1
   

AND SO IT BEGINS? SHARIA LAW IN BRITAIN?

 
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jul, 2008 12:17 pm
McGentrix wrote:
ebrown_p wrote:
... and Quran teachings don't hurt non-Muslims.

What's the point?


Depends on who you ask I guess.

Daniel Pearl would probably think it does.


So would most of those who died on 9/11.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jul, 2008 12:30 pm
More people in the US have died from Christian lynch mobs than from Muslim terrorists.

Are you saying we should blame these deaths on the Bible?

(For the record I think there are both peaceful Muslims and peaceful Christians)
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jul, 2008 12:34 pm
ebrown_p wrote:
More people in the US have died from Christian lynch mobs than from Muslim terrorists.

Are you saying we should blame these deaths on the Bible?

(For the record I think there are both peaceful Muslims and peaceful Christians)


You have numbers to back that up, right? I am sure that you didn't just pull that out of your ass and post it because it looks nice in print, right?

I'll wait for your links.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jul, 2008 01:51 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
ebrown_p wrote:
... and Quran teachings don't hurt non-Muslims.

What's the point?


Depends on who you ask I guess.

Daniel Pearl would probably think it does.


So would most of those who died on 9/11.


I consider it a safe statement that NONE of those who died on September 11th, anywhere in the world, from any cause, think anything at all.

*************************************

I say, we the CHRISTIAN solution. If we just kill all them goddamned towel-headed Muslim creeps, all our problems will be solved, and all our dreams will come true ! ! !
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jul, 2008 05:09 pm
ebrown_p wrote:
More people in the US have died from Christian lynch mobs than from Muslim terrorists.

Are you saying we should blame these deaths on the Bible?

(For the record I think there are both peaceful Muslims and peaceful Christians)


First of all are you prepared to support your claim concerning the lethality of American lynch mobs with some facts? You may be right, but it would take thousands of lynchings to surpass the body count of 9/11.

Secondly, and more importantly, while many,if not most, of the lynchings in America were committed by people who considered themselves Christian, few, if any, were committed in the name of Christianity. The attacks of 9/11 were very definately committed in the name of Islam.

There are, indeed, peaceful Muslims, but what you are trying to argue is that fundamentalist Christians, are and have been the same violent threat as fundamentalist Muslims. This is simply not supportable.

Moreover, if you have to reach back in time to find comparisons between the violence of Christians and the violence of Muslims you are missing a fundamental point. Violent Muslims, existentially, threaten us right now, violent Christians do not.

It is hardly the case that Islam has had a long history of non-violence in prior centuries, but even if it did, it doesn't get a free pass this century, because Christian crusaders and lynchers had their time in history.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jul, 2008 05:48 pm
1. This estimate gives a number of 4,700-- a number that is greater than the number killed in the US by Muslim terrorists.

2. There is a strong connection between groups that are explicitly religious and extremism. The best known example is the the KKK groups (historians will point out that the modern group of this name differs from previous incarnation); the KKK groups have always claimed to be doing the work of Christ and has drawn much of their rhetoric from the Bible.

These Christian extremist groups have been responsible for thousands of deaths. They are still spouting hatred, but have held at bay for some time.

3. If you want to look internationally, there are many modern Christian groups that have advocated and committed barbaric acts of violence. I would include the Lord's Army (and similar groups) in Africa and Mislosavic, not too long ago in Europe.

4. There is no real threat that violence will have any significant impact on our government (other than to give Republican even more power by a public reacting to fear).

The implicit threat that I think Foxfyre was raising is that Muslims would enter government and then start mucking with laws.

Of course there are other reasons that this fear is completely ridiculous

1) Americans of any religion have the right to enter political office and change the laws. Since Muslims are a minority, any change would need support from other religions-- and if enough American support a change in law, that's democracy.

2) The Christian Conservatives (the group from which Foxfyre hails) is doing exactly what she accuses the Muslims of doing. Of course they are not having much luck recently owing to the fact that most Americans think they are full of crap.

3) The conservative Muslims and Foxfyre would probably agree on most laws. They would ban homosexuality, enforce public morality (particularly on the airwaves), support capital punishment, promote a vigorous national security policy.

