Islam? A better religion for minorites

(like this one TheReligionofPeace.com - Islam: Making a True Difference in the World ).

Yes, Christianity had it's bad moments. HAD being the operative word. And they've evolved and grown up. Islam hasn't!! That's the point! And it really would behoove you to join christians and jews and non-believers alike who see the threat that Islam poses to YOU and me and others, TODAY!!!

I know this because the muslims who live in the modern world with the same opportunites as the rest of the western world are not violent radicals, they are the same as us.

FF - you really are blind if you state the crusades couldn't have been "defensive" against Muslim invasion because of hundreds of years before christian nations fought back. In your modern thinking, you forget that everything moved much slower back then. The inroads of islam in to the west weren't all at once - it was a bit here, a bit there. And the christian world couldn't unite enough to get in the fight until they saw the peril. Actually, like what's going on today......
Yes, some few hundreds of years after the muslim conquests, christianity finally united and fought back with the crusades. To TAKE BACK what were once christian lands. And it took ALL the crusades to finally do it. It was also on many fronts (as it is today, yet again)- Spain, Italy, and then reclaiming the "holy land". We took back spain and italy, and, after many crusades, the "holy land" and vicinity, but never got the turkish region back.

You realize Ghandi was born up within religious violence, right? He spent 30+ years of his life trying to stop hindu violence because of course ghandi himself was a hindu, so i'm not sure where you were going with that example but it shows that it isn't just Islam that is violent it's all people in impovershed areas.

That's silly, stalin, Mao, Fidel etc... were all communists their violence is atributed more to their political agendas than their personal beliefs although stalin killed many more people than hitler stalin did not commit genocide thus the reason why hitler is more infamous than stalin. Stalin did not kill people because of his atheism he killed them because they opposed his corrupt polocies and criticized his actions the same goes for Mao and Fidel. You cannot attribute his violence to his non-belief in god any more than you can attribute world violence to non-belief in the easter bunny.

That's really somewhat of a generalization.

ah, yes finally we are getting somewhere... I somewhat agree with this statement. Why do you think that the Muslim world hasn't grown up? Do you really think christians have some moral superiority to the muslims? Do you think thats the case? The muslim world hasn't "grown up" as you call it, because they are impovershed and uneducated, that is the reason they are violent not because of their religion. I know this because the muslims who live in the modern world with the same opportunites as the rest of the western world are not violent radicals, they are the same as us.

...and calling all muslims violent, isn't?

A bit of a hypocrite are we?

They haven't joined us in the modern era because their religion (via sharia law) keeps them down. THAT is what "impoverishes" them. They surpress individual freedom and subscribe to a 7th century law that doesn't allow them to excel. It is their religion that keeps them impoverishsed and uneducated.

The "impoverished" issue concerning terrorism has been thoroughly debunked. Most of the terror is masterminded by college educated, rich arabs. - using their religion.

And all the terrorists of 9/11 were educated.

A large chunk of those muslims in the west tacitly support what is going on around the world - and those that don't agree - are too afraid to speak up. Plus, they are a small minority. As they grow in numbers, they begin their jihad -- that has always been their way. Witness England and France with roughly 10% populations. And it WILL get worse as their numbers grow.

that certainly hasn't stoped the catholic league, the catholic church of the vatican has abandoned centurey old traditions so that they can thrive i a modern world there is nothing that would stop the muslims from doing the same.

JJJ wrote:

:
The "impoverished" issue concerning terrorism has been thoroughly debunked. Most of the terror is masterminded by college educated, rich arabs. - using their religion.

source?

and again that's why i said it's possible for the first crusade to be a retaliation, (notice i said Retaliation and not defesive) but there is still 8 more crusades and the europeans conquered more than what was originally theirs so that argument is moot.

There are many muslims (the majority) who really are good people. But they also are not practicing their religion fully. the muslims doing terror (because mohammed himself did it and stated that is the way) would kill them for not being muslim enough. Not all muslims are terrorists, but nearly all terroists are Muslim. there's a reason for that.....it's commanded of them in their holy book, and as per the precedant and commands of their prophet.

