[quote]lurker26 wrote:
Sorry, to clarify my earlier comments, the Anti-sex comment was mostly directed towards observations of all strict faiths, my own example being Catholicism (though also with protastantism and islam). As an example, in the catholic faith, oral sex is considered a ‘sin of sodom’ and as such is as sinful as anal sex.
In fact, most of the ‘anti-sodomy’ laws that have been overturned addressed oral sex as well as anal sex. People cherry picking what they want to believe in a religion to support their own agendas is pretty typical in North America.
You usually don’t get the people condemning gay marriage making a big deal about a wife giving her man a blowjob, even though the bible says no to both.[/quote]
Can someone here please reference a verse where it says your wife giving you a blow job is a sin.
And lurker26 I believe you insulted me, you have no idea what kind of science i practice. Any good scientist removes all bias from his work. But I will let it go.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
I don’t hate any group based on religion, race etc.
I do think that there is too much violence done in the name of religion and moderates need to step up and speak out against it much more forcefully.
Did you just agree with me? I feel queasy.[/quote]
You are queasy.
Did you miss the nuance? I’m asking moderates of every religion, including Christianity, to step up.
Anyway, back to the original question.
Doesn’t the Al-Queda or something guy have a say? Do we know if he would want to fuck Ashley Blue, if that is her real name?
All Muslims? Well we can’t ask all Muslims, but some Muslims for sure? Would they consider poor Ashley?
Another anti-scientific theory many radical christians hold is about the beginning of time. They eschew deep geological time and propose that the world was created a few thousdand years ago. I can’t remember the exact age they give the earth, but basically it is, according to them, just a few thousand years old.
Mind you, I am not saying Christians, in general, believe this. I am talking about the radical Christians. Anybody here want to defend that one?
Now do we have to put that kind of shit into high school textbooks as well. After all, nobody was around (except of course GOD) when the earth was formed, so, you see, deep geological time, is just a theory, just like that gravity stuff :). I am also convinced that the earth is flat.
If it weren’t everything would slide down towards the south pole…hell, we’d all be Australians! That’s my theory and I want it in the textbooks. If you dont do so, I am going to wage a massive campaign (in the LIBERAL MEDIA) denouncing you for not being open-minded
and trying to force your weird, atheistic theories about roundness on innocent children.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
Can someone here please reference a verse where it says your wife giving you a blow job is a sin.[/quote]
I’m not aware of any. I think it’s the various churches that have lumped, incorrectly, oral sex with sodomy.
The Song of Solomon has a couple of passages that can be interpreted as celebrating fellatio and cunnilingus. (2:3, 4:16 and 5:1)
From Onan’s story, we learn that spilling seed on the ground angers God. (Genesis 38:9) So my guess would be that fellatio is okay, but the woman has to swallow.
[quote]entheogens wrote:
Another anti-scientific theory many radical christians hold is about the beginning of time. They eschew deep geological time and propose that the world was created a few thousdand years ago. I can’t remember the exact age they give the earth, but basically it is, according to them, just a few thousand years old.
Mind you, I am not saying Christians, in general, believe this. I am talking about the radical Christians. Anybody here want to defend that one?
Now do we have to put that kind of shit into high school textbooks as well. After all, nobody was around (except of course GOD) when the earth was formed, so, you see, deep geological time, is just a theory, just like that gravity stuff :). I am also convinced that the earth is flat.
If it weren’t everything would slide down towards the south pole…hell, we’d all be Australians! That’s my theory and I want it in the textbooks. If you dont do so, I am going to wage a massive campaign (in the LIBERAL MEDIA) denouncing you for not being open-minded
and trying to force your weird, atheistic theories about roundness on innocent children.[/quote]
In some circle I would be considered a radical christian. But the whole geological dating, if you are going by carbon dating it has an error attached to it of something like +/- 10,000 yrs.
But that is another arguement.