But the point is this. Under our laws... all religions are equal.

Personally I have the same opinion. If a religious person is moderate, and reasonable on how they pursue their political goals, I can respect them. If they are obnoxious and trying to force their beliefs on me (particularly by enacting conservative laws on social policy) I get annoyed (but accept their right to do so).

Of course we should oppose extremists. But, they should be opposed because of their extremism-- not because of their particular religion.

To say there are no Christian extremists... or that Christian extremists shouldn't be opposed is lunacy.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jul, 2008 06:28 pm
ebrown_p wrote:
... and Quran teachings don't hurt non-Muslims.

What's the point?


You just came out of left field with the above. What do you base it on?

As I learned, women were the first converts to Christianity, since it gave women more rights, and respect in the community. Can we say that about Islam? I do not know; however, do not answer, based on the next thought.

Listen, I assume you are quite the liberal progressive. If that is correct, will you not engage me in threads, since I really do not want to have you waste your breath on me.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jul, 2008 06:57 pm
I was responding to your comment that "bible teaching should not hurt non-Christians."

Muslims and Christians both make claims that they give women more rights. Factually it was people rejecting the hold of each respective religion that led to more rights in our society and traditionally Muslim societies (read about the Suffragettes, to whom you owe your right to vote).

As far as whether I am a liberal progressive... whether you think I fit this label or not says more about you than about me. I am who I am (by the grace of God), and my opinions are my own.

If you post on a public forum, you should expect people like me to comment-- especially you are making the unsupportable claim that one religion is either more moral, or more evil than the others.
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Jul, 2008 10:07 pm
I like this quote I've been hearing - 'liberals love humanity but hate people'. I mean, it's hubris, to think it's possible to balance everyones needs actively - like these ones gotta have their religion, so it's OK, cephalapods have animal rights - I saw a thing the other day some schools have interviews to evaluate the sincerity of people claiming special needs, I mean, if you're going to rough folk up, it defeats the purpose right? I can't get the text but there's an article called 'The Cult of Sincerity'.

I say let the chips fall - someones special needs won't get met? What else is new? At least in such a case, if the G washed it's hands, it would be fate not the G to be blamed for the inevitable failure...
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 08:31 am
The idea that all those lynchings--the data only goes through 1968 well before Muslim terrorism was much on the American radar by the way--were inspired or prompted by the Bible or that people typically used the Bible to justify them is ludicrous. To do so would be a gross corruption of Biblical teachings.

Further lynchings were an illegal mob activity targeted at individuals accused of some crime and were not targeted at a society as a whole The Quran IS being quoted and used to justify assault against societies by militant Islam who defines the infidels as men, women, and children who do not submit to the will of Allah.

Ebrown frequently strains at gnats to demonize Christianity but his arguments are nothing but red herrings and strawmen on this front. You would have to hunt very hard to find a Christian who would say that the Bible supports lynchings or that lynchings are an appropriate form of dispensing justice. Almost every Christian would readily speak out against lynching or any other form of terrorism.

While most Muslims are not terrorists or violent in any way, it is much more difficult to find Muslims who will speak out against terrorism for fear of retaliation if any part of the Quran is criticized or disputed.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 08:34 am
Foxfyre wrote:
While most Muslims are not terrorists or violent in any way, it is much more difficult to find Muslims who will speak out against terrorism for fear of retaliation if any part of the Quran is criticized or disputed.


You've got to be kidding. Just out of curiosity: How many Muslims do you know?
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 08:44 am
It is funny that you are accusing me of "demonizing" Christianity. All I am pointing out is that Christianity and Islam are equal.

There are extremist Christians (even today) who use the Bible to justify hatred and violence (see the KKK or Christian Identity websites if you don't believe this). Even so, I it wrong for me to defame the Christians who don't support hatred or violence simply because some Christians are extremist.

Foxfyre... you are trying to say that Christians are superior. I don't buy it.

If you are a good person, you are a good person no matter what religion you are. If you are filled with hatred, your religion doesn't matter much.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 08:49 am
old europe wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
While most Muslims are not terrorists or violent in any way, it is much more difficult to find Muslims who will speak out against terrorism for fear of retaliation if any part of the Quran is criticized or disputed.


