crime, it is an indictment against the entire religion and an excuse to profile and/or hate all Muslims.
I have a question. Are you a Muslim or have people close to you that are Muslim?

[Mongo]

Read one or two of my posts, please. I am far, far, far from hating Christians. Far. Far.

Do you have a Christmas tree? Any Santa's in or around your house?

Do you go to Church and sing hymns of your Faith, listen to the word being spoken, take the Lord's Supper, truly meditate in prayer to reflect on the real Christmas?

i do that and Christmas tree and presents, but none of this would be done without the Faith

[handcrafted]

Ah. So when it's in the Bible, it's a parable and not the literal truth. Except when it is. When it's in the Koran, it's the literal truth, except when it's not.

Tell you what:

Explain to me the context of this as not meaning that Christians should kill nonbelievers:

Exodus 18 and 20

"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"

"He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed."

No, it's a parable when it's a parable!!!!!

Poetry is poetry. Narrative is narrative. Prophecy is prophecy. A letter is a letter. The Bible is not all one kind of literature. It's many. Each has its purpose, and can only be properly read and interpreted in light of that purpose. Do you read and interpret a novel by John Grisham the same way you would read, say the Rules of Professional Conduct for lawyers?

BTW you mean Leviticus 20, not Exodus. And those are civil punishments directing Israelites to implement the death penalty on other Israelites who apostasize. Punishment within the community of God's people. Has nothing to do with outsiders/unbelievers/infidels or whatever you want to call them.

[handcrafted]

That's easy, even I can answer that.

Exodus is Old Testament so it doesn't apply.

(except when it does apply, you know)

See my other post to Froz.

If you're going to bash Christians, at least learn how to read the Bible and what it really says instead of talking out your azz.

[Frozen Sooner]

Actually, no. I meant Exodus but only gave the verse, not the chapter.

Both of those are direct quotes from Exodus Chapter 22. I'm looking at them in the King James Bible right this very second.

How are civil punishments for apostacy that include death any different from a commandment to kill an unbeliever again?

[Stoop Dawg]

I have a question. Are you a Muslim or have people close to you that are Muslim?

None of the above.

However, I have a lot of people close to me who are Christians. Good ones, even.

[handcrafted]

Nope, wrong answer. I actually like the believers and understand the belief (even though I don't believe it myself). What I hate are the posers. Those who say they believe, but then behave in a way that clearly indicates that they don't.

Ah! So you hate hypocrites?

Good. So does Jesus.

Any Christian who claims to perfectly follow all of Christ's teachings is a liar. Don't trust them.

We all still have sinful natures and will royally mess up at times. The difference between you and us is, we understand our nature and realize that only God can do something about it.

[Stoop Dawg]

i do that and Christmas tree and presents

Christmas tree is pagan. Sorry. Looks like you're gonna burn in hell.

[Mongo]

Christmas tree is pagan. Sorry. Looks like you're gonna burn in hell.

Christ has forgiven me:D

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Please don't make me pull a Tuba and start posting pictures of the celebrations on 9/11 and all the murals in Iraq we found honoring 9/11. The problem being that moderate Muslims are far and far between.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

And as for Christmas Trees being Pagan...let's get serious for a minute...the Tree is for the little kid when they come around the corner and see it for the first time and light up and say WOW and they start getting excited because they know Presents and lots of yummy food is coming their way in next month or so

[handcrafted]

Actually, no. I meant Exodus but only gave the verse, not the chapter.

Both of those are direct quotes from Exodus Chapter 22. I'm looking at them in the King James Bible right this very second.

How are civil punishments for apostacy that include death any different from a commandment to kill an unbeliever again?

Because an unbeliever cannot apostasize. An apostate is a former believer. An unbeliever is someone who never was part of God's people.

Those are Israelite civil laws. They did not apply to anyone who wasn't part of the nation of Israel. They couldn't. The Mosaic Law was given to Israel, period (along with anyone from another nation who voluntarily chose to join up, so to speak).

[Frozen Sooner]

Please don't make me pull a Tuba and start posting pictures of the celebrations on 9/11 and all the murals in Iraq we found honoring 9/11. The problem being that moderate Muslims are far and far between.

