PDA

View Full Version : The Islam Thread



dneal
July 3rd, 2016, 05:05 PM
The 2nd Amendment thread is getting a little long in the tooth, and bogged down with the issue of Islam.

I thought Scrawler's post was particularly insightful (or inciteful, if you like ;) ), and the topic could do with its own thread.



It is rather curious how this thread has deteriorated into the usual ignorance on both sides of the Islam issue. The best way to understand Islam is to go and live in an Islamic society, rather than listen to the antagonists and appeasers. Go see what kind of societies Islam creates. The truth of something is in what it does, not in what it says about itself. I have lived in a couple and my wife is from an Islamic country. It is quite wrong to say, as was stated above, that there are two types of Muslim. There are actually 73 different sects, derived broadly from two major divisions. All of the trouble, murders and mayhem that you are seeing is from one sect and its subdivisions only. Confusion about what Islam is, comes largely from the apparent dichotomy between the manifest violence of one group of sects and the peaceful, friendly ways of members of other sects. Indeed the more violent sects claim the others are "apostate" and victimize them too. Thus leading to the confusion caused when it appears that Muslims kill other Muslims, despite the teachings. I am going shortly to have coffee with a lady who identifies as a Muslim. She is a kind, thoughtful and generous person. If you were to judge Islam by her and her ethnic group, you might form a good opinion of Muslims in general. If on the other hand you have only been exposed to one of the strict observance sects, you would likely form a different opinion. In the same way many people identify as Christian but are very different. There is almost no relationship, beyond the name of the principal, between say a nominal Anglican and a foaming at the mouth American Evangelist. Many Muslims are victims of Islam and would quite happily just be another person, just like you or me, but for the non-acceptance that forces them into communities, where the strictures of the religion can be enforced on them by the more recent wave of migrants. There are many who identify as Muslim, but are not accepted as "real Muslims" by others, but cannot drop the label.

I tend to agree with this point of view. I have many muslim friends, from members of the Turkish Army to Afghan interpreters who now reside in the U.S. I also know first hand the evil of fundamentalist Islam.

Labeling the whole of Islam as evil is pointless, as is denying the Islamic influence on terrorism. At the end of the day, we're talking about totalitarian ideology - and that's not confined to Islam. Religion just tends to be a convenient justification, whether it's the Spanish Inquisition or Jihadism.

“Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion—several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn’t straight.” Mark Twain

MTurbo
July 3rd, 2016, 05:23 PM
The 2nd Amendment thread is getting a little long in the tooth, and bogged down with the issue of Islam.

I thought Scrawler's post was particularly insightful (or inciteful, if you like ;) ), and the topic could do with its own thread.



It is rather curious how this thread has deteriorated into the usual ignorance on both sides of the Islam issue. The best way to understand Islam is to go and live in an Islamic society, rather than listen to the antagonists and appeasers. Go see what kind of societies Islam creates. The truth of something is in what it does, not in what it says about itself. I have lived in a couple and my wife is from an Islamic country. It is quite wrong to say, as was stated above, that there are two types of Muslim. There are actually 73 different sects, derived broadly from two major divisions. All of the trouble, murders and mayhem that you are seeing is from one sect and its subdivisions only. Confusion about what Islam is, comes largely from the apparent dichotomy between the manifest violence of one group of sects and the peaceful, friendly ways of members of other sects. Indeed the more violent sects claim the others are "apostate" and victimize them too. Thus leading to the confusion caused when it appears that Muslims kill other Muslims, despite the teachings. I am going shortly to have coffee with a lady who identifies as a Muslim. She is a kind, thoughtful and generous person. If you were to judge Islam by her and her ethnic group, you might form a good opinion of Muslims in general. If on the other hand you have only been exposed to one of the strict observance sects, you would likely form a different opinion. In the same way many people identify as Christian but are very different. There is almost no relationship, beyond the name of the principal, between say a nominal Anglican and a foaming at the mouth American Evangelist. Many Muslims are victims of Islam and would quite happily just be another person, just like you or me, but for the non-acceptance that forces them into communities, where the strictures of the religion can be enforced on them by the more recent wave of migrants. There are many who identify as Muslim, but are not accepted as "real Muslims" by others, but cannot drop the label.

I tend to agree with this point of view. I have many muslim friends, from members of the Turkish Army to Afghan interpreters who now reside in the U.S. I also know first hand the evil of fundamentalist Islam.

Labeling the whole of Islam as evil is pointless, as is denying the Islamic influence on terrorism. At the end of the day, we're talking about totalitarian ideology - and that's not confined to Islam. Religion just tends to be a convenient justification, whether it's the Spanish Inquisition or Jihadism.

“Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion—several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn’t straight.” Mark Twain

Like I mentioned in that other thread...I have yet to see any of these "Muslims victims" protesting or speaking out against all the others who are giving them such a bad name.

"Labeling the whole of Islam as evil is pointless."
If someone gave you a bowl of raisin brand cereal and told you that one of the raisins might be poisoned and could kill you, would you eat the cereal anyway or toss the entire thing into the garbage?

Just a thought.

dneal
July 3rd, 2016, 05:45 PM
Rasin Bran cereal - False analogy. Even if it weren't, it only illustrates a point. It doesn't prove one.

But let's assume for a moment that Islam is at its heart a totalitarian death cult. Now what? Hunt 'em all down and kill 'em? Nuke 'em all? We both know that's not going to happen, so it's pointless. Most importantly though, it doesn't properly identify the enemy. It's hard to know who to fight if you haven't done that critical first step.

Saudia Arabia has been propagating its radical interpretation of Islam worldwide for around 50 years. Steven Schwartz describes this well in his book "The Two Faces of Islam". It has done this for a few reasons, one being a geopolitical struggle with Iran (see: Vali Nasr The Shia Revival). We're all now reaping what they've sown.

