Islam? A better religion for minorites

Could you quote me as saying all Muslims are violent?

Those seem to be the very same things you've promoted pino...

Can that be spun in any way to mean 'all Muslims are violent?'

Don't give me that "i didn't say all" bull****. I caught you in your own silly web of lies.

I was expecting you to say that, but i also know that the "purging"
was commanded by god

and people still use this purging as an excuse such as
the spanish inquisition. {{emphasis added}} Whether justified in your eyes or not.

Even the fact that god had to change his mind means that he could
not be a perfect being if he exists at all.

Millions!? I think you better recount, there are only about 10 to
20 thousand terrorists alive today in the region. There is a great number who oppose the actions
of the terrorists.

JoJoJams wrote:

They are NOT an advanced religious society!!

they aren't an advanced society, religion had little to do with it.

Hindus are just as violent and they happen to be in the same general area as the muslims, so this isn't just a problem exclusive to Islam but all religion in that
region of the world.

INDIA Praying and fasting to counter
anti-Christian violence - Asia News
US rights report slams
India for anti-Christian violence

JoJoJams wrote:

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.

does that include the violence i listed above?

You seem to ascociate the success or advancement of a nation by the
dominent religion, even though you cannot show that any progress is actually due to the
religion. Corralation does not mean causation!

You seem to forget christanity has had some absurd cultural aspects as well, but that hasn't
stop the advancement of the west.

JoJoJams wrote:

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.

It does happen, and it does happen today...maybe to a lesser extent because of our more
modernized society and stronger enforcement.

JoJoJams wrote:

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.

based on?

JoJoJams wrote:

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.

I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about but answering questions with questions may seem
silly but is to give you another point of view.

JoJoJams wrote:

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.

why? What evidence have you?

JoJoJams wrote:

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?

Just because something grew with a certain characteristic are we to praise that before said
characteristic for the growth? Can you show me that it was in-fact christanity that is
responsible for societal progress?

Can you show me that christanity is the cause? Do you think those men
wouldn't have started those colleges if they weren't christian? What of homer and socretes, do
you think they wouldn've started a place of learning because of their religion?

JoJoJams wrote:

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

how so?

actually there are studies of religion and reigious thought...have you ever heard of the "god
machine"?

The problem is Evolution isn't criticized by scientists, it is criticized by people who have no
expertise in the subject area, religious zealots, while far more absurd theories go completely
unchallenged by those same people. Those people aren't criticizing evolution on evidential basis
but because for many evolution is a challenge to their faith.

They are free to question it, the problem occurs when religious zealots try to remove accepted
scientific theory from places of education.

JoJoJams wrote:

"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....

not really, there once was a political party in the US called the progressive party, all it takes is for one to compare the platform of that party to more modern issues. Albeit there is some level of subjectivity but not a lot.

JoJoJams wrote:

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.

Actually are kids are more intelligent than they have been in the past, it has been the rest of the world that has caught up, but admitdly i don't agree with such programs either like the "no child left behind" policy which has proven to be a disaster.

JoJoJams wrote:

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".

Do you know what moral relativism means?

JoJoJams wrote:

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

Just because i denounce the actions of the past doesn't mean i'm justifying the actions of today....

JoJoJams wrote:

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.

You ask me why i put religion in with culture yet in the very next sentance you do the same....

JoJoJams wrote:

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.

Yet it was in economic hardship...

JoJoJams wrote:

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.

I've heard this many times before, and i know it is ridiculous. You and i both know belief in divine retribution isn't the only thing that stops people from commiting horrendous acts. If that was true then crime would be more prevelant among atheists yet statistics show otherwise.

Where is the middle exactly?

JoJoJams wrote:

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.

Don't confuse the Middle-East with Islam...The same mentality is present among other reliions in the same region.

JoJoJams wrote:

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??.....

I could never really believe as they do but i would lie to save my life as any thinking person would.

JoJoJams wrote:

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

Modern anything won't impose that choice on anyone.