So POOKIE
only the spitters are sinners.
better teach my wife to be a good devout christian and put her in her place since that is what we christians do.
Probably a topic for a new thread, but what do you think the bible says about my other profession, you know the one where I get locked in a cage with another barbarian(trained athlete) and we beat the snot out of each other (determine who is more skilled).
[quote]lixy wrote:
Joe D. wrote:
Which version of the Koran did you read?
Is that a joke?
[/quote]
It was sarcasm.
Hmm, let me see. Perhaps the main difference is that the guy who claims to have been given the word of god was a slave owner. Had a man killed so he could marry his wife. Destroyed the Zorastranians so as to establish his “religion of peace” and generally is a strange example of a man to try and emulate.
Is that a joke? How about Rights for homosexuals, women, things like that?
How does the mass migration of muslims from muslim countries to non muslim countries along with reproduction rates much higher than average western numbers weaken my argument? People are not converting to Islam, Muslims are merely moving into western countries and having lots of kids. My argument is fine, thank you.
Again, as with your previous posts, your condescending answers and presumptions about my knowledge of the subject matter are amusing. I am fully aware of the history of Turkey, the whole place was founded upon the spoils of the Christian Byzantine Empire. Attaturk made marvellous strides to modernise the country by banning the fez and enforcing western-style second names. Militarism is all the stops Turkey falling the way of all other Muslim countries, namely Fundamentalist regimes.
[quote]
Muslims living in western countries are no doubt nice people, but they do not afford the same niceties to non-muslims when the are the majority. Simply look to ANY Muslim country for proof of this.
Ok. You pushed it too far this time.
What kind of knowledge do you have of Muslim countries? Did you ever live for a long strech of time in ANY of them? Are you in contact with indigenous people living in one of them. You judge a billion and a half people and 40+ countries based on what you see about Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia in the news. This is quite unfair if you ask me.
I am familiar with practically every single Arab country, and let me tell you that, with the exception of the Saudis, Christian and Jewish communities are treated with the utmost respect in all of them.
For someone so keen on denouncing blind intolerance, you come off as a…how shall I put it? Bah, let’s remain courteous. There is no way to put it delicately.[/quote]
On this point, if I started, I would not know where to stop. A casual search could provide endless lists of beheadings, “honour killings”, the fact that it is forbidden to repair any churches in muslim countries, the torture and murder of three protestants by muslims in Turkey last month. The fact that it is illegal in Malaysia to convert to Christianity. Just little inconsequential things like these?
Perhaps you stop listening to your father about the great old country and wake up to the reality of the “religion of peace”.
[quote]Joe D. wrote:
lixy wrote:
Joe D. wrote:
Which version of the Koran did you read?
Is that a joke?
It was sarcasm.
It is fundamentally different to all other world religions and totally intolerant of the western way of life.
Please elaborate. What exactly is it you find fundamentally different about it? Last I checked, it wasn’t a new religion. It was meant as a revival of the true Abrahameic monotheistic message.
Hmm, let me see. Perhaps the main difference is that the guy who claims to have been given the word of god was a slave owner. Had a man killed so he could marry his wife. Destroyed the Zorastranians so as to establish his “religion of peace” and generally is a strange example of a man to try and emulate.
I am a Muslim who is very tolerant of Western lifestyle. I don’t see why you’d call it intolerant.
Is that a joke? How about Rights for homosexuals, women, things like that?
Islam spread across the globe and was only stopped by determined effort by the west to stop it.
Boo! Beware of the plague.
What kind of thing is that to say. If Islam is indeed spreading across the globe, it rather weakens your previous claim of “intolerance” and “fundamental differences”.
How does the mass migration of muslims from muslim countries to non muslim countries along with reproduction rates much higher than average western numbers weaken my argument? People are not converting to Islam, Muslims are merely moving into western countries and having lots of kids. My argument is fine, thank you.
One only needs to look at the protests in Turkey to see the reality of western values fighting again the tide of Islam.