The Middle East is now in another transition, leaving the last vestiges of Pan-Arabism. A "return" to "Islam" is a promised ideology that will solve all the muslim world's ills, much like Socialism/Communism was (and still is) to other regions of the world. It's an idea of a utopia that "true believers" will try to force down people's throat. It's only rejected when people get a taste of that "utopia". We see 2nd generation muslims from Europe and the U.S. flocking to Syria, and Syrians fleeing.

HughC
July 4th, 2016, 04:41 AM
This seems like a really stupid idea for a topic.....

MTurbo
July 4th, 2016, 05:22 AM
Seems strange to me that in today's world there are so many that dislike Christianity and find every other culture better than their own. Romanticizing Islamic culture is becoming the vogue it seems.

myu
July 4th, 2016, 10:02 AM
MTurbo, you obviously get all of your news from US sources. The US news media only covers the sensationalism, the horror and scandal that attracts readers. It won't cover anything peaceful, except something like a dog being rescued from cruel treatment.

Btw, Turkey is a Muslim nation that had a secular government for a very long period of time. It was only recently that things changed, but even though leadership has a religious agenda, policies are still grounded in a secular foundation. Aside from the Kurds issue, it has been a generally peaceful nation until more recent terrorist incursions.

While I don't know precise statistics, I can safely say that a majority of Muslims leave peacefully. But a large number of Americans won't believe that, because when they hear about terrorists there is always a Muslim or Islamic association drawn. Polls have been taken. It's shocking how many people think Muslims are inherently violent or that Islam is intent on devouring the Western world. People have such short memories. Roll back to the times before the 1980's and you'll see there were very few terrorist incidents tied to Islam. It wasn't until Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan nations were embroiled with war that militants began to coalesce and form their terrorist organizations with ties to Islam. And we can thank both Russia and America for that. Those b@stards tried to control and manipulate a region for their own aims, because of fossil fuel dependencies. Well, all that nicely backfired. Those two nations are complicit to starting this whole mess.

What this all comes down to is that most Muslims are people just like anyone else, wanting to live peacefully and prosper. We human beings have to become better educated about psychology. Because the whole "witch hunt" syndrome seems to keep coming up anytime something goes wrong. Find the scapegoat and eviscerate it mercilessly. Like those poor girls in Salem accused of being witches.

MTurbo
July 4th, 2016, 10:21 AM
The truth is not difficult to find. All you have to do is to read the original history of Islam written by the early historians, read the Hadith for historical information, and read the Quran. After you do that, you will get to know the true Islam. This is the pure Islam as taught by the Wahhabis and practiced by the Taliban. After that, when you read the books written by the modern day "apologists" you will see that they are concealing the truth.

dneal
July 4th, 2016, 11:34 AM
What original history of Islam by what historian? I would recommend Phillip Hitti's book "History of the Arabs". Anyway - The original history of Christianity (and Judaism!) bears little resemblance to what we see today. Leviticus and Deuteronomy could easily be justified for all sorts of horrible things. Stoning originates with Judaism, in fact. Christianity is rife with a history of killing heretics, in particularly gruesome ways. Should that be the basis of judgement to the whole of Christianity, or Judaism, today? I think not.

So why isn't this the case for Islam as well? The Ottoman caliphate gave sanctuary to Spanish jews when they were being forced to convert under penalty of death, because Islam considers Jews and Christians "al kitab", or "People of the Book". Classically, they're a protected class who pay a different tax rate because there is no compulsory military service for them.

An overwhelming portion of the Islamic world is illiterate, and only know what is taught to them by Mullahs/Imams. A great majority of those mullahs are schooled in Islam by Saudi "scholars" (again, pay attention to who is funding madrassas and mosques worldwide).

SIR
July 4th, 2016, 12:21 PM
All organised religions are inherently wrong, belief cannot be taught but only learned by experience; it is wrong to expect others to believe the same as oneself simply because one 'believes' one is 'right'.

Religion is social-psychological terrorism...
and Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam et al are all guilty.

Flounder
July 9th, 2016, 11:08 AM
What original history of Islam by what historian? I would recommend Phillip Hitti's book "History of the Arabs". Anyway - The original history of Christianity (and Judaism!) bears little resemblance to what we see today. Leviticus and Deuteronomy could easily be justified for all sorts of horrible things. Stoning originates with Judaism, in fact. Christianity is rife with a history of killing heretics, in particularly gruesome ways. Should that be the basis of judgement to the whole of Christianity, or Judaism, today? I think not.

So why isn't this the case for Islam as well? The Ottoman caliphate gave sanctuary to Spanish jews when they were being forced to convert under penalty of death, because Islam considers Jews and Christians "al kitab", or "People of the Book". Classically, they're a protected class who pay a different tax rate because there is no compulsory military service for them.

The same Ottoman caliphate considered children of conquered Christian "People of the Book" (giaour infidels) taxable. As in, boys to the janissaries, girls to the harems.

So long as we debase the truth to support a multiculturalist narrative of a peaceful Islam, our safety is compromised.

Flounder
July 9th, 2016, 11:19 AM
The Ottoman caliphate gave sanctuary to Spanish jews when they were being forced to convert under penalty of death, because Islam considers Jews and Christians "al kitab", or "People of the Book". .

Remind me again - what's the penalty for leaving Islam, both then and now?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XRCYlZ4XOQ

EmreMusovi
July 9th, 2016, 12:53 PM
Well eventhough i dont have strong religious roots and beliefs, this thread really annoys me...