Don't give me that "i didn't say all" bullshit. I caught you in your own silly web of lies.

Here's a hint for future reference: When you're wrong, admit it. I've done it several times. You accused me of saying all Muslims are violent, and I never said that.

and by the way, "all" is implied when you fail to state "some"

"Some the Muslim world is violent?"

Is that your idea of an intelligent statement? I'd rather make a generalization.

'The Muslim world has been violent since the conception of Islam,' is what I said, I was not talking about specific Muslim people, I was saying that the general state of the Muslim world since Islam started has been one of perpetual violence.

So you are admiting that you did make a generalization? Or that you are incapable of typing "Some of the muslim world is violent"...

The Muslim world is a single entity,

Why don't you tell that to the muslim world? I don't think they got the Memo!

I'm pretty sure they didn't need to. The Muslim world is anywhere within the borders of heavy Muslim influence, it doesn't have to be unified culturally or in terms of sects, as long as it is mainly Muslim in religious terms.

Like the Western world is America, Europe, Australia, even though they aren't exactly the same, they share the same core Western values/culture.

Sorry it took so long to reply - been on a real nice valentine's week - :-) That's something

that would be forbidden under Islamic rule, of course - which is another reason I'm thankful for

western culture....



You were so "expecting" my answer that you didn't even read it. How can you "know" the purging
was commanded by God, when reading the entire chapter you can see that it was the leader of the
Jews (Asa) at that time who declared this in his "oath of fealty" to his God? (as I stated) How
can YOU "know" God said it, when there isn't a Jew or Christian or SECULAR scholar who could
read that chapter and come to your same conclusion? It's so obvious a statement/declaration of
Asa (the jewish ruler at that time), and not an "eternal commandment" from God, that I'm
actually embarrassed for you.....
He (Asa) made the decree you state "God said". As I stated, it was common for it's time, a
ruler declaring the "state religion" and anyone disagreeing would be killed. That's human
history in any culture 101. In the Judaeo-Christian theology, it wasn't a commandment from God,
either. It was a "chronical" (ummm hence the title), or history - recording an event. I
really am actually embarrassed for you. But that's what you get for "assuming" you "knew" my
answer, and didn't read what I had actually said.



STILL use?? then, "such as the Spanish Inquisition"?? Excuse me while I laugh so hard I think I
might piss myself!!! ROTFL!! We might need to notify the authorities that there are those
atrocities and human rights violations going on in Europe by the Spaniards!! I haven't seen a
thing about it in the international news scene!! It HAS to be a conspiracy!!
Gosh! And to think my history teacher in grade school told me those ended 5 centuries ago!! How
could I be so stupid and blind!!



Since it wasn't God who stated what you attributed to him in 2 Chronicals, He never "changed his
mind". For that point you'd do better to quote other scripture such as the taking of Ai in the
book of Joshua. He told them to utterly wipe out the inhabitants - men, woman and children -
and to not take anything at all for booty in that battle. There were other battles, too, where
He told them to utterly wipe them out (the people they were battling). As stated umpteen times
- it was the "way of the world". But, in order to answer your oft asked question of "how could
God change his mind?!" regarding OT and NT stuff, HOW, exactly, did he change his mind?? How
did a "god of war" get to a "god of love"??? Which is a very reasonable and honest question!!