Judging from such a comment, it appears that you don’t seem to have enough background on Turkish history, political system, and society.
Read on a bit about the complexity of the issue before making patently false catch lines;
Again, as with your previous posts, your condescending answers and presumptions about my knowledge of the subject matter are amusing. I am fully aware of the history of Turkey, the whole place was founded upon the spoils of the Christian Byzantine Empire. Attaturk made marvellous strides to modernise the country by banning the fez and enforcing western-style second names. Militarism is all the stops Turkey falling the way of all other Muslim countries, namely Fundamentalist regimes.
Muslims living in western countries are no doubt nice people, but they do not afford the same niceties to non-muslims when the are the majority. Simply look to ANY Muslim country for proof of this.
Ok. You pushed it too far this time.
What kind of knowledge do you have of Muslim countries? Did you ever live for a long strech of time in ANY of them? Are you in contact with indigenous people living in one of them. You judge a billion and a half people and 40+ countries based on what you see about Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia in the news. This is quite unfair if you ask me.
I am familiar with practically every single Arab country, and let me tell you that, with the exception of the Saudis, Christian and Jewish communities are treated with the utmost respect in all of them.
For someone so keen on denouncing blind intolerance, you come off as a…how shall I put it? Bah, let’s remain courteous. There is no way to put it delicately.
On this point, if I started, I would not know where to stop. A casual search could provide endless lists of beheadings, “honour killings”, the fact that it is forbidden to repair any churches in muslim countries, the torture and murder of three protestants by muslims in Turkey last month. The fact that it is illegal in Malaysia to convert to Christianity. Just little inconsequential things like these?
Perhaps you stop listening to your father about the great old country and wake up to the reality of the “religion of peace”.
In some circle I would be considered a radical christian. But the whole geological dating, if you are going by carbon dating it has an error attached to it of something like +/- 10,000 yrs.
Probably a topic for a new thread, but what do you think the bible says about my other profession, you know the one where I get locked in a cage with another barbarian(trained athlete) and we beat the snot out of each other (determine who is more skilled).
[/quote]
True on the error range of carbon dating, but any radioactive date has an error range. Carbon is typically (on most dates I have seen, the error range is something like +/- 200 to 500 years.
We use a different isotopic process to date the earth entirely. I believe it’s Uranium-Lead dating, which has a much longer accuracy range.
In some circle I would be considered a radical christian. But the whole geological dating, if you are going by carbon dating it has an error attached to it of something like +/- 10,000 yrs.
Probably a topic for a new thread, but what do you think the bible says about my other profession, you know the one where I get locked in a cage with another barbarian(trained athlete) and we beat the snot out of each other (determine who is more skilled).
True on the error range of carbon dating, but any radioactive date has an error range. Carbon is typically (on most dates I have seen, the error range is something like +/- 200 to 500 years.
We use a different isotopic process to date the earth entirely. I believe it’s Uranium-Lead dating, which has a much longer accuracy range.
[/quote]
Stay on topic…stay on topic.
Let me remind you. Ashley Blue, Double Anal, Muslims.
[quote]entheogens wrote:
Another anti-scientific theory many radical christians hold is about the beginning of time. They eschew deep geological time and propose that the world was created a few thousdand years ago. I can’t remember the exact age they give the earth, but basically it is, according to them, just a few thousand years old.
Mind you, I am not saying Christians, in general, believe this. I am talking about the radical Christians. Anybody here want to defend that one?
Now do we have to put that kind of shit into high school textbooks as well. After all, nobody was around (except of course GOD) when the earth was formed, so, you see, deep geological time, is just a theory, just like that gravity stuff :). I am also convinced that the earth is flat.