SM-G935F cihazımdan Tapatalk kullanılarak gönderildi

migo984
July 10th, 2016, 04:31 AM
"The very ink with which all history is written is merely fluid prejudice".
- Mark Twain -

MTurbo
July 10th, 2016, 07:11 AM
Well eventhough i dont have strong religious roots and beliefs, this thread really annoys me...

SM-G935F cihazımdan Tapatalk kullanılarak gönderildi

Most of the sheep in the world would be bothered with this thread. Continue hand wringing...

jar
July 10th, 2016, 09:17 AM
Speaking as a Christian, Islam is certainly far less dangerous than Christianity and it's history certainly far more peaceful than Christianity.

The biggest difference is that Islam is far less capable of exporting violence than say, the US. Muslims make up about 1% of the US citizens but so far there is absolutely no evidence that they are anymore prone to violence than any other US demographic group.

pepsiplease69
July 14th, 2016, 07:01 PM
The truth is not difficult to find. All you have to do is to read the original history of Islam written by the early historians, read the Hadith for historical information, and read the Quran. After you do that, you will get to know the true Islam. This is the pure Islam as taught by the Wahhabis and practiced by the Taliban. After that, when you read the books written by the modern day "apologists" you will see that they are concealing the truth.

Very interesting..

Tell me, are you yourself a Muslim? How many Muslims do you know personally?

It's very puzzling to find that the wahabi and taliban version of Islam (if you could call it that), is being portrayed here as the "true" and the "pure" Islam, by folks who haven't necessarily established their credibility on the subject.

MTurbo
July 16th, 2016, 09:17 PM
I'm surprised to see so many defending the same people that just finished killing so many men,women and children with the assault truck. Why in Gods name would you continue doing that!?

jar
July 17th, 2016, 07:50 AM
I'm surprised to see so many defending the same people that just finished killing so many men,women and children with the assault truck. Why in Gods name would you continue doing that!?

Who is doing that?

Sorry but not condemning a whole religious population does not defend those members of that population that commit crimes. Remember far more Christians in the US kill folk than Muslims yet no one says all Christians should be condemned. In addition it was an assault using a truck. There is no such thing as an assault truck nor do I condemn all trucks just because a criminal used one to kill people.

myu
July 17th, 2016, 12:29 PM
Who is doing that?

Sorry but not condemning a whole religious population does not defend those members of that population that commit crimes. Remember far more Christians in the US kill folk than Muslims yet no one says all Christians should be condemned. In addition is was an assault using a truck. There is no such thing as an assault truck nor do I condemn all trucks just because a criminal used one to kill people.

Exactly. And this is the problem... the same issue that occurred with the Japanese interment camps during WWII. People who were Americans, either immigrated to the US as children and naturalized or were born here, were rounded up in those camps and held under terrible conditions... meanwhile, many legalized citizens of Japanese descent suffered financial loss, as their domiciles were left unattended and bills unpaid allowing for seizure. And to what end? Maybe 0.01% of that population might have been sympathetic enough to Japan for inspiration to do something about it. Incarcerating an entire population for that fractional percent is just PREPOSTEROUS. And yet, this same reasoning is being promoted by a certain presidential candidate. It's the "conspiracy syndrome." It's a deadly mindset, promoting fear and hate mongering with rash erroneous conclusions.

I've done further research that has opened my mind further... to see beyond the clouded rhetoric swirling around the USA these days. The simple PLAIN FACT is that a vast majority of Muslims living in Western nations are doing so because they do not subscribe to the extremist beliefs of their originating countries. That's why they left. They do not embrace Sharia law, nor the barbaric punishments and inhumane treatments prescribed. It's just like Christianity that overlooks the extremist content of the Bible, where passages can be found where stoning, slave ownership, and second class treatment of women is condoned. These Muslims are peaceful people... and yet, they suffer this distorted perception due to the radical extremists. Think of it in reverse. If there were Christian extremists who were blowing up mosques and Muslims, what would normal Christians do about it? Well, what could they do, other than reporting very suspicious activity... but beyond that, what? Who would go ahead and be publicly vocal against it, because of fearing retribution from those extremists? We don't live under those conditions, but imagine if you did... MOST Americans revealing an underlying hatred of all Muslims are clueless ignoramuses that are too cowardly to face the truth.

I get it. The whole "conspiracy fear" is an easy trap to fall into. But God damn it, if you take a sensible approach you can cut through that and see reality for what it is. It's just appalling to me how many educated and experienced people can be SUCKED INTO CONSPIRACY PEDDLING. What conspiracy? The one about all Muslims intent on dominating the world, seeping their way into all of our Western societies and bringing about the same inhumane treatments from the countries they immigrated from. There is no conspiracy. Most people on Earth just want to live in peace, prosper as best they can, and worship their own religion. Isn't that what the USA was founded upon?

HughC
July 17th, 2016, 09:23 PM
I'm surprised to see so many defending the same people that just finished killing so many men,women and children with the assault truck. Why in Gods name would you continue doing that!?

Nobodies defending those involved in such acts. People are defending those with no involvement in such acts.

pepsiplease69
July 18th, 2016, 07:40 AM
For the record, I am a Muslim.

Me, my mosque, my people, and in fact my religion categorically and unconditionally condemn the senseless killing of innocent people.

Let me be clear, no one is defending these heinous crimes. We are saying these acts are completely against what we believe in, we condemn it and although the perpetrators want to make it look like they are done in Islam's name we want to say these acts are in no way associated with Islam. These acts are committed to advance an agenda. They are meant to spread terror. It's very unfortunate that these mass criminals associate their agenda with Islam.

We Muslims are taught by our religion to live a peaceful life. Be a law-abiding person. Don't do harm to others. Those are among the core teachings of Islam.

You CANNOT violate those tenets and continue to call yourself a Muslim and wave a Muslim flag and associate these crimes with Islam in any way.