To start, a rough analogy would be that a parent doesn't treat his 45 year old "child" like he
treated him when he was 5. The parenting obviously changes to suit the childs maturation.
The human race, in it's early years, was tribal/clannish/warring - superstitious. And it was
survival of the fittest - conquer/kill - or be conquered/killed. We'd only recently evolved
from our animalistic beginings, after all. "Turn the other cheek" at that time would not have
made it past the first generation. A "god" would be a fool to tell some of his children to
"turn the other cheek" , when others of his children would kill them. Yes, he could "stop"
that stuff - but he left it up to mankind to decide/do in freewill, though he would (in the
myths) intercede sometimes. He didn't want automatons (would you if you created something?) he
wanted thinking, rational beings. He helped out some (so the myths of old say) but seemed to
pull away as mankind matured....(less paranormal stuff, and myths, as history progresses into
the enlightened age). Then, according to some legends, there came a more enlightened time when the
doctrine of "turn the other cheek" could be intellectually understood within humanity, and it
was introduced to humanity through the personae of Jesus Christ. "love your neighbor as
yourself" - "do good to those that persecute you" - "judge not, lest ye be judged" or, the
better rendering, imho, of that statement in another verse, "As you judge, so shall you be
judged". Do you need me to explain the nuance of those two apparently contradictory
statements/"scriptures" for you?

He (god) didn't change his mind......it was our[/i] minds (humanities) that
changed......and grew up. The "parenting style" necessarily "changed", but the two "golden
rules" remain the same throughout - "love God with all of your heart and mind and soul", and to
"love your neighbor as yourself".



Obfuscation -- taqiyya...... the "region"!! lol = I am talking about is this tiny little planet called
earth, located in the Sol solar system (Side test:: quick! which planet is it in that system,
and how many planets ARE there in that system?), wayyy out on the far edge of the left arm of
the milky way galaxy. Which region are you talking about?? In my region, the quotes of
terrorist support within islam are anywhere from 5 - 10% of the islamic populous, whether
actively or monetarily/support involved. Lessee.....allegedly 1.2 billion people make up the
Muslim community.....5% of that......naaa... forget that - let's go with the 1% I mentioned
earlier..... 1,200,000,000 divided by .01...... My calcs broke -- what's that come to??
Yep, there are "many" opposed to it....unfortunately, they don't do anything about the millions
of people involved in jihad, even though they (moderates?)are in the overwhelming majority of
thought. Even if it were only tens of thousands (wish it were....) just a few of them getting
their hands on nukes, or other WMDs, is enough to do extreme damage to any western power.



Oh, bushwa again! Religion has been a defining influence in every culture and society since the
beginning of humanity (it's an evolutionarily derived meme, after all....) and has been
influential in every culture/society. That's a "humanities 101" given. After all, you
yourself point out negative influences throughout history, societies and western culture, that
prove the "impact" of religion. Ergo and therefore Religions obviously affect culture society,
by your own statements. Why do you disagree with yourself here? Especially when Islamic
law/sharia most adamantly (at the cost of your head) demands that there is NO separation of
church and state. It is the religion of islam that allows for the
governments/theocracies/thugocracies that they embrace in the middle-east to control them. This
runs the entire culture - a culture obviously extremely foreign to your mode of thought. And
it IS that religion that is keeping Islamic nations in the poverty that they live. It most
certainly has EVERYTHING to do with their religion, which is intertwined politically, and
running their lives. For someone who so denigrates religious control of a populous, it's
really astounding your defense of Islam!! Especially from a self-alleged "atheist"......***my
spider senses tell me....*** You're either a misguided muslim or ignorant of life and the human race/species.



No, Hindus AREN'T just as violent - that's only your personal assertion. Hindus have no problem
with any other religion. Just Islam. Which coincidentally happens to be the only correlating
factor between the majority of conflicts in the world (religious or other). Islam. (Which is a
religious AND political system [not to mention cultural)



2nd one came up not available. The first one brought up a front page, but I didn't find the
article you refered to - as what caught my eye was the article about the plight of Christians in
Gaza. Which is much more advanced than any isoloated instances in india. Regardless - the
majority of "terrorism" is Hindu/Muslim - and I don't blame the Hindus at all. I just
find it funny how on one hand you argue that religion has no bearing in culture, but then go on
to argue how a religion has a bearing in culure. Rotfl! At least in the latter, I agree with
you.



Most definitley. That doesn't negate the fact that most - as I stated are muslim vs.
hindu. Equating a few instances with thousands is ludicrous.