Please don't, considering it has nothing to do with this thread. Nobody has said that there aren't some pretty f'ed up Muslims out there. It's a straw-man argument to post pics like that when Tuba does it, and it'd be a straw-man here.

[Stoop Dawg]

Ah! So you hate hypocrites?

Good. So does Jesus.

Any Christian who claims to perfectly follow all of Christ's teachings is a liar. Don't trust them.

I'm glad we have finally found some common ground.


We all still have sinful natures and will royally mess up at times. The difference between you and us is, we understand our nature and realize that only God can do something about it.

I'd like to debate you on that, but it's impossible to tell who is "you" and who is "us". Any concrete example I try to pull from the "you" category will surely be immediately pronounced "not a real Christian". So if we go with the definition of "all good people are Christians and all bad people are not", then you win hands down. Congrats.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

My Problem is when people say the Islam thing is limited to just a few crazy folks...I always get the impression and it may just be paranoia that they all wish we would die....now some aren't willing to do what it takes but alot will.

[Frozen Sooner]

Because an unbeliever cannot apostasize. An apostate is a former believer. An unbeliever is someone who never was part of God's people.

Those are Israelite civil laws. They did not apply to anyone who wasn't part of the nation of Israel. They couldn't. The Mosaic Law was given to Israel, period (along with anyone from another nation who voluntarily chose to join up, so to speak).

I'm going to take your post, spread it on my lawn, and watch the grass come up green.

You're honestly saying that a law that tells you to kill someone who no longer believes in your religion isn't telling you to kill unbelievers? And that it's actually OK to kill people who don't want to be Jewish anymore?

That's the most intellectually dishonest thing I've ever heard.

[Stoop Dawg]

And as for Christmas Trees being Pagan...let's get serious for a minute...the Tree is for the little kid when they come around the corner and see it for the first time and light up and say WOW and they start getting excited because they know Presents and lots of yummy food is coming their way in next month or so

Wait, so it's actually okay to embrace the non-Christian traditions of "Christmas"? Hooooray!!!

[Frozen Sooner]

My Problem is when people say the Islam thing is limited to just a few crazy folks...I always get the impression and it may just be paranoia that they all wish we would die....now some aren't willing to do what it takes but alot will.

Well, I'd characterize my position as Islam got hijacked by a few crazy leaders who had a bunch of money and charisma and they wound up getting a bunch of people who'd have probably been relatively nice otherwise all wound up and crazy.

Doesn't mean we don't have to deal with the wound up and crazy followers, of course.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Okay the truth is that Dean= Dumbledore and the rest of us are the Ministry of Magic...If we don't start listening to Dean...The Death Eaters are going to get too much control!!!!

[handcrafted]

I'm glad we have finally found some common ground.



I'd like to debate you on that, but it's impossible to tell who is "you" and who is "us". Any concrete example I try to pull from the "you" category will surely be immediately pronounced "not a real Christian". So if we go with the definition of "all good people are Christians and all bad people are not", then you win hands down. Congrats.

Lemme 'splain. No, is too much...lemme sum up.

All people are bad. Jesus died and was resurrected, thus allowing anyone who believes and proclaims such to be made good...eventually. But only partially in this life. As we get more mature we get "kinda good" but still somewhat bad. And everyone is different.

Non-Christians can act good, but they can't *be* good in God's eyes.

[sanantoniosooner]

I figured there was a reason to avoid this thread ;)

[Stoop Dawg]

Christ has forgiven me:D

Actually, I believe that idolatry is the one sin that cannot be forgiven. Someone correct me on this one if I'm wrong, it was always a little hazy whether this was "unforgivable" or not.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Shampoo is better. I go on first and clean the hair.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Everything is forgivable

[handcrafted]

I'm going to take your post, spread it on my lawn, and watch the grass come up green.

You're honestly saying that a law that tells you to kill someone who no longer believes in your religion isn't telling you to kill unbelievers? And that it's actually OK to kill people who don't want to be Jewish anymore?