What you are not seeing are the millions upon billions of peaceful Muslims who adhere to the faith and live peacefully and condemn these acts of terror.

myu
July 18th, 2016, 08:53 PM
^ I'd like to gain some clarity, so please overlook any ignorance on my part concerning matters of Islam.

In Christianity, there are two main volumes to the Bible -- the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Old Testament condoned slavery, stoning, rape, and murder of people. But the New Testament was a revolution to the old ways. Despite this, at various periods of time, hard line fundamentalist Christians considered the Old Testament fully applicable, even the archaic laws. That's what helped fuel the Crusades. And even within sects of Christianity, there were bloody conflicts. Eventually, a more peaceful approach to Christianity prevailed... leading up to modern times.

In the Qu'ran, it seems that there are many passages which condone the killing of infidels (non-believers), intolerance of other religions (to the point of violence against non-Islamic people) and execution for apostasy. Is there some delineation of time whereby those older ways are surpassed with a more peaceful, humane approach? Or does it become a matter of choice, for Muslims to simply reason that those older ways are incompatible with modern times and are therefore not followed? By choice is how I understand it. That unfortunately leaves more up to interpretation... which makes it sound like it's easier for one to consider Sharia law as complete in all respects.

But the really serious issue is this awful schism between Sunni and Shia. It is growing to such a fervor, that people are warring over this, killing thousands. This is just like going back to Medieval times. All because of a question about whether or not a bloodline from Mohammed is required for religious authenticity. This schism has been going on for centuries... never resolved. Despite all the supposed guidance from the divinity, nobody can fix it. And now... the extremism comes into play, which then also emboldens purists who want to return to the way things were before Mohammed died, enacting jihad.

Sunni is clearly dominant... Shia refuses to acquiesce, despite the lives lost. If this is never resolved, there will never be peace. And this leaves everyone else looking at this religion with tremendous distrust.... even though a vast majority of Muslims would really just prefer to live in peace. Is that about right?

HughC
July 18th, 2016, 09:57 PM
^ I'd like to gain some clarity, so please overlook any ignorance on my part concerning matters of Islam.

In Christianity, there are two main volumes to the Bible -- the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Old Testament condoned slavery, stoning, rape, and murder of people. But the New Testament was a revolution to the old ways. Despite this, at various periods of time, hard line fundamentalist Christians considered the Old Testament fully applicable, even the archaic laws. That's what helped fuel the Crusades. And even within sects of Christianity, there were bloody conflicts. Eventually, a more peaceful approach to Christianity prevailed... leading up to modern times.

In the Qu'ran, it seems that there are many passages which condone the killing of infidels (non-believers), intolerance of other religions (to the point of violence against non-Islamic people) and execution for apostasy. Is there some delineation of time whereby those older ways are surpassed with a more peaceful, humane approach? Or does it become a matter of choice, for Muslims to simply reason that those older ways are incompatible with modern times and are therefore not followed? By choice is how I understand it. That unfortunately leaves more up to interpretation... which makes it sound like it's easier for one to consider Sharia law as complete in all respects.

But the really serious issue is this awful schism between Sunni and Shia. It is growing to such a fervor, that people are warring over this, killing thousands. This is just like going back to Medieval times. All because of a question about whether or not a bloodline from Mohammed is required for religious authenticity. This schism has been going on for centuries... never resolved. Despite all the supposed guidance from the divinity, nobody can fix it. And now... the extremism comes into play, which then also emboldens purists who want to return to the way things were before Mohammed died, enacting jihad.

Sunni is clearly dominant... Shia refuses to acquiesce, despite the lives lost. If this is never resolved, there will never be peace. And this leaves everyone else looking at this religion with tremendous distrust.... even though a vast majority of Muslims would really just prefer to live in peace. Is that about right?

Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all Abrahamic religions , that is all claim a link to Abraham although most Christians consider themselves as gentiles grafted to the family tree. The Old Testament is derived from the Jewish bible. The Quran also incorporates Jewish history into it's own. In a very simplistic way all three are just different offshoots of the same religion ( same God, Prophets etc.) that have evolved differently over time. Just as there are many subsets of Christians ( Catholic, Church of England etc.) there are many subsets in Islam and they have outlooks of varying "strictness". To categorize Sunnis, for instance, as all having the same views is incorrect. More to the point is a small number of people make the majority of the problems we see and they're not representative of the religion as a whole. Well that's my take on it and I'm open to being corrected.

jar
July 19th, 2016, 06:53 AM
^ I'd like to gain some clarity, so please overlook any ignorance on my part concerning matters of Islam.

In Christianity, there are two main volumes to the Bible -- the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Old Testament condoned slavery, stoning, rape, and murder of people. But the New Testament was a revolution to the old ways. Despite this, at various periods of time, hard line fundamentalist Christians considered the Old Testament fully applicable, even the archaic laws. That's what helped fuel the Crusades. And even within sects of Christianity, there were bloody conflicts. Eventually, a more peaceful approach to Christianity prevailed... leading up to modern times.

In the Qu'ran, it seems that there are many passages which condone the killing of infidels (non-believers), intolerance of other religions (to the point of violence against non-Islamic people) and execution for apostasy. Is there some delineation of time whereby those older ways are surpassed with a more peaceful, humane approach? Or does it become a matter of choice, for Muslims to simply reason that those older ways are incompatible with modern times and are therefore not followed? By choice is how I understand it. That unfortunately leaves more up to interpretation... which makes it sound like it's easier for one to consider Sharia law as complete in all respects.

But the really serious issue is this awful schism between Sunni and Shia. It is growing to such a fervor, that people are warring over this, killing thousands. This is just like going back to Medieval times. All because of a question about whether or not a bloodline from Mohammed is required for religious authenticity. This schism has been going on for centuries... never resolved. Despite all the supposed guidance from the divinity, nobody can fix it. And now... the extremism comes into play, which then also emboldens purists who want to return to the way things were before Mohammed died, enacting jihad.