I can more easily show (and have, if you read all my posts -not just those in response to yours
- you just refuse to see) that religion has historically affected culture more than you can show
that it hasn't....even while you're so adamant about expressing all the negative affects it has
had on culture. How can it negatively affect people/cultures/life, if you refuse to allow it to
have any type of impact within culture?? You truly don't see the loops and leaps of faith in
logic (erroneous) that you perform, do you? Further, I mentioned/rated atheistic China over any
middle-eastern nation under islamic law....Change your statement from "dominant religion" to
"dominant ideology" and I'll agree, yes, the advancement (or lack thereof) of a nation is
directly related to it's dominant ideology. That's pretty much a human psychological
given.....
Correltation doesn't always lead to "causation" - but a lot of times....it DOES.
And by the way - can I use that same argument in the AGW (anthropomorphic global warming)
issue?? lol - or would that be too nuanced for you?



Well, duUuUhhHh! You haven't been stopped in the west!! That's what I've been saying! But that
isn't so in Islam today!! No matter your declarations of what other religions similarly did half
a millenia ago!! Help THEM (the Islamists) to grow up in to your enlightened ways, bro.
And, so what of the "advancement" and what you are "allowed", in Islamic nations under sharia
law, per the koran and Big Mo, as decreed and dictated by governments that would kill you for
not agreeing with them??
Look, facts are you could NOT be YOU in an islamic nation - you are only "you" through a
judeao-christian and SECULAR society that allows you to be you....even if you are so adamantly
opposed against your own peoples and cultural heritage.

Islam Watch - "Islam will lose, so will the west" by Mumin Salihdoesn't happen now - the incidencies have been far and few, and the condemnation
overwhelming.



Based on the geographical and historical facts that they're living next to them, been fighting
them for centuries, and you're not/haven't.....



Is that what it is?? How about you, yourself, thinking from a different point of view, and
answering any original questions, then going on to pose your own question, to help me think from
another perspective? What are you afraid of? Debate is a two-way street. Why are you so
bigotted and close-minded?? You (and everyone reading this exchange) know what I am talking
about on this point.



The evidence of all human history, humanity and the evolution to the "west" as we know it.
The majority of the people of the "west" (no matter any enlightened elites) were from a
culture/heritage of judeo-christian values. This is an obvious fact no different than stating
the "religion" aspects of the Roman or Greek or Assyrian Empires. You stress how the church
kept people "down" in the dark ages of europe - the religion obviously affecting the culture -
but then disbelieve when others suggest some good - including your own enlightenment and the
establishments of colleges, could have come from those same superstitious relgions. In short,
in your mind, religions can only affect cultures in the negative - and positive manifestations
within a culture cannot possibly be caused/attributed/aligned in any way, to religion.

My evidence is logic. reason, and history. What's you're evidence to the contrary?? Especially
when you so adamantly state how religion has had negative cultural manifestations, then try to
state that religion had no bearing on the development of culture of "the west".



No one is asking you to praise it - just quit over-looking any postive contiributions of
religion to the west (like founding all the greatest, most elite colleges of western
civilization) in your adamantly atheistic viewpoint - as well as over-looking when people point
out current pandemics of a religion doing what you are allegedly so against. People
agreeing with you 100% in that religion can breed violence, yet you obsuscate and deflect away
from any real and obvious threats from a religion in the now that they bring up, and instead
point to issues of another religion from centurys ago. It's kind of mind-boggling to me. But
then again, I'm a simple guy. Maybe I miss the "nuance".
If all the elite colleges and institutions of learning that helped usher in the enlightenment were created by christian men and institutions, that there is enough to "show" how christianity contributed to the development of the west. But somehow I'll bet you'll refuse to acknowledge that....