If it weren’t everything would slide down towards the south pole…hell, we’d all be Australians! That’s my theory and I want it in the textbooks. If you dont do so, I am going to wage a massive campaign (in the LIBERAL MEDIA) denouncing you for not being open-minded
and trying to force your weird, atheistic theories about roundness on innocent children.[/quote]
Im not hear to defend that im just going to let you know they believe the earth is 6,000 years old. I don’t know how they got that number either.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
My stone her to death comment was uncalled for, but I am just irate from that poor Iraqi woman being stoned to death for marrying outside her faith.[/quote]
Now that it’s established the poor girl wasn’t Muslim, can we get some form of apology? Thanks.
[quote]tmoney1 wrote:
I am Muslim, so no, I don’t hate Muslims.
But as a Muslim, I agree with Zap’s original post on this thread. Moderate Muslims need to take a forceful stand against radical Muslims. Moderate Muslims greatly outnumber fundamentalist Muslims, but their voice is soft and not much is being done about it.
It seems moderate Muslims are taking a ‘to each his own’ approach, and letting radical Muslims live the way they want to without intervening, which is wrong.[/quote]
Very well said and something more people in the Muslim community need to say.
Part of the fault with anti-Muslim fervor is with the Western press. When Muslims denounce evil acts by extremists, it gets little play in our media. Its not sensational enough.
I hope that people of all faiths and non-faith can live in peace or at least leave each other alone.
[quote]John S. wrote:
entheogens wrote:
Another anti-scientific theory many radical christians hold is about the beginning of time. They eschew deep geological time and propose that the world was created a few thousdand years ago. I can’t remember the exact age they give the earth, but basically it is, according to them, just a few thousand years old.
Mind you, I am not saying Christians, in general, believe this. I am talking about the radical Christians. Anybody here want to defend that one?
Now do we have to put that kind of shit into high school textbooks as well. After all, nobody was around (except of course GOD) when the earth was formed, so, you see, deep geological time, is just a theory, just like that gravity stuff :). I am also convinced that the earth is flat.
If it weren’t everything would slide down towards the south pole…hell, we’d all be Australians! That’s my theory and I want it in the textbooks. If you dont do so, I am going to wage a massive campaign (in the LIBERAL MEDIA) denouncing you for not being open-minded
and trying to force your weird, atheistic theories about roundness on innocent children.
Im not hear to defend that im just going to let you know they believe the earth is 6,000 years old. I don’t know how they got that number either.[/quote]
Beat me to it.
Ahhh, I think someone, somewhere, tried to work out how many generations down from Adam and Eve, using average ages and loads of dumb ideas sprinkled with some religious fervor and a dash of coconut eating T-rexes.
Hey, don’t shoot the messenger, I didn’t make the rules.
Again, I don’t make these rules. Personally, I think they suck, but the directives in the New Testament are clear enough about the role God expects a woman to hold in the household and society.
Well, as long as you don’t kill each other (Thou shalt not kill and all that), you’re probably okay.
Turning the other cheek could turn out to be a sub-optimal strategy, though.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
My stone her to death comment was uncalled for, but I am just irate from that poor Iraqi woman being stoned to death for marrying outside her faith.
Now that it’s established the poor girl wasn’t Muslim, can we get some form of apology? Thanks.[/quote]
To refresh your memory, you said that in reply to Sean H who wrote:
“However i do dispise the people who do not read their religous books. For example, the current threat of islamic terrorists, these are people who are muslim and think that they [and familiy] will go to heaven in killing themselves and the “enemy”. If they were to read the koran, it would say that this act would send them straight to hell.”
Call me dull and unwitty, but I fail to see the point you wanted to make with your “sarcastic” comment.
Yep. However, he ardently fought for their rights and actively encouraged the freeing of slaves. What you probably don’t know is that most early Muslims were slaves.
Also, the prophet Mohamed never claimed to be perfect. Keep in mind that we’re talking about someone who walked the Earth 15 centuries ago.
I am unaware of the particular incident you’re alluding to, but I’ll be more than happy to provide the context if you can give me the names of the involved parties.
Yes. That’s kinda the plan when trying to revive the monotheistic religion.
