islam, the religion of love...

The End of Faith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reason trumps belief. We've been conversationally tolerant long enough. Etc.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

The ceremonial daggers are also problematic.

And Brady can get as bent out of shape as he wants, but at the end of the day, we all know he's as frustrated as any of us by religious zealotry. And probably more than the rest of us when it comes to religion mingling with politics.

(P.S. Since when am I skinny?)

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Can we just bring up female circumcision, nazis and how 9/11 was all Islam's fault right now? Just so when it comes up later no one will have to feign shock that someone dared do it?

I just think it's easier this way.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Bradylama

I actually was going to bring up female circumcision and how the aforementioned arab girl thought that granting asylum to a girl and her family based on fears of female genital mutilation was bunk, but I felt it would be too complicated for the argument I was going to attempt to make about determining consent.

Opportunity lost.

Show up to school one day driving a SAAB, wearing a yamaka and a t-shirt that says "REPPING FOR JUDEN."

Offer her a ride.

Film the results.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by El Ray Fernando

I have studied Ethinic Minorities and Law with one of the best professors litterally in the World this year as one of my 4 core Law modules and I know the shit these people take.

Well I've studied Anthropology at some of the top universities in the world, with some of the top professors in the field and I can tell you: No, you really don't.

Want to keep the academic pissing contest going or can we move on with our lives now?

You've offered some examples of what are obviously overreactions by people towards Islam.

But you know what's just as stupid and dangerous? Assuming you have a full grasp of thousands of years of history, religion and belief because you took some classes on law.

Blanket acceptance is just as idiotic as blind rejection.

EDIT FOR BRADY

It's the danger of a belief in anything, really. Once you wholeheartedly buy into any given system, be it secular or religious, you're generally cutting off certain logical options.

In summation:

Grow a set of those dangly hair thingies the rabbis rock and look into learning the Israeli national anthem.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Pangalin

Absolutely. One of the main things fueling the current American revival in conservative Christianity is the notion that they're somehow being oppressed, and every stamp-out-the-loonies book and editorial just gives them more fuel for that delusional fire. While the notion that kooks shouldn't have to be tolerated is a valid one, it's flatly impossible by definition to reduce extremism via a zero-tolerance policy. Persecution (or the appearance of persecution) strengthens cult behavior.

But they are being oppressed, Pang. They've only had 43 Presidents be of their faith. And though that might seem impressive from a percentage standpoint, it's absolutely horrific when you think of it in terms of a number.

I mean 43 is a lot less than a million.

And that's terrifying.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Pangalin

Oh, most of those Presidents weren't really Christians, Deni. Not Real True Christians. One of them was even a Papist, don'tcha know.

No President will be a Real Christian in the eyes of the modern fundamentalist movement until he deploys troops specifically to secure the Temple Mount for Israel (at which point the Messiah may return to Earth and the Saved will be raptured, yes lord god jesus amen).

You're being smarmy, but when Earth 2 happens, I'm going to be chillaxing on a beach that's almost exactly (but not quite) the South of France and you'll be burning in hell for using sarcasm about our Lord's return and the rapture.

Or in some sort of mass void of nothingness.

The scripture is a little vague on that.

But it is clear on being anti-fag. Sorry half of GFF.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Bradylama

Some of them were even Deists!

This nation was founded on the notion that God is not an active universal participant! VOTE SECESSION

Your currant av and sig combination makes your political motivations suspect, Mr. Lama.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Bradylama

Soviet-era propaganda posters are badass is my motivation.

The best ones are the posters that tell people to smoke cigarettes with the sex appeal of 20 Marlboro men and then the ones that came out in the 50's telling people not to smoke.

Until you can show me a picture of Joe Camel working for the good of the people, I won't be impressed.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Who would have guessed, someone named Sexninja is a complete fucking idiot.

No, you don't become a "proper" christian by being a nun. You become an ascetic by becoming a nun. A sub-category of a religion. You don't need it to be christian, it's an extreme choice that is offered to people who desire to follow it.

Please read a book before you speak. At least one. Please.

Also, Fernando, you're ridiculously outclassed here. Just stop thrashing about. People argue logic, and you set your dial to 11 and start screaming in a disgustingly reactionary manner. Enough.

You can't just interweave two cultures with opposing value systems with the magic of tolerance. Just because you want to push your idiotic university liberal bullshit doesn't mean intelligent people need to pretend like it makes sense. It doesn't. Not everyone can be accepted into a given society. You can't simply blend different cultures that don't have the ability to be blended. You're being an ethnocentric git if you think for one second that anyone can simply become involved with anyone else so long as there is tolerance. No. The state apparatus exists as an entity created by the whole of the people who support it. It has certain doctrines and beliefs that are integral to its worldview. And you can't just squash another culture into it that has a completely alien worldview. It doesn't work that way. It has never worked that way. It shouldn't work that way.

No one here is saying you can't be Muslim AND something else. What people are saying is that if people come to a new country, though small concessions must be made by the state, the burden of changing one's perspective is on the immigrant. You don't leave Iran to become Iranian in America. You leave Iran to become an American-Iranian. There are clashing value systems, and you can't just magic those away with tolerance.