Sunni is clearly dominant... Shia refuses to acquiesce, despite the lives lost. If this is never resolved, there will never be peace. And this leaves everyone else looking at this religion with tremendous distrust.... even though a vast majority of Muslims would really just prefer to live in peace. Is that about right?

The great divide exists in many different religions and Christianity is not very different when if comes to internal fighting and killing than Islam. In Christianity, there is no evidence on a break in internal conflicts between sects related in time to the advent of the New Testament. As long as Christianity was a small minority they were not in a position to oppress others but only a few hundred years after Jesus death that changed when they became a State Religion. From then on, for over a thousand years, Christianity was the most violent force on Earth, utterly destroying and in many cases totally wiping out any other religion that they encountered. Historically it has been the most intolerant religion on Earth.

That intolerance continued with the exportation of Christianity to the New World as well as to much of Southern Africa. In Europe only the Jews were left to oppress and Christians did continue with laws restricting what Jews could do or own as well as repeated Pogroms when Jews were killed and their properties confiscated.

In the mid 1500's Henry established the first Non-Roman Catholic Christian State religion (only a few years after he had been given the title of Defender of the Faith by Pope Leo X partially for Henry's support in violently suppressing Protestants in Europe) and the violence increased between the various Christian sects. That remained the norm through subsequent reigns of Edward, Mary and Elizabeth. Under James I and VI an attempt was made to reduce the inter-Christian violence with the introduction of a Politically Correct Authorized Bible (the KJV) that removed the papal condemnation found in some other versions and more closely following the Roman Catholic liturgy but much of the inter-Faith conflicts continued through the Protectorate and mid 1600s.

The US is a great illustration of just how great the conflicts were. New England was established as a sanctuary for the Puritans while Maryland was a sanctuary for Roman Catholics and Rhode Island (Providence Plantations) a refuge of a theologian thrown out of Massachusetts while Pennsylvania was a refuge for the Dutch Friends, Amish and Mennonites. None of them got along with the others and all tried to impose their version of Christianity by law and force. All did agree that God wanted them to wipe out any vestiges of other religions that had grown up among the displaced natives.

The 1st. Amendment to the US Constitution was created to specifically stop the Christian Inter-faith violence and the imposition of ANY religious standards on the population in general.

But until very, very recently, violence between the different Christian sects as well as violence by Christianity towards any other religious system was the norm.

Today the violence has shifted to the Sunni/Shia (and other smaller Muslim sects) but just as with Christianity it is far less about beliefs but rather about power. Just as with Christianity it is about who would control the government, the resources, the wealth and the power.

SIR
July 19th, 2016, 07:06 AM
Well even though I don't have strong religious roots and beliefs, this thread really annoys me...

Most of the sheep in the world would be bothered with this thread.


"Greater is an army of sheep led by lions, than an army of lions led by sheep."

Variously attributed to Chabrias, Alexander the Great, and Daniel Defoe, amongst others; and something the England football team would do well to meditate upon.

SIR
July 19th, 2016, 08:18 AM
I think it is the British, actually the ENGLISH, that are responsible for virtually ALL the problems, both past and present in this world.

Now they have visited Brexit upon their own people, a serious storm of bad luck is due to land on its shores for at least the next 100 years, possibly more.

I think we have a new Nostradamus...

Great Britain was Great before joining the EU, was Great whilst being part of the EU, and will continue to be Great after leaving the EU.

If you ever find a true English person, I'm sure they'll correct your bigoted opinion.

dneal
July 19th, 2016, 10:55 AM
I think whoever is 'in charge' around here should delete this thread and replace it with one attacking only English people LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perhaps you missed the subtext of this particular forum.

"Topics pertaining to politics, religion, philosophy, and social issues. Not for the faint of heart. Also, do not post while high on ink fumes or after using ballpoints. However, please post as much as you want if coming from FPN. You have been warned."

This is not the modern university, where students are sheltered from micro-agressions in their safe-spaces; and the growing trend to stifle discussion of difficult topics is disturbing. The real world will continue in its spectrum of good and evil, indifferent to your protests. Some recognize that and see the value in discussing human events, even if they are troubling.

If you can't stomach confrontational topics, feel free to spend your time in the other areas of this forum. Perhaps something discussing the best shade of Royal Blue? If the temptation to peek in here is too much, and you lack the self control; you could alternatively spend your time on FPN where this sort of discussion is forbidden.

If, on the other hand, you feel capable of having adult conversations about difficult subjects (which you don't appear to); stick around. Anything in this section is bound to be contentious.

dneal
July 19th, 2016, 01:13 PM
What a load of drivel.

Piling ignorance upon ignorance and classing it as "brave discussion" does not make you in any sense "brave", and CERTAINLY not in any sense clever". I say SHUT IT DOWN.


I didn't say anything about bravery or cleverness.

I say GO BACK TO LURKING.

;)

SIR
July 19th, 2016, 02:41 PM
I think it is the British, actually the ENGLISH, that are responsible for virtually ALL the problems, both past and present in this world.

Now they have visited Brexit upon their own people, a serious storm of bad luck is due to land on its shores for at least the next 100 years, possibly more.
I
I think we have a new Nostradamus...

Great Britain was Great before joining the EU, was Great whilst being part of the EU, and will continue to be Great after leaving the EU.

If you ever find a true English person, I'm sure they'll correct your bigoted opinion.

Also, what is a "true English person"?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ironic...

jar
July 19th, 2016, 05:08 PM
I think it is the British, actually the ENGLISH, that are responsible for virtually ALL the problems, both past and present in this world.