That's the most intellectually dishonest thing I've ever heard.

Okay, dude. You really haven't been hearing a word I've said. If you really want to understand, then I suggest you get a Bible commentary and/or do some online research. Try www.monergism.com for starters.

Or, if you don't care, don't. I can tell you the truth, but I can't make you believe it.

[Widescreen]

Actually, I believe that idolatry is the one sin that cannot be forgiven. Someone correct me on this one if I'm wrong, it was always a little hazy whether this was "unforgivable" or not.
There is nothing you can do that God won't forgive through Christ.

Man, this thread really blew up! :D

[Frozen Sooner]

I'm reading every word you're writing. They're just not making sense in any language I've ever heard of.

You're trying to claim that being commanded in your holy book to kill someone who no longer believes in your religion isn't the same thing as being commanded to kill an unbeliever.

Many Muslim nations have the same sort of rule, by the way, and they rightfully are condemned for it. Why can't you do the same for your own faith?

So what's the "truth" handcrafted? That Christians have never used the Bible as justification for killing people who believed a little differently than they did?

[Stoop Dawg]

Lemme 'splain. No, is too much...lemme sum up.

All people are bad. Jesus died and was resurrected, thus allowing anyone who believes and proclaims such to be made good...eventually. But only partially in this life. As we get more mature we get "kinda good" but still somewhat bad. And everyone is different.

Non-Christians can act good, but they can't *be* good in God's eyes.

Let me see if I can sum up your summary (don't wanna put words in your mouth so correct me if I'm wrong here):

All people are bad regardless of whether they are Christians or not. Christians may or may not be "better" than non-Christians. It's impossible to tell who is Christian and who is non-Christian. And, people may actually be Christian or non-Christian at different times in their lives.

Errr, I seem to have lost the point. Does being a Christian have any meaning whatsoever in this world?

[sanantoniosooner]

THE REFS HATE US.
PAC 10 CHEATS

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Conditioner is better. I make the hair silky and smooth

[SCOUT]

You forgot the part where people are inherently sinners and cannot live perfect Christian lives. It is perfectly reasonable that one may falter, as long as they are trying. I have a PM that can clarify this, if necessary.

However, if someone proclaiming to be a Muslim commits such a crime, it is an indictment against the entire religion and an excuse to profile and/or hate all Muslims.

To me the difference is that Christians falter and commit sins, even violence, in spite of their religion. Some Muslims commit such crimes in the name of their religion.

This is separate from the Jerk/Mike conversation about the writings in each book and I am referring to actions.

[Stoop Dawg]

Everything is forgivable


32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.


28Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:

29But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.


.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

This is worse than my poop thread

[Frozen Sooner]

To me the difference is that Christians falter and commit sins, even violence, in spite of their religion. Some Muslims commit such crimes in the name of their religion.

This is separate from the Jerk/Mike conversation about the writings in each book and I am referring to actions.

I'd argue that there are those who commit violence in the name of Christianity. However, their actions are understood to be those of a fringe minority.

I'm firmly convinced that no matter what your creed is, there's always going to be some kook who's going to take things too far and start hurting people. Hell, look at the anti-animal cruelty people. I can't think of any more peaceful creed than "It's bad to hurt animals," but they've got some yahoos who run around setting buildings on fire and destroying private property and injuring people.

What needs to happen is that the Muslims who can get along with other and play nice need to take back the voice of their religion from the kooks. Unfortunately, the kooks have the de facto backing of the petrocracy.

[Stoop Dawg]

To me the difference is that Christians falter and commit sins, even violence, in spite of their religion. Some Muslims commit such crimes in the name of their religion.

This is separate from the Jerk/Mike conversation about the writings in each book and I am referring to actions.

I see your point of view, even though I don't necessarily agree with it.

