Trump Launches Tomahawk Missiles at Syria in Response to Alleged Chemical Attack

Okay fine, I'll rephrase then:

Why do you never post violent parts of the Quran when you're arguing that it's a religion of peace? They've been provided to you before haven't they?

Is it that it "never goes anywhere with your made up mindset" or is it that you're just not arguing the same point that they support?

Seriously, which is it?

That you cannot see what I've already explained (& the history Bob & I have) & prefer to not address Bob at all- tells me everything. You notice he is willing to let you do the heavy lifting for him as of late. I tire of this aside.

Sigh....

Okay Shinob. Carry on then.

And? You could probably find hundreds of millions of people that endorse any number of extreme nonsensical stances. Religions draw delusional people and rational people alike. That is inherently true of all religions. To say that Islam is defunct as a religion because it attracts crazy people is nonsensical.



Can a Muslim still be a Muslim and not follow Middle Eastern Islamic Law?



This argument is bulls*** and you know it. Claim that Islam is inherently violent, claim that Islam is repugnant, but you can't look at upwards of 70% of Muslims (a generous number by the way) that don't support Middle Eastern s*** and say that that's a 'minority view'. What kind of math wizardry allows 70% to be a 'minority view'? As to the 'leading tafsir' thing, you're going to have to elaborate how a 'leading tafsir' in the Middle East has any more say over Islam as a whole than a genocidal 'Christian Leader' in Africa has over the whole of Christianity. My digging indicates that they both have exactly zero influence over world doctrine, but I'm not the learned one here, so please elaborate.



Of course there's a difference. Just like there's a difference between Asians and Blacks. The question is, however, does it matter? Does it matter that Islam is different from Hinduism, Christianity, and Zionism when talking about extremism in their own ranks? How is it different for Islam as opposed to other religions like Christianity? How is it different from other ideas like patriotism?

Saying Islam is a religion of peace when it calls on its followers to kill, R4pe and molest the innocent is a joke. I am not saying Islam is defunct I am saying it is sick, dangerous and needs to be exposed for what it is.

Islam has problems in it's own text just like Christianity does. I don't even have to go through the OT and highlight things like stoning people for wearing two different types of fabric at once. I can pull problems from the NT too. The NT has a problem with passiveness, and that's because Jesus' message could get a little heavy handed at times. 'Trust in the Lord' promotes concepts of passiveness and fate, where the people who suffer are deserving of it because the Lord is the great arbiter of judgement. Where people who are suffering, instead of being encouraged to change their own situation for the better, are instead encouraged to appeal to God until He deems it fit to change their situation for them. These are not healthy attitudes.

Islam's texts have a rather different problem, but it is no less dangerous. Islam's texts, from what I've seen, promote vigilance and tribalism. Two concepts not at all unexpected in a society living in the desert. Islam's problem is that this can balloon into problems of paranoia and violence. From what I've seen of the texts, he engaged in pretty typical behavior for the time period. Of course it was barbaric by our standards, and of course the world has, by and large, moved away from those practices. Just like the Battle of Jericho was both a common war time practice at the time and barbaric by today's standards.

This is literally the automated, knee-jerk muppet response of those who have been programmed to speak the acceptable lie in the face of truth. I can no longer be bothered with it. If you or anyone else wishes to say that Islam is just like all other religions your level of mental defect is beyond remedy, as you have clearly decided that two plus two equals five solely as a product of your own choice and free will.

Yes the propaganda and lies are intense, but it only takes one, maybe two seconds of critical thought to see the emperor's emaciated, flaccid johnson swinging pathetically in the breeze.




So many errors here.

1. The problems of the Islamic texts are in no way comparable to the problems of any other religious text - a thing that is known by anyone who bothers to learn. No other religious text I am aware of calls non believers inhuman, gives its followers permission to lie to, r4pe and murder them at will, tells its followers that they will spend eternity rap1ng unbelievers etc., etc. This psychosis is unique to Islam.

2. Islam's texts demand supremacy, hate, bigotry, violence, child molestation, r4pe, terror, torture, mass murder, the brutalisation of women (Muhammad's child bride is recorded as saying no women suffer as much as the wives of Muslims) not paranoia. Muslims are the best of all creatures whereas non Muslims are "vile beasts" and worse than animals (from memory 8:55 and 98:6 of the koran).

3. The world has not moved away from the practices of Islam at all and this is a ridiculous statement. Slavery, oppression and barbarism have continued unabated (with only a couple of brief exceptions) from the days of Muhammad til today in areas where Islam is left unchecked. From the Armenian genocide of the early 1900s in Turkey through to the repeated genocidal acts against Kurds in Iran, Iraq and Turkey and the systemic oppression and violence against Copts, Bahai and other minority groups in Iran, the killing of apostates in Saudia Arabia, and their imprisonment or death in places like Pakistan, Northern Africa etc., the enslavement and r4pe of Africans that has gone on for 1400 years, and the general suppression of any other Islamic sect it is fair to say that the Islamic world is a long way behind the civilised world. Despite taking over some the most advanced cultures of the past Islam languishes to the rear of the rest of humanity in pretty much every indicator of civility.

4. Even by the standard of Muhammad's day he was considered particularly immoral and brutal. Islam's own texts record people reviling him for his despicable conduct, his lies, his mistreatment of women, his propensity for violence and bloodshed etc. If you read the texts you speak of you would know this.

5. The battle of Jericho is in no way relevant to Islam's current acts of violence.

You have not shown a single piece of evidence that puts Islam beyond the pale of other religions. You have argued, quite vehemently, that Islam has a bunch of dangerous passages in it, something that I have not argued against, but you have not explained how these passages put them beyond the pale when compared to other religions. All the things you cite can be found in the Bible as well, because most of the barbaric practices of the time were a result of the times and not of the religions.