I guess they didn’t have the Universal Declaration of Human Rights back then. Blame Rousseau for being born too late.
Homosexuals get squat. But let’s face it, Islam is by no mean the only ideology to oppose same-sex relationships. With all the sweet talk about tolerance and such in the west, homosexuals are still beaten up, discriminated against, and humiliated constistently. Try to kiss a guy in Texas and see what happens.
As for women, Islam brought them more freedoms and rights than any other religion at the time. It’s just that some macho whackos are misinterpreting the Quran to justify their needs for dominance. Brave feminists did a fantastic job at bringing Muslim countries up-to-date with regard to civil laws, and I don’t particularly see why you’d judge a religion based on the Taliban and the Saudi example.
I beg to differ. You don’t have any proof that it’s the case.
I have a long list of converts to Islam. Some of which include very notable and respected people in their respective fields. Saying that it’s the fastest growing religion solely because of the reproduction rates of its constituency is disingenous. Any converts around here care to voice their opinion?
It wasn’t presumption. Look at the simplistic statement you made:
“One only needs to look at the protests in Turkey to see the reality of western values fighting again the tide of Islam.”
From that, one would assume you have very little knowledge of the situation in Turkey. I’m sorry if that sounded offensive, but when you make such baseless and agressive assertions, be prepared for people to challenge your grasp of the context.
Your interaction with Turkey is probably limited to the bastardized version of İskender kebap and the things you picked up in History 101. I have family ties to Turkey and can safely say that I am quite acquainted with the political situation there and the current power struggle.
Let me guess, you probably also believe that Jews dominate the finance world, that Vietnamese women want to love you long time, and that british food tastes like feet…err, on second thought, skip that last one. After all, you’re from England.
Your first “fact” is wrong. Some Muslim countries don’t allow repairing churches, but they are a tiny tiny minority. I’ll be glad to walk you through them one by one, by the list is too long. You see, there are around 50 Muslim countries in the world.
The second bit about murder and torture commited by Muslims is unconvincing. I can easily refer you to what Ethiopians have been doing in Somalia this year as a counter-example to your HH style all-Muslims-are-evil rant.
As for Malasiya, let me first say that only five states condone criminal prosecution of apostates. In case you’re wondering, there are a dozen more states in the country.
But you conveniently choose to overlook that. The debate on those laws is also very heated and Malays are challenging them on daily basis. I’ll also ask you why some States in America forbid blowjobs? There will always be stupid laws passed by stupid people. Blaming it on religion is ignorant.
My father passed away when I was a few months old. The bulk of my family don’t give a damn about religion and the rest is agnostic.
I was a hard-line atheist until a few years back when I laid my hands on a Quran and read it assiduously cover to cover. I live by principles. One of them is to keep a critical eye and always thoroughly research what’s presented to me. Can’t say you do the same…
I don’t hate Muslims. I do hate their despotic warlord of a prophet. That includes present muslims who believe in his violent and oppressive ideology. Now, the muslims who don’t, I have no problem with.
If a muslim doesn’t believe it takes two women to equal the testimony of one man, fine. If they don’t ascribe to forcing a woman to wear hajib through governmental or community enforcement, fine.
If they believe women have the exact same right to education, fine. If they believe religious minorities (and the non-religious) should have the full rights, representation, and protections the Islamic majority have, fine. And, as long as they don’t buy into convert, or be subjugated, or die, fine.
I’ll get slammed on this one I’m sure. Especially over the Muhammad comments. But I’m trying to answer this question honestly.
Now, from the 40+ Muslim countries, how many of them enforce such backward things in their civil laws? Do the math.
There ain’t a single text that says governments or communities should force women to do that. It’s the gal’s own business. That is, unless she’s minor, in which case her dad telling her to change that slutty dress before prom night is universal and has nothing to do with Islam per se.
