Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Muslims Versus Christians - Who will win? Aren't they alike?

Muslims Versus Christians - Who will win? Aren't they alike? (Page 4)
Thread Tools
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 06:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Exactly ... on almost any park bench where you'd be able to find those 3 women, the one wearing the burqa does so by choice (where women have the freedom to wear bikini tops, they also have the freedom to choose to whether or not to wear a burqa.

and, some other guys will beat their wives for cooking the wrong meal.
I think you missed it completely. My argument is: though it may be legal to remove the burqa, the woman will suffer from her husband greatly if she does. Not likely to happen in the bikini scenario.

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
and, some other guys will beat their wives for cooking the wrong meal.
... and if she removes her burqa in public while she does it.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 08:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
I think you missed it completely. My argument is: though it may be legal to remove the burqa, the woman will suffer from her husband greatly if she does. Not likely to happen in the bikini scenario.
Oh, I get your argument. You seem to think that Muslim men in Western countries are allowed to act without consequence by the laws of those countries.

But, you've missed *my* point completely. Husbands abusing their wives is not a problem unique to Muslims (Amazon.com: Battered Into Submission: The Tragedy of Wife Abuse in the Christian Home (9781579101992): James Alsdurf: Books) and Western societies have developed many mechanisms to help protect wives from abusive husbands.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 09:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Oh, I get your argument. You seem to think that Muslim men in Western countries are allowed to act without consequence by the laws of those countries.
I do?



Oh, right, no I don't. I *know* they are acting illegally. I know they know they are acting illegally. Either way, catching them and punishing them after the fact is a little too late when the wife is blinded, maimed, or dead.

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
But, you've missed *my* point completely. Husbands abusing their wives is not a problem unique to Muslims (Amazon.com: Battered Into Submission: The Tragedy of Wife Abuse in the Christian Home (9781579101992): James Alsdurf: Books) and Western societies have developed many mechanisms to help protect wives from abusive husbands.
THAT was your point?!? You're right, I probably never would have gotten that.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 09:21 PM
 
I am really empathizing with Doofy right about now. So sad.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 09:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
... catching them and punishing them after the fact is a little too late when the wife is blinded, maimed, or dead.
Indeed. So, rather than whine about it, how do we go about preventing *all* spousal abuse before it happens? (I understand that it's incredibly simple for you to focus on only Muslim spousal abuse, but the reality is that it happens with great frequency in all corners of society).
Domestic Violence Facts
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 10:20 PM
 
Obviously, if you can't win an argument, change the parameters.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 10:21 PM
 
Hey Doofy, how you doin'?
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 10:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
Obviously, if you can't win an argument, change the parameters.
Indeed. I've learned from the best. "Muslims are clearly evil ... see, Muslim wives are forced to cover up their bodies and are abused, or worse, by their husbands" (completely ignoring that this isn't unique to Muslims)
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 11:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
I think you missed it completely. My argument is: though it may be legal to remove the burqa, the woman will suffer from her husband greatly if she does. Not likely to happen in the bikini scenario.
Your argument suggests that the woman in the burqa is dressed that way at the direction of her husband. Do you think it is possible the woman in the burqa chose to dress that way on her own? because she wants to wear a burqa?

In a more general sense, do you think a Muslim woman would choose to wear the burqa if she didn't have a male figure suggesting/demanding/forcing her to wear a burqa?
( Last edited by dcmacdaddy; Sep 13, 2010 at 11:55 PM. Reason: edited to add the more general question.)
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 11:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
Your argument suggests that the woman in the burqa is dressed that way at the direction of her husband. Do you think it is possible the woman in the burqa chose to dress that way on her own? because she wants to wear a burqa?
that's ludicrous. everyone knows that every woman wants to show off as much skin as possible.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2010, 11:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
that's ludicrous. everyone knows that every woman wants to show off as much skin as possible.
Bah! Leave the sarcasm for the trolls. Just debate Railroader on the facts and see what answers he can come up with.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
Bah! Leave the sarcasm for the trolls. Just debate Railroader on the facts and see what answers he can come up with.
I dunno. sometimes it seems that sarcasm is the only way to expose the illogic.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:26 AM
 
Again, I wonder how she would be treated if she chose not to wear the burqa.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
Bah! Leave the sarcasm for the trolls. Just debate Railroader on the facts and see what answers he can come up with.
What facts?!? Dcmacdaddy, please.

WARNING: Very graphic video of a woman getting beaten for not wearing a burqa
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
I dunno. sometimes it seems that sarcasm is the only way to expose the illogic.
Your sarcasm revealed your illogical thought process. Removing the burqa does not equate to showing as much skin as possible.