Please stop being a reactionary twit and think before you speak. It'd do you wonders.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

That may be the funniest damn thing I've ever read on here. "NOTHING BAD HAPPENS IN ISLAMIC COUNTRIES."

Hilarious.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Blah is right, and I'll add to it:

Christianity isn't a state. We don't have a christian state. I'm not religious, a lot of people arguing with you aren't religious. We're people who have a problem with a lot of religion, we're just able to spot the especially idiotic ones from a non-biased perspective.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Did... he just say Israel was responsible for the attacks on 9/11? Wow.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Janus X

I wouldn't bet my life on your claim. The bible, too, calls for the massacre of infidels. Had the pope of the time have it, he would have gladly use it and say, ''I have cleared the Earth from infidels''

This is why controlling iran (and surrounding countries) is important. THEY don't have the rule of law, they have the sharia (law from the kuran). And because such a law also calls for the extinction of infidels, we must be very careful.

Of course, imposing democracy like it is done in iraq is no solution. Prosperity brings democracy, not the other way around

YouTube Video

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

The best part of this is watching Janus backpedal as fast as possible when he realises how obscenely outclassed he is.

FELIPE NO

Pang, you realise you're trying to argue logic with Minion, right? You might as well slam your head into a brick wall.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

It would certainly be hard to be more predictable.

Well, I guess to do that he would have to come back when some random girl on the boards had a tragic turn of events, and he would try and slime his way into her panties.

That would be more classic minion.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by chronicles

Jesus healed the sick, preached love thy neighbor, give to the poor etc. Muhamad was involved in many bloody wars, married a 9 year old. Christianity has had its roots in being spread by the sword, I won't argue that. The difference between the two religions is pretty simple. The bible taught against it while the koran endorces it.

Except that child bride's were fully acceptable at the time, and Mary Magdalene--who was more than likely married to Jesus--was an underage prostitute by our standards. Jesus also whipped people in a temple, but hey. Dude was all hugs and flowers, right?

But here's your problem: Jesus and Mohammed are neither of them the basis of the religion. God and Allah are. And you know who are really, really similar? God and Allah.

You say the bible teaches tolerance, but it simply doesn't. Anti-homosexual (men who lay with men etc), anti-tolerance (no gods before me), anti-free thought (tree of knowledge), and very much pro-war on the unbelievers.

You can try and justify your arguments anyway you like, but anyone with a lick of logic realises that the difference between the Muslim faith and the Christian faith is a political one and nothing more. The one thing you've made abundantly clear through your idiotic ranting thus far is that you've never actually studied either faith. Watching CNN and reading the Cole's Notes on the bible doesn't make a religious studies major. This concept that either religion is worse than the other, or that christian faith wouldn't be as iron fist-y if they had a theocracy in our country is ridiculous. You're arguing politics, not religion, and you're doing -that- poorly as well. Feel free to shove the fuck off until you read a little more.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Swank Frank

Could you go into a little more detail here? I honestly don't understand the comparison between robbing banks and suicide bombings. I can see their both done out of some severe desperation, but other than that I'm afraid I'm lost.

Robbing banks and holding rich motherfuckers for ransom leaves some hope for personal advancement, wheras suicide bombings do not. While I agree that it's silly to blame solely Islam on the readiness of those who strap explosives to their chest I'm afraid I can't follow how you're drawing such a hard line (or so it seems) between Bonnie & Clyde and Sajida Rishawi.

It's obvious there's something in the middle-east aside from personal depseration driving people to do these things, and while it's not necessarily religion I think you're trying to oversimplify the situation.

Pang isn't making a direct comparison between suicide bombings and bank robbing, what he's saying is that desperation breeds actions that a rational man would find off-putting. A poor man will rob a bank, risking incarceration or death, because his life simply isn't that good to begin with. For him, the benefit outweighs the risk. The same is true of suicide bombers. Religion is the outlet, but it isn't the cause for the act. If there was a standard of living, and a situation where the benefits of death (possible afterlife reward) didn't outweigh the benefits of life (poor, no food, no women, no hockey) you wouldn't see it happening. It's very easy to be reasonable and logical when you aren't living in a desperate situation. I think that's what Pang was getting at, anyway.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by niki

reading Da Vinci Code =/= studying a faith ~

A) I couldn't make it through twenty pages of Dan Brown without dry heaving.

B) I did read Holy Blood Holy Grail, and it was obviously bullshit.

C) What I'm stating isn't some modern fiction, it's the gnostics. It's a fact accepted by many scholars, and it's even thought she may be the author of the fourth gospel. Pagels and Brown ran with it, and it's certainly a valid opinion supported by facts and textual clues if you understand the culture at the time of Jesus. Is it true? Who knows. But it's as plausible as anything else in there.

You're right, reading the Da Vinci code doesn't equal studying a faith. But you know what does? Years of studying a faith.

Coming back from a break after a lot of people felt you were being a git? Free.

Posting in a random thread on religion with an attempted pissy remark? Free.