There are certainly some who call themselves Christians who commit evil in the name of their religion. Whether they are actually Christians or not is certainly debatable. As is whether the Muslims you mention are actually Muslims. The question, then, is whether a particular religion actually teaches violence (or some other immoral action). If so, that is certainly to be condemned.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

It's called context ;) Try reading the story of Jesus...I believe he covered that in his new covenant with man ;)

[Widescreen]

Let me see if I can sum up your summary (don't wanna put words in your mouth so correct me if I'm wrong here):


All people are bad regardless of whether they are Christians or not. Christians may or may not be "better" than non-Christians.
Your first statement is true. The Apostle Paul said in Romans that there are none who are righteous - not even one. However, there's really no concept of "better" - only forgiven and unforgiven.


It's impossible to tell who is Christian and who is non-Christian.
Christ said people will know us by our love for each other. Unfortunately, Christians (myself included) too often drop the ball on that one. So it can be difficult to tell. There are a lot of people who profess to be Christians that do a lot of really bad things. I'm always tempted to think "well, they're not really Christians" but that's really between them and God.


And, people may actually be Christian or non-Christian at different times in their lives.
I don't personally believe that a person can be a REAL Christian (born again) and then later lose it. The New Testament is very clear that being saved is not done by works but by faith. If you can lose your salvation, it's putting your salvation back in the category of works because you've done something to lose your faith.


Errr, I seem to have lost the point. Does being a Christian have any meaning whatsoever in this world?
Absolutely. Christ said that when we do things for other people it's like we're doing it for Him. He also told us to tell the Good News to all the nations so that everyone can know the truth of God's love for us. Not to mention that the belief that you're going to spend eternity in heaven is comforting.

[SCOUT]

I'd argue that there are those who commit violence in the name of Christianity. However, their actions are understood to be those of a fringe minority.

I'm firmly convinced that no matter what your creed is, there's always going to be some kook who's going to take things too far and start hurting people. Hell, look at the anti-animal cruelty people. I can't think of any more peaceful creed than "It's bad to hurt animals," but they've got some yahoos who run around setting buildings on fire and destroying private property and injuring people.

What needs to happen is that the Muslims who can get along with other and play nice need to take back the voice of their religion from the kooks. Unfortunately, the kooks have the de facto backing of the petrocracy.
Agreed.

It seems to me, and I could of course be wrong, that there is a disproportionate number of Muslims adhering to the fringe of their religion. Also, when there is an incident of violence in the name of Christianity it is quickly condemned and punished. In Muslim countries the violence in the name of Islam is celebrated.

[Stoop Dawg]

Agreed.

It seems to me, and I could of course be wrong, that there is a disproportionate number of Muslims adhering to the fringe of their religion. Also, when there is an incident of violence in the name of Christianity it is quickly condemned and punished. In Muslim countries the violence in the name of Islam is celebrated.

Let me throw this thought at you (not that I necessarily espouse it, just want to throw it out there as food for thought).

Americans generally condone violence when at war. For example, in general, it's the right-wing conservatives (who are mostly Christian) who back the war in Iraq. (There are certainly some non-Christians who also back it - including myself.)

So, logically, if there are certain Muslims who believe they are "at war" does this relax the moral requirement of non-violence for them?

I have a few reasons why I think not, but it's still interesting to consider.

[Stoop Dawg]

Absolutely. Christ said that when we do things for other people it's like we're doing it for Him. He also told us to tell the Good News to all the nations so that everyone can know the truth of God's love for us. Not to mention that the belief that you're going to spend eternity in heaven is comforting.

But it's also possible to do good things for other people without being a Christian. I'm not sure "being a Christian" is necessarily the determining factor when it comes to good works. However, as previously stated, this is a difficult debate to have because determining who is a Christian is difficult.

As for comfort, you obviously didn't sit through the "hell, fire, and brimstone" sermons of my youth. ;)

[usmc-sooner]

I'd rather live in a mostly Christian country than a mostly Muslim country.

[Poli Sci]

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/fugitives.htm

FBI's most wanted terrorist list, I don't see many non-muslims. When peaceful muslims stop radical muslims from killing non-muslims they will be treated with respect.

[handcrafted]

But it's also possible to do good things for other people without being a Christian. I'm not sure "being a Christian" is necessarily the determining factor when it comes to good works. However, as previously stated, this is a difficult debate to have because determining who is a Christian is difficult.