Don't you guys get tired of this crap? I know I am.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:38 AM
 
Post 4
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
Again, I wonder how she would be treated if she chose not to wear the burqa.
It probably depends on the woman and whether or not she lives in a conservative Muslim society.

For some Muslim women in some places wearing the burqa is not a choice.
For some Muslim in some places wearing the burqa is a choice.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
Pretty horrific.

What's the point of providing the link? We know already that in conservative Muslim cultures people can be physically assaulted and/or killed for not conforming to strictly held traditional practices. So what's your point for showing this? Are you trying to make a general indictment of all Muslims based on the behaviors/practices of conservative/fundamentalist Muslims?


The thing that bothers me about this video is the violence towards the woman. Whether the violence is due to wearing or not wearing a particular piece of clothing is irrelevant to me. Whether the violence is perpetuated by familiars or strangers is irrelevant to me. Whether the violence is performed by a Muslim or someone of another religion is irrelevant to me. What bothers me is the fact a woman is assaulted for attempting to assert her independence and to exhibit some personal agency. What bothers me is that this woman seem to be treated like an animal, like a possession in the socio-cultural context in which this assault took place.
( Last edited by dcmacdaddy; Sep 14, 2010 at 01:09 AM. )
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 01:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
Post 4
I'm not sure what 4 you are referring to but this post of yours was reply #165 (post # 166) in this thread.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
hyteckit  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 01:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
Here's Mel Gibson's reenactment of the incident in English.

YouTube - Mel Gibson Audio Tape #2 - Threatens to KILL Girlfriend
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 01:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
Hey Doofy, how you doin'?
Becoming quite bemused watching those whose stated hobby it is pick apart religions defend islam so rigourously.

...All religions are evil!
...except islam.
...and, umm, anything else which isn't Christianity.

That's about the top and tail of it, no?
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 01:43 AM
 
Clearly, again, I am wasting my time in this thread. You'll keep believing Muslim women wear the burqa by choice. I won't budge in my defense that being forced to wear a bikini top does not remotely compare to the forcing of women to wear burqas, nor the punishments if either remove the mentioned articles of clothing. Because really, that is what is little debate started about.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 01:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Becoming quite bemused watching those whose stated hobby it is pick apart religions defend islam so rigourously.

...All religions are evil!
...except islam.
...and, umm, anything else which isn't Christianity.

That's about the top and tail of it, no?
Yup. It is quite ironic. And I got them to do so on record.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 01:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
The thing that bothers me about this video is the violence towards the woman. Whether the violence is due to wearing or not wearing a particular piece of clothing is irrelevant to me. Whether the violence is perpetuated by familiars or strangers is irrelevant to me. Whether the violence is performed by a Muslim or someone of another religion is irrelevant to me. What bothers me is the fact a woman is assaulted for attempting to assert her independence and to exhibit some personal agency. What bothers me is that this woman seem to be treated like an animal, like a possession in the socio-cultural context in which this assault took place.
...caps
Originally Posted by Old Mo The Kiddie Fiddler
Hell is mostly full of ungrateful women.
     
hyteckit  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 01:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
Clearly, again, I am wasting my time in this thread. You'll keep believing Muslim women wear the burqa by choice. I won't budge in my defense that being forced to wear a bikini top does not remotely compare to the forcing of women to wear burqas, nor the punishments if either remove the mentioned articles of clothing. Because really, that is what is little debate started about.
I believe both Islam and Christianity limits a person's freedom and choice. Islam might be more restrictive than Christianity. Catholics are more restrictive than Protestants.

I mean no use of condoms during sex?
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 01:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
I mean no use of condoms during sex?
Can't see any mention of that restriction in the Bible. I must have an out-of-date copy or something.
     
hyteckit  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 01:59 AM
 
No one ever went to a Catholic School where you are physically punish if you don't follow the rules?

I mean, my brother got spank in the ass by a yard stick.
I got smack on the hand with a ruler.

And this was in grade school.

So maybe this wasn't a smack on the face. But I did get hit.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 02:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
But I did get hit.
I'm not surprised.
     
hyteckit  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 02:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Can't see any mention of that restriction in the Bible. I must have an out-of-date copy or something.
There was lots of things that are not mention specifically in the Bible. Doesn't mean Christians can interpret it and making up restrictions.

Something about wasting his seed.

F*ck that. I'm going to got waste another million seeds right now.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 02:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
I'm not surprised.
Why? Is that how priests get altar boys to touch their penises?
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 02:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
I'm going to got waste another million seeds right now.
Here's some material to aid you in that endeavour.

You're welcome.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 02:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Why?
Because you're whiney enough that anyone would want to slap you.