You've got to be kidding. Just out of curiosity: How many Muslims do you know?


Of those that I know to be Muslim, I know only a few who are or have been my neighbors and/or who have been my coworkers or those I have sought out as experts on the value of Arab/Asian/Middle Eastern artifacts. I can't think of any of these that I didn't like and enjoy knowing however. There have not been large concentrations of Muslim people anywhere I have ever lived.

My comment was based on what I have read. Note that I was careful to not to say that no Muslims speak out, only that most are reluctant to do so for fear of retaliation. As an example, this NY Times piece
HERE

(You still have not answered my questions.)
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 09:01 am
You have a lot of hate coming out of the extremist Christian groups (i.e. KKK groups etc.) I haven't heard you, or the Christian establishment speak out against them.

Rather, the more mainstream conservative Christians seem to take the same rhetoric of the extremists (i.e. the defamation without the violence). There is almost a tacit approval (with a lukewarm disapproval of overt calls to violence) .

Perhaps your smug self-righteousness is due to the fact you are in the middle of it, and unable to see the big picture.

From where I see it, the Christian extremists are every bit as ugly as the Muslim extremists, and more dangerous to our society here since they already have a foothold.

It is one thing to kill people. It is far more sinister to spread hatred and half-truths about groups you want to hurt in order to turn society against them.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 09:05 am
ebrown writes
Quote:
You have a lot of hate coming out of the extremist Christian groups (i.e. KKK groups etc.) I haven't heard you, or the Christian establishment speak out against them.


Then my dear, your propensity to selective reading or dysfunctional reading skills is far more severe than even I realized.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 09:29 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Of those that I know to be Muslim, I know only a few who are or have been my neighbors and/or who have been my coworkers or those I have sought out as experts on the value of Arab/Asian/Middle Eastern artifacts. I can't think of any of these that I didn't like and enjoy knowing however. There have not been large concentrations of Muslim people anywhere I have ever lived.

My comment was based on what I have read. Note that I was careful to not to say that no Muslims speak out, only that most are reluctant to do so for fear of retaliation. As an example, this NY Times piece
HERE



Well, personally I think it's rather easy to find Muslims who will speak out against terrorism.

However, I'm not disputing that even moderate Muslims living under a militant, absolutist regime might be less willing to do so. Note, though, that the NYT bit you've linked to only talks about the Middle East. Or, more specifically, about 'Arab societies', which would be even more limiting.

It's noteworthy, though, that contrary to what many people in the 'West' believe, the majority of Muslims lives outside of the Middle East.

http://i38.tinypic.com/426q8.gif

For example, an estimated 140,000 Muslims live in India - more than in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the Palestinian territories, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain combined.

I would also guess that it is rather easy to find Muslims in India who will speak out against terrorism. I'd also guess that that's true for a good number of the 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide.


I think that an exclusive focus on Muslims in the Middle East as well as a lack of personal familiarity with Muslims leads people cto onclusions and to sweeping generalisations such as yours.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 09:49 am
OE, if you think the article only referenced Arab or Middle Eastern muslims, you either didn't read the article or your reading skills are even more selective than ebrown's. I accept that it is your opinion that neither the writer nor I have a clue. I have, however, provided some evidence for my opinion. You have provided none for yours.

And you still haven't answered my questions to you.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 09:56 am
Interesting article, FF, as is its conclusion.

Quote:
All of the above suggests Bush may be naïve in arguing that the West's only fight is with a "perversion" of Islam, a latter-day Fascist ideology. Rather, it is with a deep-rooted movement of Islamization for which the West bears significant responsibility.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 10:03 am
ehBeth wrote:
Interesting article, FF, as is its conclusion.

Quote:
All of the above suggests Bush may be naïve in arguing that the West's only fight is with a "perversion" of Islam, a latter-day Fascist ideology. Rather, it is with a deep-rooted movement of Islamization for which the West bears significant responsibility.


Well no good liberal could pass up a parting shot at President Bush andl by implication, the United States could he? Smile
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2008 10:06 am
It's your reference of choice <shrug>





(I've not often thought of the International Herald Tribune as being particular liberal in its orientation - but, once again, your choice)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/16/2024 at 09:58:41