As for comfort, you obviously didn't sit through the "hell, fire, and brimstone" sermons of my youth. ;)

And this was the point I was making. Doing good things is not what's most important. What's most important is your internal motivations. And your internal motivations will always be selfish to some degree, even if you are the most altruistic human who ever existed. Jesus was very clear on this. The only way to reconcile your evil motivations with God is through Him. This does not remove the evil motivations, but it makes you follow them less and less over time. And it makes your good works acceptable to God, whereas before they were just filthy rags.

The questions you need to ask yourself are, do you do enough for other people? If not, why not? If you do, why do you do it? And what about all those times in the past where you've done wrong to someone? How do you fix those?

If for you, an unbeliever, determining who is a Christian is difficult, that is our problem (the Church's problem), not yours. It's we who have to fix that.

[handcrafted]

Oh, BTW, Froz, Dawg, and any other non-Christian (unbelievers, yo! :D) who quote the Bible incorrectly or out of context, don't get your panties in a wad when I or someone else point out your error and tell you what the text really says. You make category mistakes like equating ancient Israel with the modern New Testament church, and when we call you on it, you all act like we are making this stuff up. We are relating to you 2000 years of Biblical scholarship by people far more intelligent and educated than we are. I don't know what language you're reading, Froz, but it certainly is not English.

Try sitting down and reading the Bible, or just one section of it, like you would read any book. Forget for the time being that it's Holy Scripture. It is, after all, written in human language. Translated, yes, but human language. Realize the type of literature that you are reading. Is it poetry? A book of wisdom sayings? A narrative story? You went to high school like the rest of us, you've taken english and literature classes, so put some of that to use.

I realized a while back that reading the Bible is not rocket science. It takes a little work to understand the historical context and the culture of the ancient Near East, but it's not beyond the abilities of most regular folks. The key is, you have to be willing to be taught. Are you?

[handcrafted]

You're trying to claim that being commanded in your holy book to kill someone who no longer believes in your religion isn't the same thing as being commanded to kill an unbeliever.

Many Muslim nations have the same sort of rule, by the way, and they rightfully are condemned for it. Why can't you do the same for your own faith?


In the Bible, the apostate is treated much more harshly than the one who never believed. Why? Because the apostate knows better. The unbeliever is simply ignorant. The apostate is held to a higher standard, not only because of the state of their own soul being worse than if they had never believed, but also because in apostasizing they bring disrepute on God's people. This is a major theme throughout the entire Bible. The Law and the Prophets are filled with text related to this very issue. It's the reason the nation of Israel was invaded and destroyed and its people exiled, brought back, rebuilt, then destroyed and exiled again.

By way of contrast, the Koran uses the term "infidel" which means anyone who is not a Muslim, period. Although, I think sharia law makes a distinction and provides different punishment for apostate Muslims. But the Koran mandates killing unbelievers, and then in another passage demands that Christians and Jews be protected while in Muslim states. It's one of the many unreconcilable contradictions which prove that the Koran cannot have come from God.

For us Christians, the unbeliever is to be taught the truth. The apostate is to be shown no mercy unless he repents (but even this is to attempt to correct the person and bring them back). In modern times, this does not involve civil penalty, because the civil government and the church are separate. In ecclesiastical terms, the punishment is excommunication. So there really is no justification, and there never has been, for killing ANYONE simply because they are not a Christian. There isn't even a reason any longer for killing someone because they are an apostate Jew. Don't take a Christian's word for it if you don't want to, ask a Rabbi, or any orthodox Jew. They will tell you the same thing.



So what's the "truth" handcrafted? That Christians have never used the Bible as justification for killing people who believed a little differently than they did?

The truth is, they certainly have. And they were wrong to do it.

What can I say. We're all sinners.

[Widescreen]

As handcrafted alluded to, motivation for good works is important. Most people who do good deeds have some kind of selfish motivation - even if it's just done in an effort to relieve a guilty conscience. There certainly are some who do good deeds solely out of genuine compassion. However, Christianity is the only world religion that espouses doing good works, not in an effort to gain anything, but as a love response to God. Every other religion espouses good works in an effort to buy your way into heaven - the problem is, how much is enough? For the Christian, you're already going to heaven so the motivation is (or should be) entirely different.