To point that out is not being a hypocrit.

One could say that the decent christians aren't really practicing their religion fully either.

The question you should be asking youself is: Would the middle-east still be violent if it were dominated by a different religion?

I believe the answer is yes, the middle-east would still be violent regardless of the predominent religion there, they will always find an excuse to kill for their political causes. So to me it's not a matter of religion, because you will always be able to find an excuse to kill if that is what you intend to do.

One could say that about decent Christians, but in the context of violence against those that aren't Christian, one would be wrong. There is nothing in Christian theology that tells them to "fight the unbeliever wherever you find them". There is nothing in their scripture that tells them jews are "descendants of apes and pigs". There are NO comparable passages of WAR in the new testament such as is found in the koran. While the Christian prophet they follow says to "pray for those that persecute you", as He himself did as an example when he allowed himself to be crucified, the prophet muslims follow had people killed (one was on older woman/poet, killed while she was holding her child) merely for diagreeing with him and "mocking" him - which is one of the reasons they find no problem with murdering the likes of Theo VanGogh, today - their own prophet did the same things!!! And they believe him to be the most perfect of men and are following his example. Those that follow Jesus' example hate the sin, but love the sinner.
Now, I know there are "peaceful" passages in the koran - but those are earlier passages that have been abrogated by the later passages - that is muslims own interpretation of their scriptures! not mine. Since the warlike passages come after the peacerful ones, it is the warlike ones that are to be followed. Islam is a religion of perpetual warfare against the unbeliever. Christianity talks of spiritual warfare, but has no comparable passages of "killing the unbeliever", as sanctioned by their prophet, that islam has. Mohammed himself tells them to kill anyone that leaves their religion - I don't see any comparable passages like that in any other religion. You only find that kind of commandment in cults..... You obviously don't know much about early and modern Christianity (beyond leftist re-writing of history and only showing things in a bad light) to make your above assertion of moral equivalency.

If the middle-east weren't dominated by the shackling of the human spirit, in submission to their arabic moon-god via sharia law and the example of their prophet, they would have already grown beyond the tribalistic childishness that so dominates their culture. They wouldn't be as backwards and piss-poor - thereby negating the "poverty causes terrorism" argument.

Even India, with it's ancient caste system and hinduism, has seen huge improvements and is one of the fastest growing economies and cultures, bringing modernity to it's peoples.

Hell, even China, an atheistic regime, is doing more for it's people than the muslim world does for its people!!

Now, the second part of your argument I agree with, in part. Expanding it out to just "humans" in general, yes, people will always find an excuse and reason to justify murdering. Basically my initial "fire" analogy - it can be used for good, or evil, and you're basically stating above that they will use religion in pursuit of their evil purposes. Ok - so then you are negating your own argument that it is religions, in and of themselves, that are violent! ~ In short, you are agreeing that violence is to be found in the heart of ALL men/peoples, and that they will use any excuse to do violence.

As stated umpteen times in getting here -- Islam is the only religion TODAY used for those purposes of violence.

Ask yourself THIS question:: Would you rather continue to live your life here in the free west, created/derived from judeao-christian and secular values/culture, or would you rather live in the middle-east, in an Islamic nation under sharia law??

I think the answer is obvious to even a "moral relativist" like yourself.

you argue all religions are violent/terrible, on the other hand, you say it doesn't matter which religion is predominant in the middle-east, the violence is just "them" ~ the way they are.

Do you even see the hoops, leaps and somersaults of logic you have to use to justify your position?

I'm not asking you to change much - you can hang on to your fallacious (in my opinion) ideology.

All that i'm just asking is for you to join the west against the very real threat of radical Islam.

"and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman." (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)

I think i made my point.

Quote:

If the middle-east weren't dominated by the shackling of the human spirit, in submission to their arabic moon-god via sharia law and the example of their prophet, they would have already grown beyond the tribalistic childishness that so dominates their culture. They wouldn't be as backwards and piss-poor - thereby negating the "poverty causes terrorism" argument.