Now they have visited Brexit upon their own people, a serious storm of bad luck is due to land on its shores for at least the next 100 years, possibly more.
I
I think we have a new Nostradamus...

Great Britain was Great before joining the EU, was Great whilst being part of the EU, and will continue to be Great after leaving the EU.

If you ever find a true English person, I'm sure they'll correct your bigoted opinion.

Also, what is a "true English person"?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ironic...

If the Mayor of London is a true English person then the true English person is a Sunni Muslim.

HughC
July 19th, 2016, 09:30 PM
I think whoever is 'in charge' around here should delete this thread and replace it with one attacking only English people LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perhaps you missed the subtext of this particular forum.

"Topics pertaining to politics, religion, philosophy, and social issues. Not for the faint of heart. Also, do not post while high on ink fumes or after using ballpoints. However, please post as much as you want if coming from FPN. You have been warned."

This is not the modern university, where students are sheltered from micro-agressions in their safe-spaces; and the growing trend to stifle discussion of difficult topics is disturbing. The real world will continue in its spectrum of good and evil, indifferent to your protests. Some recognize that and see the value in discussing human events, even if they are troubling.

If you can't stomach confrontational topics, feel free to spend your time in the other areas of this forum. Perhaps something discussing the best shade of Royal Blue? If the temptation to peek in here is too much, and you lack the self control; you could alternatively spend your time on FPN where this sort of discussion is forbidden.

If, on the other hand, you feel capable of having adult conversations about difficult subjects (which you don't appear to); stick around. Anything in this section is bound to be contentious.

Hypocrite.

SIR
July 20th, 2016, 01:33 AM
I think it is the British, actually the ENGLISH, that are responsible for virtually ALL the problems, both past and present in this world.

Now they have visited Brexit upon their own people, a serious storm of bad luck is due to land on its shores for at least the next 100 years, possibly more.
I
I think we have a new Nostradamus...

Great Britain was Great before joining the EU, was Great whilst being part of the EU, and will continue to be Great after leaving the EU.

If you ever find a true English person, I'm sure they'll correct your bigoted opinion.

Also, what is a "true English person"?


Ironic...

If the Mayor of London is a true English person then the true English person is a Sunni Muslim.

Well, he is British... but personally, given the choice and despite my very limited experience, I think I prefer Shia muslims - even if nobody else does!

A true English person would need to be indigenous and uncontaminated by two thousand years of foreign rule, right?
e.g. not Roman, Saxon, Danish, Norse, French, or Spanish (let's not forget the first Queen of All England* married a Spaniard who brought many of his countrymen to England in the process...).

*{et al... "By the Grace of God, Queen of England and France, Naples, Jerusalem and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, Princess of Spain and Sicily, Archduchess of Austria, Duchess of Milan, Burgundy, and Brabant, Countess of Habsburg, Flanders, and Tyrol"}

dneal
July 20th, 2016, 04:22 AM
I think whoever is 'in charge' around here should delete this thread and replace it with one attacking only English people LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perhaps you missed the subtext of this particular forum.

"Topics pertaining to politics, religion, philosophy, and social issues. Not for the faint of heart. Also, do not post while high on ink fumes or after using ballpoints. However, please post as much as you want if coming from FPN. You have been warned."

This is not the modern university, where students are sheltered from micro-agressions in their safe-spaces; and the growing trend to stifle discussion of difficult topics is disturbing. The real world will continue in its spectrum of good and evil, indifferent to your protests. Some recognize that and see the value in discussing human events, even if they are troubling.

If you can't stomach confrontational topics, feel free to spend your time in the other areas of this forum. Perhaps something discussing the best shade of Royal Blue? If the temptation to peek in here is too much, and you lack the self control; you could alternatively spend your time on FPN where this sort of discussion is forbidden.

If, on the other hand, you feel capable of having adult conversations about difficult subjects (which you don't appear to); stick around. Anything in this section is bound to be contentious.

Hypocrite.

Said the pouting crybaby who won't converse any longer... Grow up.

HughC
July 20th, 2016, 05:06 AM
I think whoever is 'in charge' around here should delete this thread and replace it with one attacking only English people LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perhaps you missed the subtext of this particular forum.

"Topics pertaining to politics, religion, philosophy, and social issues. Not for the faint of heart. Also, do not post while high on ink fumes or after using ballpoints. However, please post as much as you want if coming from FPN. You have been warned."

This is not the modern university, where students are sheltered from micro-agressions in their safe-spaces; and the growing trend to stifle discussion of difficult topics is disturbing. The real world will continue in its spectrum of good and evil, indifferent to your protests. Some recognize that and see the value in discussing human events, even if they are troubling.

If you can't stomach confrontational topics, feel free to spend your time in the other areas of this forum. Perhaps something discussing the best shade of Royal Blue? If the temptation to peek in here is too much, and you lack the self control; you could alternatively spend your time on FPN where this sort of discussion is forbidden.

If, on the other hand, you feel capable of having adult conversations about difficult subjects (which you don't appear to); stick around. Anything in this section is bound to be contentious.

Hypocrite.

Said the pouting crybaby who won't converse any longer... Grow up.

Really !! You've previously "cherry picked" data and fraudulently presented it as fact ( to anyone interested this is easily shown and I gave you ample opportunity to correct) and now you claim the moral high ground ? You lied, it's that simple...and around here you earn the right to the moral high ground and that's something you haven't done. I gave you the benefit of the doubt now all I see is a fraud....what else have you misrepresented ?

jar
July 20th, 2016, 06:26 AM
A true English person would need to be indigenous and uncontaminated by two thousand years of foreign rule, right?
e.g. not Roman, Saxon, Danish, Norse, French, or Spanish (let's not forget the first Queen of All England* married a Spaniard who brought many of his countrymen to England in the process...).