[crawfish]

"Proclaim ye this among the Gentiles; Prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up: Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong." (Joel 3:9-10)

"Surely thou will slay the wicked, O God: depart from me therefore, ye bloody men. For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain. Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies." (Psalms 139:19-22)

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27)

Both, it looks like.

Try again; but this time, take corresponding Muslim verses and the NT verses, in their proper context.

[WILBURJIM]

[QUOTE=handcrafted] But the Koran mandates killing unbelievers, and then in another passage demands that Christians and Jews be protected while in Muslim states. It's one of the many unreconcilable contradictions which prove that the Koran cannot have come from God.QUOTE]
In islam, the protected status of Christians and Jews is because they are "people of the book." When there is the call to islam, and that is rejected, the unbelievers can be put to death. If they are "people of the book," they can reject this call to islam but, must agree to pay the jizya(tax) and feel themselves subdued, and then, will have the protected status of the dhimmi. That is traditional islam as practiced in the middle-east since the days of muhammed. The muslims changed up the rule abit when they invaded the Indian sub-continent. Since Hindus were not people of the book, they had no rights and could not be a protected group. Well, there were just too many to kill and then on top of that, they had no income from the jizya tax that the Jews and Christians payed in other geographic areas under muslim control. So Hindus became a protected people as long as they payed the jizya.

[SoonerProphet]

Try again; but this time, take corresponding Muslim verses and the NT verses, in their proper context.

Passages regarding warfare and conflict in the Koran deal with issues regarding hostility in Mecca and the need to leave and establish haven in Yathrib, which would become Medina. Proper context is needed when looking a both works of literature. Froze is spot on, both books can be utilized as a call to arms.

[Widescreen]

both books can be utilized as a call to arms.
And one side is doing a heck of a job at it.

[Scott D]

And one side is doing a heck of a job at it.

I agree, "Christianity, subjugating and killing non believers for 2000 years." :D

[WILBURJIM]

Passages regarding warfare and conflict in the Koran deal with issues regarding hostility in Mecca and the need to leave and establish haven in Yathrib, which would become Medina. Proper context is needed when looking a both works of literature. Froze is spot on, both books can be utilized as a call to arms.

Ahh, NO. Since the days of muhammed, koranic verses on unbelievers were/are open ended commandments. If they were not meant that way, too bad, they have been used in that manner(open ended commandments) since the 7 century. Too late to change the interpetation now.

[WILBURJIM]

Passages regarding warfare and conflict in the Koran deal with issues regarding hostility in Mecca and the need to leave and establish haven in Yathrib, which would become Medina. Proper context is needed when looking a both works of literature. Froze is spot on, both books can be utilized as a call to arms.

Medina was a Jewish village, they rejected muhammed and paid the price.The men were killed and the women and children were taken as slaves. Sounds like a religion based in warfare, if you ask me.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Who gives a kee-rap about islam and a-rabs...Since they invented arabic numerals, their math and their architecture they have not done a darn thing or helped the world. They happen to be a bunch of tribal idiots who live on sand that happens to have a bunch of black gold underneath.

Just like the Clampets, if it weren't for'n the black gold, they'd still be just hillbillies...sand hillbillies.

[crawfish]

Passages regarding warfare and conflict in the Koran deal with issues regarding hostility in Mecca and the need to leave and establish haven in Yathrib, which would become Medina. Proper context is needed when looking a both works of literature. Froze is spot on, both books can be utilized as a call to arms.

One big difference: when christians kill in Jesus' name, they're doing so in direct opposition the words and actions of their model. You cannot say the same for Muslims.

You're also a little off as to context; the Koran and OT condone violence; the NT does not. To put a parable on the same level as a recorded instance of violence is pretty disingenuous.

You're correct, however, about people using each book incorrectly as a call to arms through lack of context. Although, I'm convinced that these people don't need a holy book do justify this anyway...it's just convenient.