There are a lot of archaic and barbaric passages and commands in the bible as well, but with the progress on western civilization that is no matter now. The progress in the middle-east is slow. An advanced religious society will not follow the barbaric commands of their religion.

Quote:

Even India, with it's ancient caste system and hinduism, has seen huge improvements and is one of the fastest growing economies and cultures, bringing modernity to it's peoples.

Terrorism lives in India as well...

Quote:

Hell, even China, an atheistic regime, is doing more for it's people than the muslim world does for its people!!

economically china is better of than the middle east.

Quote:

Now, the second part of your argument I agree with, in part. Expanding it out to just "humans" in general, yes, people will always find an excuse and reason to justify murdering. Basically my initial "fire" analogy - it can be used for good, or evil, and you're basically stating above that they will use religion in pursuit of their evil purposes. Ok - so then you are negating your own argument that it is religions, in and of themselves, that are violent! ~ In short, you are agreeing that violence is to be found in the heart of ALL men/peoples, and that they will use any excuse to do violence.

let me clarifiy 'religious ideology' is violent, but in an advanced society this violent nature does not control people as it does in deprived nations.

Quote:

As stated umpteen times in getting here -- Islam is the only religion TODAY used for those purposes of violence.

BULL ****. Abortion clinic bombings? Hindus, sihks(sp?) and christians are killing as well...

Quote:

Ask yourself THIS question:: Would you rather continue to live your life here in the free west, created/derived from judeao-christian and secular values/culture, or would you rather live in the middle-east, in an Islamic nation under sharia law??

The advanced civilization of the west is not derived from christanity, and in many cases the christian religion has been holding back cultural and scientific progress. Evolution is but one example. In fact less religious nations tend to be the most progressive and have a higher level of education.

In fact less religious nations tend to be the most progressive and have a higher level of education.

Quote:

I am not a moral relativist. I just don't think morality is based on some superstitions held by common people.

JoJoJams wrote:

If you choose living here, isn't that because you are making a "moral judgement" about which is the better place to live?? Aren't you then judging the west as more morally superior than middle-eastern nations??

Quote:

I would choose the western nations because of their advanced culture and technology, it has nothing to do with christanity, in fact i despise theocracy.

thats because all religious can be used as justification for violence.

Quote:

Do you even see the hoops, leaps and somersaults of logic you have to use to justify your position?

there s none, poverty is the 'motive' and religion is the 'weapon'. take away the motive and there will be no crime.

Quote:

I'm not asking you to change much - you can hang on to your fallacious (in my opinion) ideology.

and yours is flawed in my opinion.

Quote:

All that i'm just asking is for you to join the west against the very real threat of radical Islam.

and what do you mean by this?

First off, you're quoting OT(Torah) - The New Testament is the Christian addition. And actually, no, you didn't make your point. If you read the chapter it's in, you'll understand that wasn't a blanket statement all peoples were subject to (unlike the koranic quotes). It was actually internal - the jewish people of the time were professing their utmost loyalty as a people, and nation, to their God. Any purging was obviously, by this statement and chapter, internal. Whether you agree with them doing that or not is moot. But this verse in this chapter was an "internal" verse. Further, it was THEIR choice (for those in power) and THEIR statement - not God's commandment. And anyone of judaic or christian roots also look at this chapter and understand it was a chronical of what happened - a history. Not a commandment for all times, and obviously an internal oath of a people, all pledging loyalty to their God - with those, internally of that people/nation, not pledging their utmost to their God, being killed. Pretty common for it's time and age. You haven't proven anything. As I've stated before - while those of the west look at those passages and understand it to be a history, a product of it's times - something to be learned from - NOT an eternal commandment, there are millions in the Muslim faith who see their verses as eternal edict to be emulated, since their prophet did it. What did the Christian prophet do that was as equally terrible??

Ok - the christians have a 600 year headstart on the muslims - and it's roughly 600 years since the christian reformation - so the muslims ARE due for a reformation....Because the problem is that they AREN'T as advanced and haven't evolved to that state yet!! And there are millions caught up in the evil violence in their religion.