*{et al... "By the Grace of God, Queen of England and France, Naples, Jerusalem and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, Princess of Spain and Sicily, Archduchess of Austria, Duchess of Milan, Burgundy, and Brabant, Countess of Habsburg, Flanders, and Tyrol"}

Was that the daughter of Catherine of Aragon which is just outside Manchester or maybe some other chester or ford or bridge?

dneal
July 20th, 2016, 07:41 AM
I think whoever is 'in charge' around here should delete this thread and replace it with one attacking only English people LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perhaps you missed the subtext of this particular forum.

"Topics pertaining to politics, religion, philosophy, and social issues. Not for the faint of heart. Also, do not post while high on ink fumes or after using ballpoints. However, please post as much as you want if coming from FPN. You have been warned."

This is not the modern university, where students are sheltered from micro-agressions in their safe-spaces; and the growing trend to stifle discussion of difficult topics is disturbing. The real world will continue in its spectrum of good and evil, indifferent to your protests. Some recognize that and see the value in discussing human events, even if they are troubling.

If you can't stomach confrontational topics, feel free to spend your time in the other areas of this forum. Perhaps something discussing the best shade of Royal Blue? If the temptation to peek in here is too much, and you lack the self control; you could alternatively spend your time on FPN where this sort of discussion is forbidden.

If, on the other hand, you feel capable of having adult conversations about difficult subjects (which you don't appear to); stick around. Anything in this section is bound to be contentious.

Hypocrite.

Said the pouting crybaby who won't converse any longer... Grow up.

Really !! You've previously "cherry picked" data and fraudulently presented it as fact ( to anyone interested this is easily shown and I gave you ample opportunity to correct) and now you claim the moral high ground ? You lied, it's that simple...and around here you earn the right to the moral high ground and that's something you haven't done. I gave you the benefit of the doubt now all I see is a fraud....what else have you misrepresented ?

Please keep your problems with that thread, in that thread. You look like an internet stalker.

--edit--

I almost forgot... Strawman.

SIR
July 20th, 2016, 11:25 AM
Was that the daughter of Catherine of Aragon ..?

Right,
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_I_of_England

HughC
July 20th, 2016, 03:03 PM
I think whoever is 'in charge' around here should delete this thread and replace it with one attacking only English people LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perhaps you missed the subtext of this particular forum.

"Topics pertaining to politics, religion, philosophy, and social issues. Not for the faint of heart. Also, do not post while high on ink fumes or after using ballpoints. However, please post as much as you want if coming from FPN. You have been warned."

This is not the modern university, where students are sheltered from micro-agressions in their safe-spaces; and the growing trend to stifle discussion of difficult topics is disturbing. The real world will continue in its spectrum of good and evil, indifferent to your protests. Some recognize that and see the value in discussing human events, even if they are troubling.

If you can't stomach confrontational topics, feel free to spend your time in the other areas of this forum. Perhaps something discussing the best shade of Royal Blue? If the temptation to peek in here is too much, and you lack the self control; you could alternatively spend your time on FPN where this sort of discussion is forbidden.

If, on the other hand, you feel capable of having adult conversations about difficult subjects (which you don't appear to); stick around. Anything in this section is bound to be contentious.

Hypocrite.

Said the pouting crybaby who won't converse any longer... Grow up.

Really !! You've previously "cherry picked" data and fraudulently presented it as fact ( to anyone interested this is easily shown and I gave you ample opportunity to correct) and now you claim the moral high ground ? You lied, it's that simple...and around here you earn the right to the moral high ground and that's something you haven't done. I gave you the benefit of the doubt now all I see is a fraud....what else have you misrepresented ?

Please keep your problems with that thread, in that thread. You look like an internet stalker.

--edit--

I almost forgot... Strawman.

It's simple...behave properly.

dneal
July 20th, 2016, 05:01 PM
I think whoever is 'in charge' around here should delete this thread and replace it with one attacking only English people LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perhaps you missed the subtext of this particular forum.

"Topics pertaining to politics, religion, philosophy, and social issues. Not for the faint of heart. Also, do not post while high on ink fumes or after using ballpoints. However, please post as much as you want if coming from FPN. You have been warned."

This is not the modern university, where students are sheltered from micro-agressions in their safe-spaces; and the growing trend to stifle discussion of difficult topics is disturbing. The real world will continue in its spectrum of good and evil, indifferent to your protests. Some recognize that and see the value in discussing human events, even if they are troubling.

If you can't stomach confrontational topics, feel free to spend your time in the other areas of this forum. Perhaps something discussing the best shade of Royal Blue? If the temptation to peek in here is too much, and you lack the self control; you could alternatively spend your time on FPN where this sort of discussion is forbidden.

If, on the other hand, you feel capable of having adult conversations about difficult subjects (which you don't appear to); stick around. Anything in this section is bound to be contentious.

Hypocrite.

Said the pouting crybaby who won't converse any longer... Grow up.

Really !! You've previously "cherry picked" data and fraudulently presented it as fact ( to anyone interested this is easily shown and I gave you ample opportunity to correct) and now you claim the moral high ground ? You lied, it's that simple...and around here you earn the right to the moral high ground and that's something you haven't done. I gave you the benefit of the doubt now all I see is a fraud....what else have you misrepresented ?

Please keep your problems with that thread, in that thread. You look like an internet stalker.

--edit--

I almost forgot... Strawman.

It's simple...behave properly.

Hypocrite

HughC
July 20th, 2016, 06:11 PM
[QUOTE=dneal;177416]

If you can't stomach confrontational topics, feel free to spend your time in the other areas of this forum. Perhaps something discussing the best shade of Royal Blue? If the temptation to peek in here is too much, and you lack the self control; you could alternatively spend your time on FPN where this sort of discussion is forbidden.