[handcrafted]

I agree, "Christianity, subjugating and killing non believers for 2000 years." :D

Muslims have only been at it for 1400 years, so neener. They have a lot of catching up to do, I guess.

[C&CDean]

Wow. 9 pages already.

One final word in this thread. I don't care what any books says/commands - in terms of what's going on in the world today. All I care about is who is killing innocent people. Right now, it's the people who call themselves muslims. They're justifying their murder on the book they say commands them to do it. I don't give a **** what they're justifying their murder on, only that they're murdering.

So, let's forget about the books for a minute. Let's look at the people. Who of you out there would be willing to behead another human being with a knife just because a book written a couple hundred centuries ago tells you to - and only because this other person doesn't believe your book?

These people (muslims) are nothing but murdering scum. Some murdering scum do it because the voices in their head tell them to. This murdering scum does it because the voices in the book tell them to. Either way, they're ****ing psychos who need to be eliminated. And if all the "good" muslims some of you are trying to convince me are out there would simply denounce AND take up arms against the bad muslims I'd feel better about islam. Problem is, they ain't. Deep inside, I'm thinking they're going "way to go Osama, kill all the infidels..."

[Frozen Sooner]

You're correct, however, about people using each book incorrectly as a call to arms through lack of context. Although, I'm convinced that these people don't need a holy book do justify this anyway...it's just convenient.

Winner.

Kooks, man. Like I said earlier, any creed can be used to justify whatever you want to do, whether your justification makes any sense or not.

[C&CDean]

Winner.

Kooks, man. Like I said earlier, any creed can be used to justify whatever you want to do, whether your justification makes any sense or not.

Yeah, I just said that.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

These people (muslims) are nothing but murdering scum. ...And if all the "good" muslims some of you are trying to convince me are out there would simply denounce AND take up arms against the bad muslims I'd feel better about islam. Problem is, they ain't. Deep inside, I'm thinking they're going "way to go Osama, kill all the infidels..."

If I may add fuel to the fire...

And these people are our "so-called" friends and are our diplomatic allies??? (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/world/4387263.html)

I think not...




Dec. 8, 2006, 4:29AM
Saudi money trail leads to Iraq's Sunnis
America's top ally in the region denies financing insurgent fighters

By SALAH NASRAWI
Associated Press
CAIRO, EGYPT — Private Saudi citizens are giving millions to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and much of the money is used to buy weapons, including shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, according to key Iraqi officials and others familiar with the flow of cash.
Saudi government officials deny that any money from their country is being sent to Iraqis fighting the government and the U.S.-led coalition.
But the U.S. Iraq Study Group report said Saudis are a source of funding for Sunni insurgents. Several truck drivers interviewed by the Associated Press described carrying boxes of cash from Saudi Arabia into Iraq, money they said was headed for insurgents.
Two high-ranking Iraqi officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity, said most of the Saudi money comes from private donations, called zakat, collected for Islamic causes and charities.
Some Saudis appear to know the money is headed to Iraq's insurgents, but others merely give to clerics who channel it to anti-coalition forces, the officials said.
In one recent case, an Iraqi official said $25 million in Saudi money went to a top Iraqi Sunni cleric and was used to buy weapons, including Strela, a Russian shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missile.
The missiles were purchased from someone in Romania, apparently through the black market, he said.

Official denials


Overall, the Iraqi officials said, money has been pouring into Iraq from oil-rich Saudi Arabia, a Sunni bastion, since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq toppled the Sunni-controlled regime of Saddam Hussein in 2003.
Saudi officials vehemently deny their country is a major source of financial support for the insurgents.
"There isn't any organized terror finance, and we will not permit any such unorganized acts," said Brig. Gen. Mansour al-Turki, a spokesman for the Saudi Interior Ministry.
About a year ago the Saudi government set up a unit to track any "suspicious financial operations," he said.
But the Iraq Study Group said "funding for the Sunni insurgency comes from private individuals within Saudi Arabia and other (Persian) Gulf states."
Saudi officials say they cracked down on zakat abuses, under pressure from the U.S., after 9/11.
The Iraqi officials, however, said some funding goes to Iraq's Sunni political leadership, who then disburse it. Other money, they said, is funneled directly to insurgents. The distribution network includes Iraqi truck and bus drivers.
Several drivers interviewed by the AP in Middle East capitals said Saudis have been using religious events, like the hajj pilgrimage to Mecca and a smaller pilgrimage, as cover for illicit money transfers.
Some money, they said, is carried into Iraq on buses with returning pilgrims.
"They sent boxes full of dollars and asked me to deliver them to certain addresses in Iraq," said one driver, who gave his name only as Hussein, out of fear of reprisal. "I know it is being sent to the resistance, and if I don't take it with me, they will kill me."
He was told what was in the boxes, he said, to ensure he hid the money from authorities at the border.