Who ever said it was the cause? I just stated it was the cultural underpinnings that allowed
your enlightened beliefs to evolve. The men and institutions may very well have started those
colleges even had they not been Christians. That doesn't negate the fact that they were
Christians,...and they did. Ergo and therefore negating your declaration that there is no
culturally underpinnings of Christianity in western society.
My, how you twist and squirm!! The rest is a strawman argument - since neither Socrates or
Homer founded any institutions of learning. Homer was a poet (iliad etc) and Socrates was a
teacher/philosopher - but he didn't found anything. They also had their "religious"
perspectives which most certainly affected their thinking.
I just think it's funny how you try to state that religions are violent and how they adversely
affect peoples and cultures, but then refuse to contemplate that religions can have had any
positive influences to a culture - like the establishment of elite colleges and institutions.



Ummmm....have you listened to yourself?



There are some studies that I have read - why do you think I believe religion is an
evolutionarily derived meme?? I believe I've clarified myself enough there. That doesn't
negate the fact that the majority of men of science look down on religion, and it is only a very
small fraction that seriously examine it with an unbiased eye.



I'll agree with you to an extant in that, to some, due to their "literal" reading of scriptures,
it (evolutionary science) is, for them, an "attack" on their faith, but for others, there is an
aforemation and agreement. "Let there be light!" (big bang) ~ But to state evolution isn't criticised by scientists isn't exactly true. It's been criticised quite a bit, and by many a scientist, which is how evolutionary theory itself has evolved since Darwin.
Even so, your statement doesn't show how "science" has been harmed by christians who choose to question it. Basically, it's just upsetting to you because those opposing it are obviously stupid (or ignorant, if you're feeling nice) and should just shut up. But, it could even be argued that it's precisely due to "unbelievers" arguing some of the apparently fallacious aspects of evolutionary theory, which other scientists also saw, those discrepancies between the theory and the fossil record, which helped to hone evolutionary theory in to it's current state. Christianity hasn't harmed science, as you state. And as your own testimonies have proven, science is most definitely hostile to religion.




Ummm...no one has tried to "remove" evolutionary theory from education. And no one wants to remove it. It's the zealots like you who refuse admittance of any other theory. eg: I.D.



Pssst...my point wasn't so much about the definition of "progressive", it was really more about the statistical fact that those very same countries labeled "most progressive" in your books, also are not having enough children to perpetuate themselves....and their "enlightened" ways will most assuredly die with them. There is a more primitive and voracious culture that, per it's doctrinal commmands espoused in it's holy book, and enforced by the state, would kill someone of your enlightenment.



No, I don't think "are" kids are more intelligent than they have been in the past. ((**sorry! normally don't take pokes at typos (we all have them) but that was too perfect to let pass.)) :-) :-) [[you laughed! admit it! ;-) ]]

It depends on the bar we use for measurement. The rest of the world hasn't just "caught up" to us - they've surpassed us. When our children consistently score/test so low compared to the rest of thed world, how can that not affect our future! But our kids do feel good about themselves, I'm sure. We spend more on education then almost all other nations, yet our children consistently score way too low against the rest of the world. That's mostly due to "the system" - the way they are run. And how are the more academically astute nations run? By having strong test standards to teach up to.....Not excuses for why our kids aren't really that stupid! We need to quit teaching them how to feel good about themselves, and start teaching them reading, writing, and arithmetic. That takes measurements to verify the level of knowledge the average of the populous is at.....




From Wikepedia:
"In philosophy moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances. Moral relativists hold that no universal standard exists by which to access an ethical proposition's truth; moral subjectivism is thus the opposite of moral absolutism. Relativistic positions often see moral values as applicable only within certain cultural boundaries (cultural relativism) or in the context of individual preferences (moral subjectivism). An extreme relativist position might suggest that judging the moral or ethical judgments or acts of another person or group has no meaning, though most relativists propound a more limited version of the theory."

Seems apropo to me....



No one said you were justifying them. But you are obscuring them - obfuscation - deflecting from seeing the severity of the threat of radical Islam. Those who refuse to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.