They are NOT an advanced religious society!!

So with your own logic, I would hope you could see that danger and work towards shedding light on the problem instead of obfuscation of the issues. When someone agrees with your assessment of violence in religion, and how the west has grown up past it's violent days, you should also look honestly at their contention that another religion HASN'T evolved and grown up just yet! Especially when heads are being cut off. I don't see many Christians or Jews (or anyone else for that matter) doing that!

Yepper - mostly perpetrated by Muslims. The Indians have been fighting the muslim invasion for hundreds and hundreds of years. Pakistan was created out of India to give a majority muslim (after being taken over) area it's own country. That's how Islam works....piece by piece. Hinduism has no teachings like those in Islam. Any violence in India, by hindus, that you label terrorism, is mostly humans feeling they are protecting themselves and their loved ones. And often times they are - and it's against muslim hatred/violence.

Oh, hell! lol ~ You'd still most definitely rather live in communist China over any theocraticically controlled (no matter the "government") islamic nation now would you?? In my book, the "lesser of the two evils" there would be communist China. Any theocracy is as abhorant to me as it is to you. That's why I'm so against Islam, bro.....since they're the only ones pushing for theocracies....THough I prefer the term "Thugocracy" - 'cept that also applies to a communist nation. Still, China over any muslim nation any day! China has a growing middle-class, due to the huge trade (imbalance) with the U.S. and while their government gets the bulk, there's a fairly good trickle down to the populous. Not so in islamic states, due to the nepotism and tribalism - and the oil rich rulers hoard it all to themselves, and nothing trickles down....... But they do like to shift the blame to the west! Rile up the masses - riot over cartoons.....kill innocent people. Ironically and hilariously rioting and killing over someone daring to state that the "religion of peace" was a violent religion....... I didn't see many christians rioting and killing when one of the most reverant icons for them, a crucifix, was placed upside-down in a jar of urine.....or the Catholics marching and rioting over the "art" of an image of Mary covered in cow dung??? Yes, people spoke up about it! And they were told "it's art" - "you don't have to look!" blah blah -- but all of them that so easily mocked Christianity, were ALL too afraid to reprint the "art" of the political cartoons depicting mohammed. Tell me why?
And then you'll see a little more, maybe. Some religions haven't grown up, by your own estimations and standards.....So turn your persuasive energies against that ideology. Islam. They're the only ones currently looking to impose a theocracy, something you and I both abhor.

For the second part of your sentence, how about stating your position with logical "opposites". Something like "Advanced societies vs. less-advanced societies..... After all, the reason they are "deprived" is because they are less advanced. Root cause and all..... So, to help them "advance", you might have to point out some of the ridiculous cultural aspects of themselves that is keeping them from advancing.

Come on!! When is the last time you heard of an abortion clinic bombing!!! There were a few isolated instances, and all resoundly deplored by the over-whelming majority of christianity! There were also some shootings of doctors and workers - equally deplored and condemned by Christianity en masse. En masse!! When have you seen anythying like that about 9/11 or any other islamic atrocity, bus-bombing - or beheading.

As for Hindus and Sikhs, I truly don't see them as the instigators - I really do see them as, even if wrong sometimes, truly trying to protect themselves from the muslim belligerence. They're living next to them. You're not.

And typical of obfuscation, taqiyya and the foolishness of leftist thinking, you don't actually answer my question at all and instead attempt to deflect into nit-picking on an irrelevant to the question piece.

And what the west has developed from IS a judeao-christian and SECULAR heritage. It would be the height of foolishness for someone to suggest otherwise.

One only needs to look at all history to see the wests cultural underpinnings. If the west developed from an overwhelmingly majority culture of Christianity, which it, well -- DID....why do you have such a problem accepting that historical reality?