Tribal connections


The two Iraqi officials would not name specific Iraqi Sunnis who have received money from Saudi Arabia.
But Iraq issued an arrest warrant for Harith al-Dhari, a Sunni opponent of the Iraqi government, shortly after he visited Saudi Arabia in October. He was accused of sectarian incitement.
The Iraq Study Group report noted that the Saudi government has assisted the U.S. military with intelligence on Iraq.
But Saudi citizens have close tribal ties with Sunni Arabs in Iraq, and sympathize with their brethren in what they see as a fight for political control — and survival — with Iraq's Shiites.
The Saudi government is determined to curb the growing influence of Iran, its chief rival in the region. Tehran is closely linked to Shiite parties that dominate the Iraqi government.
Saudi officials say the kingdom has worked with all sides to reconcile Iraq's warring factions. They have, they point out, held talks in Saudi Arabia with Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, whose militia is accused of killing Sunnis.
These officials say zakat donations are now channeled through supervised bank accounts. Cash donation boxes, once prevalent in supermarkets and shopping malls, have been eliminated.
Last month, the New York Times reported that a classified U.S. government report said Iraq's Sunni Arab insurgency had become self-sufficient financially, raising millions from oil smuggling, kidnapping and Islamic charities.
The report did not say whether any money came from Saudi Arabia.




I think several neutron bombs would be a good idea for this region...

[SoonerProphet]

It would be very foolish to think that the Jordanians and Saudi's will stand idly by while the Shia gain an upper hand in this mess we have created in Mesopotamia.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

It would be very foolish to think that the Jordanians and Saudi's will stand idly by while the Shia gain an upper hand in this mess we have created in Mesopotamia.

Yep, that's why we need several neutron bombs...

[Stoop Dawg]

Yeah, I just said that.

You didn't say anything remotely resembling that. You said "let's forget the books for a minute" then went on to say that muslims were killing people just because a book told them to.

The "real" answer is that people kill people for many reasons - none of which are "some book told me to". The "some book told me to" line is the excuse, not the reason.

Deep inside, I'm thinking you're going "way to go George, kill all them muslims...". Kinda makes you the same, doesn't it?

[Vaevictis]

And if all the "good" muslims some of you are trying to convince me are out there would simply denounce AND take up arms against the bad muslims I'd feel better about islam. Problem is, they ain't.

Non-involvement is the normal response when it's not you getting shot at/blown up/etc.

You need look no further than Dec 6 or Sept 10 for evidence on that. If we couldn't be bothered to stand up and do anything until someone came for us, why should we be suprised when others act the same way?

OTOH, if you're one of the people looking the other way when insurgents use the building next to you as a base of operations, don't be suprised when a 500 lb bomb drops out of the sky on it and you're part of the collateral damage.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

That's it...I didn't want to to do this...I am issueing a fatwa against Islam!!

[SCOUT]

You didn't say anything remotely resembling that. You said "let's forget the books for a minute" then went on to say that muslims were killing people just because a book told them to.

The "real" answer is that people kill people for many reasons - none of which are "some book told me to". The "some book told me to" line is the excuse, not the reason.

Deep inside, I'm thinking you're going "way to go George, kill all them muslims...". Kinda makes you the same, doesn't it?
Wow. Dean = Muslim Terrorist.

I don't think I could have predicted that.
;)