Do you have any idea what the ratio of women who wear the hijab voluntarily is compared to those forced to wear it? I do. It’s somewhere in the 100:1.
Again, you can’t find a single Islamic text that discriminates against women in that regard. The practice stems from macho societies that didn’t keep up with the emancipation of women.
Did you know Swiss women earned the right to vote in 1971? Did you also know that the Apartheid ended in 1994? Now, those are supposedly Western-style countries, heh? Do you see anyone attributing these lags to Calvinism or Catholicism?
Last I checked, Jews fled the inquisition and many other atrocities perpetrated by some Europeans to settle in Muslim lands, because of the high level of tolerance.
Judging by the freedoms granted by the Talibans and the Saudis, I’d say things have changed. But once again, that practice is more the exception than the rule in the Islamic world. In the crushing majority of Islamic countries, you get the same treatment regardless of faith.
Can you say the same about the way colored folks are treated in the south of the USA?
Those are murderers and criminals. They have nothing to do with, not only Islam, but humanity as well.
It was a pretty insightful post that shed light on the misconceptions some people have regarding Islam.
Can’t say I blame the average person for not doing his homework, but I sure am expecting higher standards from the T-crowd. Excellence in the gym, the kitchen, and the brains!
Hey, don’t shoot the messenger, I didn’t make the rules.
better teach my wife to be a good devout christian and put her in her place since that is what we christians do.
Again, I don’t make these rules. Personally, I think they suck, but the directives in the New Testament are clear enough about the role God expects a woman to hold in the household and society.
Probably a topic for a new thread, but what do you think the bible says about my other profession, you know the one where I get locked in a cage with another barbarian(trained athlete) and we beat the snot out of each other (determine who is more skilled).
Well, as long as you don’t kill each other (Thou shalt not kill and all that), you’re probably okay.
Turning the other cheek could turn out to be a sub-optimal strategy, though.
[/quote]
I guess my attempt athumor was poor, I was being sarcastic I like what you have to say.
Now, from the 40+ Muslim countries, how many of them enforce such backward things in their civil laws? Do the math.
If they don’t ascribe to forcing a woman to wear hajib through governmental or community enforcement, fine.
There ain’t a single text that says governments or communities should force women to do that. It’s the gal’s own business. That is, unless she’s minor, in which case her dad telling her to change that slutty dress before prom night is universal and has nothing to do with Islam per se.
Do you have any idea what the ratio of women who wear the hijab voluntarily is compared to those forced to wear it? I do. It’s somewhere in the 100:1.
If they believe women have the exact same right to education, fine.
Again, you can’t find a single Islamic text that discriminates against women in that regard. The practice stems from macho societies that didn’t keep up with the emancipation of women.
Did you know Swiss women earned the right to vote in 1971? Did you also know that the Apartheid ended in 1994? Now, those are supposedly Western-style countries, heh? Do you see anyone attributing these lags to Calvinism or Catholicism?
If they believe religious minorities (and the non-religious) should have the full rights, representation, and protections the Islamic majority have, fine.
Last I checked, Jews fled the inquisition and many other atrocities perpetrated by some Europeans to settle in Muslim lands, because of the high level of tolerance.
Judging by the freedoms granted by the Talibans and the Saudis, I’d say things have changed. But once again, that practice is more the exception than the rule in the Islamic world. In the crushing majority of Islamic countries, you get the same treatment regardless of faith.
Can you say the same about the way colored folks are treated in the south of the USA?
And, as long as they don’t buy into convert, or be subjugated, or die, fine.
Those are murderers and criminals. They have nothing to do with, not only Islam, but humanity as well.
I’ll get slammed on this one I’m sure. Especially over the Muhammad comments. But I’m trying to answer this question honestly.
It was a pretty insightful post that shed light on the misconceptions some people have regarding Islam.
Can’t say I blame the average person for not doing his homework, but I sure am expecting higher standards from the T-crowd. Excellence in the gym, the kitchen, and the brains![/quote]