Getting slapped in the face because you don't know what you're talking about? Priceless.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Anti-Religion? So, I'm being anti-religion by using religious history and religious scholars as a basis for an argument stating one religion isn't inherently worse than another?

Or maybe you mean I'm anti-religion because I'm not saying Islam is inherently worse than Christianity? Or maybe what you mean is you got caught with your pants down because you don't know any actual religious history beyond the DaVinci Code and your snide remark bit you in the ass.

Or maybe what you mean is that stating that Christianity isn't a doctrine of love and acceptance is anti-religion? Or maybe what you mean is that you don't actually comprehend any of the discussion at hand, but you want people to think you do. Because you're not doing a very good job of that, either. You clearly haven't done anything but briskly scan the discussion at hand and make a few backhanded comments like a bitch.

Or maybe it was anti-religion because I said prophets aren't the basis of a faith, but merely the conveyance of a message? But you're right. I've been going up and down this thread talking about how we should throw all catholics in prison, all muslims are terrorists and we should murder the jews to free us of the Zionist agenda. Get fucked, cunt. Sorry your big return was ruined by the fact you apparently can't read.

Also, trying not to laugh out loud at your comment about asserting the gnostics are 17 year old anti-religious bullshit. As if any biblical text is a more valid historical document than another.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by niki

Or maybe I just mean what I already stated. I don't care how many years of study you've taken. If you're going to sound like an oversimplifying retard, I'm going to call you one.

You know, it's just like your pope = Hitler's buddy tirade. You tell me how many years of study it takes to be that dumbfully wrong.

Keep it up with the trying to turn this into a personal issue, though. That's all you're really good for. :3

The only thing I've ever said about the Pope in any seriousness is that he looks like Sidious and was in the Hitler Youth. After which I quickly pointed out you sort of had to be if you grew up in Germany in that era.

And I'm the one who's making things personal. I'm sure you didn't come in singling me out for an obvious disproving of a bullshit theory largely because I've made you look like a clown and hurt your precious e-rep in the past.

But you keep talking shit, niki. You're not even good for that.

And you want to talk about being an oversimplifying retard, how about storming into the room and flailing like a faggot about idiotic fiction just because you feel slighted you can't ban me when I show you up anymore. Because I was having a serious academic discussion with someone who said Jesus was the nicest guy ever and Mohammed was a pedo fuck and can we all just agree christianity is great. I should have quoted from the Gnostics directly instead of giving a rough outline of why he was wrong. Grow up.

Get fucked, dipshit. You're still useless. No one bought your pissy little backhanded faux-pacifism bullshit three years ago, and it's even more laughable now that you've been outed as a reactionary asshole. Lose the Minion impression, it isn't cute.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by niki

I'm afraid I'm not pop00lar enough anymore to get a "let's be friends" pm this time, though.

Except what I said there wasn't tying the current pope to nazis, but rather commenting on their silence during World War II and their declining to comment on the slave trade.

Good hustle though.

And see, the reason you didn't get a PM trying to work out this little spat is because a few years ago, you were a rational person I just disagreed with. But you've declined horridly since then, and aren't worth it anymore. I don't know when you decided to just go with what you know instead of bringing something to the table, but it's pathetic. Why do you think you want from being popular to no one really caring that you left? Because you fell the fuck off, that's why. There was a time when you could bring something interesting to this discussion, but we haven't seen that in years. And it's too bad, because there was a time you didn't suck.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by niki

That's always been my impression of you since the first time you joined here and started carefully picking your targets, like you still do to this day. The way you IMed me instantly when I picked on you in a Sewers thread to explain how we should be buddies was cute, too.

They say the first impression is always the good one, right ? :3

I love the way you keep bringing up the fact I tried to avoid escalating a conflict with someone I liked at the time as a bad thing. Good hustle.

Also nice job on trying to change the argument yet again, but the point you were trying to make had nothing to do with my arguing style, you were busy trying to prove I said the pope was a nazi. Good try, though. I'm sure no one else saw what you did there.

And it's going to take more than Secret Squirrel biting at my heels (yet again) to sway my opinion that you've done anything beyond show up, run your mouth accomplishing nothing, and quickly fuck right off again. You can play up the "Deni is mean" card all you like, but it doesn't change the fact you've yet to refute a single thing I've said in this thread.

Originally Posted by niki

It's all about knocking your opponents down with whatever fits you. Oh yeah, you're truly a brilliant scholar.

This from a guy who wandered in saying I was quoting from the DaVinci code (wrong), was using high school anti-religion arguments (wrong) and haven't studied religion (wrong.)

Cute.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Secret Squirrel

When have I ever been biting at your heels? And your opinion certainly isn't amongst any that I might be trying to sway here.

Upon actually looking back at the thread I was referring to, I had you confused with someone else.

I accused Saka of being Aard earlier, too. Names are not sticking in my brain, lately. Sorry, SS.

Though the comment about swaying my opinion was more aimed at niki, than you. In short: It takes more than him being propped by a few people who don't like me to change my opinion that he's done nothing in this thread but exactly what he's accusing me of doing.

Jam it back in, in the dark.