Oh, and I went to secular school and got the cane across ass*. So it's nothing peculiar to Catholic schools, as you're suggesting.

(* for being one of the ringleaders organising a bit of inter-school gang warfare)
     
hyteckit  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 02:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Because you're whiney enough that anyone would want to slap you.

Oh, and I went to secular school and got the cane across ass*. So it's nothing peculiar to Catholic schools, as you're suggesting.

(* for being one of the ringleaders organising a bit of inter-school gang warfare)
Do you slap your wife around for being whiney too?

Christian values I see.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 02:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Do you slap your wife around for being whiney too?
I don't have a wife. But if I did, she'd want to slap you around for being whiney too.
     
hyteckit  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 02:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
I don't have a wife. But if I did, she'd want to slap you around for being whiney too.
Oh right. You wanted wives.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 02:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Here's some material to aid you in that endeavour.

You're welcome.
That's a fine looking picture. But he's not my type.

I prefer Catholic school girls in their cute school uniform. Got any pictures?
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 09:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
Clearly, again, I am wasting my time in this thread. You'll keep believing Muslim women wear the burqa by choice. I won't budge in my defense that being forced to wear a bikini top does not remotely compare to the forcing of women to wear burqas, nor the punishments if either remove the mentioned articles of clothing. Because really, that is what is little debate started about.
Here's a simple question for you.

Do you think the violence shown in the link you provided is more or less horrific because the participants were Muslim?
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 09:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
Here's a simple question for you.

Do you think the violence shown in the link you provided is more or less horrific because the participants were Muslim?
Here's a simple question for you:

Do you think the violence shown in the link provided is more or less likely to happen if the participants were Buddhist?
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 09:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
I believe both Islam and Christianity limits a person's freedom and choice. Islam might be more restrictive than Christianity. Catholics are more restrictive than Protestants.
It's not just Islam and Christianity, it's pretty much all religions. There is a reason why anthropologists and sociologists talk about religion as "pattern maintenance groups". A major part of the role played by religion in a social/cultural group is enforcement of mores and values.

As far as limiting "a person's freedom and choice" you would have to array these restrictions along a sliding scale and then plot out where the various religions fall (in regards to their individual restrictive practices). Certainly, when it comes to proper dress ultra-conservative/fundamentalist Islam is one of the most restrictive when it comes to how women dress.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 10:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Here's a simple question for you:

Do you think the violence shown in the link provided is more or less likely to happen if the participants were Buddhist?
Ahhh . . . I get it now. That's the difference in how we approach this issue: You, and probably Railroader, are more concerned with who perpetrate violence against women. To me, it doesn't matter who perpetrates violence against women, I think it is wrong regardless of who is committing the act.


As to your question, certainly Buddhists are going to be less likely to assault a woman. (That leaves aside the issue of whether or not Buddhism is truly a religion or just a philosophical practice.) But again, we are talking sliding scales here. All non-pacifist religions will find some acts of violence acceptable and therein you will find one of the fundamental flaws of all religion, namely a willingness to justify certain inappropriate acts because of their faith.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 10:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
Ahhh . . . I get it now. That's the difference in how we approach this issue: You, and probably Railroader, are more concerned with who perpetrate violence against women.
Incorrect.
I'm concerned with your lack of knowledge about which groups of people are most likely, because of their culture, to perpetrate violence against women (or anyone else for that matter).
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 10:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
Incorrect.
I'm concerned with your lack of knowledge about which groups of people are most likely, because of their culture, to perpetrate violence against women (or anyone else for that matter).
I am quite aware that ultra-conservative/fundamentalist Islam is most likely to "perpetrate violence against women (or anyone else for that matter)".

What's your point? I abhor ALL religions. So, I am not going to be more bothered by one religion than another. There is no doubt that at this point in time/history believers in the fundamentalist Islamic faith are perpetrating more violence than believers of any other faith. So what? I am not going to indict believers in the fundamentalist Islamic faith more than believers in any other faith. I am going to indict them all equally because they are all (in my mind) equally flawed for the mere act of practicing a religion. I don't see this issue as Muslims are bad; I see this issue as Religions are bad.
( Last edited by dcmacdaddy; Sep 14, 2010 at 11:03 AM. Reason: incorrect punctuation.)
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 11:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
So, what's your point. I abhor ALL religions. So, I am not going to be more bothered by one religion than another. There is no doubt that at this point in time/history believers in the fundamentalist Islamic faith are perpetrating more violence than believers of any other faith. So what? I am not going to indict believers in the fundamentalist Islamic faith more than believers in any other faith. I am going to indict them all equally because they are all (in my mind) equally flawed for the mere act of practicing a religion. I don't see this issue as Muslims are bad; I see this issue as Religions are bad.
And this is the problem. By categorising all religions in basically the same way, you're essentially letting your atheist dogma get in the way of facts.
For example, you state that you're not going to indict believers in the fundie islamic faith any more than believers in any other faith - which means that you're not going to indict fundie islamic wife-beaters any more than passive Buddhists. Your assumption that all religions are equally bad is quite simply not in agreement with reality, and is a result of your religionophobia rather than any clear look at the world around you.
( Last edited by Doofy; Sep 14, 2010 at 11:16 AM. Reason: Typo)
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 11:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
And this is the problem. By categorising all religions in basically the same way, you're essentially letting your atheist dogma get in the way of facts.
What are "the facts" Doofy? That "at this point in time/history believers in the fundamentalist Islamic faith are perpetrating more violence than believers of any other faith"? I already said that.


Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
For example, you state that you're not going to indict believers in the fundie islamic faith any more than believers in any other faith - which means that you're not going to indict fundie islamic wife-beaters any more than passive Buddhists. Your assumption that all religions are equally bad is quite simply not in agreement with reality, and is a result of your religionophobia rather than any clear look at the world around you.
My attitude doesn't mean that I am not going to call out religious Buddhists--and really, only those who adhere to the Mahayana practice could be considered to be participating in a religion--it means that I keep a clear eye out for those who use religion as a tool and/or weapon against others. It means that I am no more, and no less, likely to criticise one religion over another. It mans that whenever and wherever I see an opportunity to criticise religion for being a tool of oppression I will do so. At this point in time/history I spend more time criticising Islam than other religions because there is more to criticise. But it doesn't mean I think Islam is "worse" than other religions. I think they are all equally bad at limiting human potential.


Seriously, look at my history in this forum going back a decade--It will be ten years her for me, officially, next week--and you will discover that I have always criticised ALL religions. You on the other hand, are all butt-hurt that Islamic terrorists killed one of your closest friends in the Pan Am 103 bombing and have held a grudge against all Muslims ever since. Do a little introspective examination and explore why you have such strong feelings against the entire Islamic faith; You might learn something.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 11:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
Do a little introspective examination and explore why you have such strong feelings against the entire Islamic faith; You might learn something.
I know why I have strong feelings against it - because I'm against the ideology. It's that simple.

When a bunch of people riot and threaten war over a book (not) being burned, it's time to question the ideology they adhere to.

You should try not to assume that I'm against anything because of some emotional involvement. I'm not a lib and I'm not Amerikkkan, so I don't follow emotions to anywhere near the same degree that you do. The first question to ask if any member of any group commits a crime is to ask whether they're representative of their group or a looney acting alone. So you take a good, hard look at the available evidence. And if the answer keeps coming back the same, it's usually the correct one.
I'm a conservative-leaning Englishman. I don't do emotions. Stop confusing me with your crybaby lib countrymen.
( Last edited by Doofy; Sep 14, 2010 at 11:54 AM. )
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
When a bunch of people riot and threaten war over a book (not) being burned, it's time to question the ideology they adhere to.
So you're saying Raiders fans are Muslims terrorists?
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:10 PM
 
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:14 PM
 
This seems to be making the rounds today. Interesting perspective.
===============================================



> A German's View on Islam
>
> A man, whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II, owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism. 'Very few people were true Nazis,' he said, 'but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.'
>
> We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectre of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.
>
> The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honour-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.
>
> The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent majority,' is cowed and extraneous.
>
> Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China 's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.
>
> The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.
>
> And who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace loving'?
>
> History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:
>
> Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.
>
> Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany , they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.
>
> Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts--the fanatics who threaten our way of life.
>
> Lastly, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on, is contributing to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand. So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on! Let us hope that thousands, world-wide, read this and think about it, and send it on.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
So you're saying Raiders fans are Muslims terrorists?
I'm not aware of the actions of any Raiders fans. However, all Raiders fans can probably be called "losers" since, as we know, proper football fans support the Cowboys or Packers.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2010, 12:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
The first question to ask if any member of any group commits a crime is to ask whether they're representative of their group or a looney acting alone.
Correct.

Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
So you take a good, hard look at the available evidence. And if the answer keeps coming back the same, it's usually the correct one.
Correct as well.

So, where is the good hard evidence that a majority of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims hold the same values as the world's radical/fundamentalist Muslims?

For example, you posted pictures of some Muslims in England protesting the plans to burn the Qur'an. Is it a logical assumption to think that the group of Muslims that came out to vocally and violently protest the burning of the Qur'an are representative of most or all Muslims in England?

In other words, do the actions of a small (by numerical size) subset of a group accurately represent the feelings/beliefs/attitudes of the group as a whole?
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:09 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,