No, it's not. It's actually quite a common vein in everything from political extremism, to religious extremism, to extreme patriotism. Islam is not unique in it's calls for hate, division, destruction, or victimization. Not in the slightest.



If you would like a rundown of the amount of times God and God's believers have smited 'foul beasts' for their immorality and refusal to bend to God's will, than I can happily provide. ALL Abrahamic religions call for the smiting of the 'lesser' non-believers. Every. Single. One. Islam is not alone in that regard.

You want to talk about 'demanding supremacy, hate, and bigotry'? The bible has tons of that. The basic sentiment is the same in both books.



Oh, like the Middle East. Well Africa is basically the Christian equivalent of that analogy. If you can look at the s*** happening in Africa in the name of Christianity and say they're not really Christian, I can run the same argument in favor of Islam where the s*** going on in the Middle East isn't really being done by Muslims. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either both of our points work or they both fail.



This is irrelevant as deemed by you since apparently Christian atrocities committed within the last century are irrelevant.



Islam is a religion, not a culture. What advanced cultures have Islam supplanted?



Which proves my point. Islam is multifaceted. By pinning everything to Muhammad, you limit the discussion. As you just said, the texts themselves call Muhammad reviling. How is it relevant to the larger discussion of Islam if Muhammad is marginalized in it's own texts?

Also, just as a note from a person who likes history, sources calling other people more s***ty even by their standards does not in any way make them accurate. Enemies, people with problems with the person in question, and a whole host of other things can be in play. The much better option is to look at the practices of the day and compare them with each other. Much less chance for introducing bias that way.



No but it is relevant when talking about the various religions and their bloody passages. You wish to argue that Islam is the worse religion in the world, but you do not want to debate that point using other religions. How can anyone have a discussion about which is the worst religion in the world if you don't want to talk about any other religion?

[Adopts voice of brainless automaton]

Yes. Islam IS like all other religions.

Yes. Islam IS a religion of peace.

Yes. All those people killed by Muslims in the name of allah were not killed by Muslims in the name of allah.

Yes. Two plus two does equal five.

Yes. It is racist to point out some problems happening now in the Islamic world.

To claim that Islam is like any other religion because no other religion is currently anything like Islam but all religions have bad things in their texts and/or history is to argue that you are a muppet sucking up the absurdly transparent propaganda to be honest. It gets boring after awhile.

FFS, we all know Islam is a little different to other religions because the fruit of it is clear in every place that has its laws predicated on sharia - the more sharia, the more oppressive the culture. Yes, you can ignore all the nations where sharia is used to justify r4pe, violence, child abuse, slavery and the oppression of minorities if you want and instead focus on those nations that have been secularised by the west and falsely claim that this is Islam, or, you can look at countries where Islam is practiced. Or, you can look at how Islam is growing in places like Indonesia. Or you can look at places within Indonesia where Islam is growing and bringing all the problems Islam brings for women, children, minorities and non believers etc.

Okay, now you're simply projecting because the only thing I've actually said is the first statement, and clearly all those statements are different. Unless you're like Bush and 'if you're not with us you're against us'?



Well, I guess I'm racist because I just did that not too long ago.



You say repeatedly that you want to discuss the problems of Islam, but unless I subscribe to your childish understanding of psychology and World History, you don't want to hear it. You say you want to discuss the problems of Islam, but the discussion begins and ends with 'Islam is the worst thing in the world.' 'Paranoia brought on by a combination of doctrine and fundamentalism? Naw that can't be right. That's too complicated. It MUST be because Islam is a piece of s*** of a religion and everyone who follows it is morally bankrupt.' What an asinine and completely rudimentary understanding of the world.



There's the old 'no true Scotsman' argument. "Nations that have been secularized by the west and falsely claim that this is Islam"? Yeah, because only the Muslims who subscribe to making Sharia apply to all, to suicide bombing, to extremist doctrine, are "true" Muslims, just like the only "true" Christians are the ones who disavow the Old Testament, don't kill people, and have married priests. What a gigantic load.

News flash, religious law is incredibly oppressive by it's very nature, I think the Old Testament proved that point rather succinctly. Whether it's Sharia or Christian or Zionist or whatever else the result is never good, especially when enacted by fundamentalists.

Somewhere between I am a rainbow unicorn princess and my pronoun is zimzerweezel the great, and, you must adhere strictly to the idea I believe embodies a given ideology, there is probably a reality of some kind or other.

Not all Muslims are evil. Most Muslims do not know what Islam entails.





Whether this is acceptable in Islam is debatable. My reading suggests it probably isn't. But as Islam is a load of s*** it really doesn't matter all that much.

What gives you or anyone else the right to decide where that middle ground is for everyone else? Your entire argument is based on two suppositions. 1) That a middle ground exists and 2) That you know where that middle ground is and anyone who says it's somewhere else is barking at the moon.

Religion is varied, just like politics. Religion can range for people quite easily. Who's to say what the most important pillar of Christianity is, for example? Is it the call to charity? Is it the call to obey the Lord unflinchingly? Is it the call to 'treat others the way you would like to be treated'? Is it the call of chastity until marriage? Is it the call that marriage is final? How many of these things must you believe in in order to call yourself a 'true Christian'? How many of these things must you not believe in in order to no longer be allowed to call yourself a 'true Christian'? The same applies to being Muslim. That threshold will be different for different people, but they will all self identify as Christian or Muslim, as is their own right.



My reading suggests that pretty much everything I listed for both Christianity and Islam is, if probably not unacceptable, at least up in the air.