If, on the other hand, you feel capable of having adult conversations about difficult subjects (which you don't appear to); stick around. Anything in this section is bound to be contentious.




Said the pouting crybaby who won't converse any longer... Grow up.

All that outpouring of meaningless dribble because someone posted a tongue in cheek comment..


I think whoever is 'in charge' around here should delete this thread and replace it with one attacking only English people LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

and you wonder why you come across as a complete idiot...

dneal
July 20th, 2016, 07:32 PM
All that outpouring of meaningless dribble because someone posted a tongue in cheek comment..

Yet it prompted a whole paragraph in response. (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/16742-The-Islam-Thread?p=177474&viewfull=1#post177474) The irony is delicious.

By the way, the word is "drivel", not "dribble". Admit you're wrong or I'll no longer have a conversation with you...

lol

HughC
July 20th, 2016, 08:24 PM
All that outpouring of meaningless dribble because someone posted a tongue in cheek comment..

Yet it prompted a whole paragraph in response. (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/16742-The-Islam-Thread?p=177474&viewfull=1#post177474) The irony is delicious.

By the way, the word is "drivel", not "dribble". Admit you're wrong or I'll no longer have a conversation with you...

lol

Yes, I stand corrected.

HughC
July 20th, 2016, 10:29 PM
If you can't stomach confrontational topics, feel free to spend your time in the other areas of this forum. Perhaps something discussing the best shade of Royal Blue? If the temptation to peek in here is too much, and you lack the self control; you could alternatively spend your time on FPN where this sort of discussion is forbidden.

If, on the other hand, you feel capable of having adult conversations about difficult subjects (which you don't appear to); stick around. Anything in this section is bound to be contentious.




Said the pouting crybaby who won't converse any longer... Grow up.

All that outpouring of meaningless dribble because someone posted a tongue in cheek comment..


I think whoever is 'in charge' around here should delete this thread and replace it with one attacking only English people LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

and you wonder why you come across as a complete idiot...

I don't come across an idiot at all mate, you on the other hand...English people are finished in this country, you know that, right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It wasn't directed at you, my apology.

SIR
July 21st, 2016, 01:37 AM
Was that the daughter of Catherine of Aragon ..?

Right,
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_I_of_England

Who cares anyway, this is the Asian Century, you better get used to it.


Centuries...

Here's a quatrain for you -

In a time of false fear
The children of light will decide,
Who from truth
In the house of knowledge will preside.

SIR
July 23rd, 2016, 09:26 PM
I don't come across an idiot at all mate, you on the other hand...English people are finished in this country, you know that, right?

guess what this is a map of...

25927

jar
July 25th, 2016, 03:46 PM
I think it is the British, actually the ENGLISH, that are responsible for virtually ALL the problems, both past and present in this world.

Now they have visited Brexit upon their own people, a serious storm of bad luck is due to land on its shores for at least the next 100 years, possibly more.
I
I think we have a new Nostradamus...

Great Britain was Great before joining the EU, was Great whilst being part of the EU, and will continue to be Great after leaving the EU.

If you ever find a true English person, I'm sure they'll correct your bigoted opinion.

Also, what is a "true English person"?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ironic...

If the Mayor of London is a true English person then the true English person is a Sunni Muslim.

How dare you! Trying to say Sadiq Khan isn't English even though he was born and raised in this country. He is as English as anyone else born in England with a British passport. To suggest otherwise is, frankly, ludicrous.

You are a RACIST, pure and simple.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not just a TROLL but one with a major reading and comprehension disability.

SIR
July 25th, 2016, 04:12 PM
A map of your Mum's face?

Actually, no; it is a map of the world's nations and their relative percentage rates per population of affirmed atheists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_irreligion#/media/File:Irreligion_map.png



How dare you! Trying to say Sadiq Khan isn't English even though he was born and raised in this country. He is as English as anyone else born in England with a British passport. To suggest otherwise is, frankly, ludicrous.

You are a RACIST, pure and simple.

Not just a TROLL but one with a major reading and comprehension disability.

Have pity jar, the Mk2579 may/mayn't be taking it's medication.

https://www.reddit.com/user/MK2579

HughC
July 25th, 2016, 05:04 PM
Quite remarkable it's possible to prove so much with so few words and leave no room for doubt.

SIR
July 27th, 2016, 06:49 AM
So now your claiming your some kind of fancy pants Dr. I don't believe you. In England Dr's aren't white, their Asian LOL (funny coz its true).



Getting back to the original subject of this thread, wasn't the Florida gunman a homo? (abbrev.). Why don't you replace this thread with one called "The Homo Thread" so everyone can debate at their leisure everything they dislike about homos? It seems in modern America people would rather let homos walk around with guns shooting everyone, than peaceful Muslims go about their daily life in peace.


Bipolar disorder - symptoms;

"...being delusional, having hallucinations and disturbed or illogical thinking"

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Bipolar-disorder/Pages/Symptoms.aspx

RudyR
July 29th, 2016, 12:35 AM
Getting back to the original subject of this thread, wasn't the Florida gunman a homo? (abbrev.). Why don't you replace this thread with one called "The Homo Thread" so everyone can debate at their leisure everything they dislike about homos? It seems in modern America people would rather let homos walk around with guns shooting everyone, than peaceful Muslims go about their daily life in peace.


Bipolar disorder - symptoms;

"...being delusional, having hallucinations and disturbed or illogical thinking"

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Bipolar-disorder/Pages/Symptoms.aspx

I think we have the return of Special K. Great thing about this topic is that I quickly find which trolls not to feed. Please do not feed the trolls . . . ignore feature is your friend.