Many of them believed so much, they even started institutions of higher learning - colleges - I'm sure you've heard their names, since most are the "elite" colleges of the world.....for the advancement of the human species. I've always admired Mendel, one of those "religious" nuts, I guess..... Still, the majority of old and elite colleges, in old europe as well as here in the states, were started by Christian men and institutions.

It isn't christianity/religion that is "hostile" to science.....it's science that is hostile to "relgion" -

What's funny/sad is that it appears to me that religion is an evolutionarily derived meme that serves a needed purpose for survival, and for some reason our scientists seem incapable of understanding that and exploring it deeper.... So, they are adamantly opposed to discussing the possibilities in those other dimensions they themselves claim to exist.....

Why is arguing against evolution so terrible as to mean that somehow that's "retarding" the growth of evolutionary doctrine?

Questioning everything is one of the bedrocks of Science. If your christian boogey man were holding back evolutionary ideology, why is it (evolutinary doctrine) the majority perspective in science?? And I see nothing wrong with postulating I.D. And I can make a case for intelligent design completely outside of any "religious" connotations.

"most progressive" is a matter of interpretation and what's important for the perpetuation of the species....or nation. Evolutionarily speaking, are they bearing enough children to perpetuate themselves and their enlightened views?? The truth is, statistically, they are not.... And their enlightened views will die with them....

As for better education, that used to be the U.S. - but we most certainly have dumbed down our kids. I blame that on the liberal (ahem...progressive) programs where we teach our kids how to "feel good" about themselves, but not critically think, and tehy don't teach the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic. That's not christianity keeping our kids stupid - that's liberal/progressive teachers union b.s. at it's finest...to the detriment of our children, our nation - and our future.

If I believe beheadings, endemic to a certain religion TODAY, are barbaric and point that out, it would be neat if someone didn't say, "yeah, but 600 years ago yours did the same!". That's a part of "moral relativism",

Instead of denouncing the actions of barbarism today, you denounce any acts of barbarism amongst your own people that happened centurys ago.

I wasn't asking you to choose chirstianity - I was asking you what do you prefer - the "west" or the middle east. Why do you keep having to throw religion in to any question, and what are you so afraid of? In fact, everything you so like about your freedoms, you've acquired through a judeao-christian AND secular culture - that is basic and obvious history. You could not have your freedoms in an Islamic culture - so stop denigrating the culture that has allowed you to be you.

Oh, bushwa - that's a typical "liberal/progressive" fallacious dogma that poverty is what causes crime and worse. Nazi Germany was one of the most educated and growing nations of it's time,

especially if one believes in "anything goes" and that we're not answerable to anyone higher than ourselves.....which is why I believe "religion", or a "higher power" is a necessary, evolutionarily derived meme that is needed for our maturation as a species.

But of course. Yet, at least I'm willing to meet somewhere in the middle.....

Merely that you look at the "lesser of two evils" and stand up against radical Islam, that wishes to impose a theocracy on you. Religion, in and of itself, and christianity, are not a threat to you. They merely question you - and that's not a bad thing. Islam will cut off your head if you don't agree with it/them.

If a group of men came up to you, bound you, told you had to convert to their religion or die......what would you do? Would you choose your enlightenment and death?? Or would you bow down to them and acquiesce??.....

Modern day Christianity will never force that choice on you -- modern day Islam will.....

Islam is an inhuman religion. It promotes the oppression and mistreatment of women, and outright murder in the name of Allah. It's backward-looking, and violent. It's the product of a barbaric culture, and reinforces barbarism within that culture in the modern era. Islam is a cauldron of hated, warfare, and torture, anchored to remembrances of and a longing for 7th Century Arabia. It can't be tolerated in the West, or Greater West, for that matter. Christian patriots and Jews worldwide, should fight its spread to the bitter end. The worst thing any Western warrior can do is cave in to PC and accept Islam as a so-called "peace-loving" religion and society. It's not. Islam is an ancestral enemy of the Christian West, and Judeo-Christian thought and culture. It must be fought with tenacity and self-sacrifice.:AR15firing::AR15firing::AR15firing:

...and calling all muslims violent, isn't?

A bit of a hypocrite are we?