No, as anyone can read, I asked you why you were putting religion in to any question....which you like to do to show negatives, and I may do to show some positives. I also added the secular contributions to culture/society. It would be neat if you could see the positive contributions to culture from religion and religious people...... For your asked for "proof" of religions influence in culture/society - just look at how it permeates our own discourse, son..... Likewise, it permeates in our western culture and society, and has impacted the growth of our society - despite your objections to the obvious.



Valid point. Therefore, the people were more easily riled and malleable by the intellectual elites and those in power. It was the educated elites and powerful that performed the holocaust, while the average "joe" was too afraid to speak up, if he himself didn't subscribe to those Jew hating beliefs. So, a small percentage of the populous in control, a quite larger percentage of people actively supporting them, and the majority/rest, too poor and afraid to speak up. Yepper. Sure sounds like events out of the current islamic world.....




Well, you can "believe" it's ridiculous - but you can't "know" it's ridiculous. like any religion/ideology. Even in ideologies of science, throughout humanities growth, science once "knew" something (flat earth, geocentric universe, etc.) - only to find out later in our growth that they only "believed". So, too, a thousand years from now, will our current science and what we "know" have changed.
The majority of religious Jews and christians don't look at the "devine retribution" as the reason for not commiting horrendous acts. It realy is more for the "love of God", and trying to do what is right in his eyes. To be the best man or woman we can be, for humanities sake.
I agree with you - worrying about a divine payback isn't the only thing keeping people from committing atrocities. It's just nice that you freely admit that religion is one of the things that does help people from committing atrocities - or even petty crimes. I would think that is a positive contribution to culture.




From my perspective, somewhere closer to my viewpoint rather than yours. From your perpective, I would suspect that same mode of thought.




No, for all your assertions, the same mentality is NOT prevalant among other religions in the region. Only in islam do we find doctrinaly commanded justification for beheadings, mutilations and stonings (today!!). And only in the muslim nations are those things practiced (today!). Since they are, by LAW, muslim nations, practicing islam or, at least, using Islam to justify all they do, one would have to be a fool to not see the correlation between islamic doctrine (and indoctrination), and the direction those nations take. Religion - affecting a culture - since it IS so intertwined into their lives, culture and nations.



Interesting. And you know what, my friend?? You will have to make that choice some day soon..... There are plenty of thinking, rational loving people who will never bow to those childish demands of tyrants. If you and everyone acquiesces to their demands - everything you and the west stands for will be lost. If you stand up to them - fight them - humanity can prevail. But instead you choose to hide behind your self-righteous foolishness.



Really?!? Tell that to the Fox news crew in the middle east kidnapped and forced to convert.... Modern day islam WILL force that choice on you, my brother.....


Yepper -- anyone reading all our postings can see that Fatal_Freedom is a mo follower. He has to be!! He can't be that ignorant of a young westerner??

Holy *** man! you type way too much, it hurts my eyes just to read that ****. You need to just get to whatever point you are trying to make. last time i responded to your post it took me like an Hour just to respond to everything you said.

Rotfl! Well, you didn't have to re-post it! ~ lol

It's a point-by-point refutation. Obviously. And I think I made my point(s) quite well.

I'll be the first to admit that I like to debate to a fault sometimes. Must be the Jewish blood in me.

Thanks for the fun debate. So far on this thread I've gotten to debate a rabid Islamist, an apparently very nice/decent Muslim, and now a secular atheist. It's been quite interesting! ~

I like to make my posts short and to the point, you'll get no sugar-coating from me. I don't mind people who like to deeply elaborate their points, but it becomes rather time consuming.

I like to debate as well, probably too much sometimes, but it isn't wasted time. I get to learn other view points. I also get to learn the weak points in my arguments and then i will adjust my argument accordingly. To me it is a matter of self-education. Most of what i know is not learned in a classroom, but rather self-education.

Basically all you said was that they only share a common religion, that in itself doesn't make them unified in any manner.


thats like saying "all men are unifed because they are all men."

WTF, you just said they weren't a single entity, make up your mind. The fact is that I never said anything about Muslim people, just about the geographical Muslim world.