The problem of course, is religion. Competing religions, religious differences, religious extremists, etc.
RELIGION is the problem.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Radical Islam is a problem, as is radical Christianity, but Islam surely is blown out of proportion. (In contrast problems with radical christians are collectively ignored for the most part)
[/quote]
I’d be genuinely interested to see the instances of radical Christianity that can be equated in 1)scale and 2)heinousness with what we see from radical Muslims.
I’ll be the first to condemn those Christians carryinng out suicide bombings & public beheadings, and flying commercial airliners loaded with civilians into huge buildings packed with innocents. All IN THE NAME OF CHRISTIANITY, of course. [/quote]
The Crusades?
Wikipedia - The Crusades were a series of religiously sanctioned military campaigns waged by much of Western Christian Europe, particularly the Franks of France and the Holy Roman Empire. The specific crusades to restore Christian control of the Holy Land were fought over a period of nearly 200 years, between 1095 and 1291. Other campaigns in Spain and Eastern Europe continued into the 15th century. The Crusades were fought mainly by Roman Catholic forces (taking place after the East-West Schism and mostly before the Protestant Reformation) against Muslims who had occupied the near east since the time of the Rashidun Caliphate, although campaigns were also waged against pagan Slavs, pagan Balts, Jews, Russian and Greek Orthodox Christians, Mongols, Cathars, Hussites, Waldensians, Old Prussians, and political enemies of the various popes.[1][page needed] Orthodox Christians also took part in fighting against Islamic forces in some Crusades. Crusaders took vows and were granted penance for past sins, often called an indulgence.
So, like 200 to 400 years of killing?
[quote]milktruck wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Radical Islam is a problem, as is radical Christianity, but Islam surely is blown out of proportion. (In contrast problems with radical christians are collectively ignored for the most part)
[/quote]
I’d be genuinely interested to see the instances of radical Christianity that can be equated in 1)scale and 2)heinousness with what we see from radical Muslims.
I’ll be the first to condemn those Christians carryinng out suicide bombings & public beheadings, and flying commercial airliners loaded with civilians into huge buildings packed with innocents. All IN THE NAME OF CHRISTIANITY, of course. [/quote]
The Crusades?
Wikipedia - The Crusades were a series of religiously sanctioned military campaigns waged by much of Western Christian Europe, particularly the Franks of France and the Holy Roman Empire. The specific crusades to restore Christian control of the Holy Land were fought over a period of nearly 200 years, between 1095 and 1291. Other campaigns in Spain and Eastern Europe continued into the 15th century. The Crusades were fought mainly by Roman Catholic forces (taking place after the East-West Schism and mostly before the Protestant Reformation) against Muslims who had occupied the near east since the time of the Rashidun Caliphate, although campaigns were also waged against pagan Slavs, pagan Balts, Jews, Russian and Greek Orthodox Christians, Mongols, Cathars, Hussites, Waldensians, Old Prussians, and political enemies of the various popes.[1][page needed] Orthodox Christians also took part in fighting against Islamic forces in some Crusades. Crusaders took vows and were granted penance for past sins, often called an indulgence.
So, like 200 to 400 years of killing?[/quote]
100 year war, the Jesuit experiments in South America, the Spanish Inquisition, witch burnings, progroms against Jews all across Europe…
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]milktruck wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Radical Islam is a problem, as is radical Christianity, but Islam surely is blown out of proportion. (In contrast problems with radical christians are collectively ignored for the most part)
[/quote]
I’d be genuinely interested to see the instances of radical Christianity that can be equated in 1)scale and 2)heinousness with what we see from radical Muslims.
I’ll be the first to condemn those Christians carryinng out suicide bombings & public beheadings, and flying commercial airliners loaded with civilians into huge buildings packed with innocents. All IN THE NAME OF CHRISTIANITY, of course. [/quote]
The Crusades?
Wikipedia - The Crusades were a series of religiously sanctioned military campaigns waged by much of Western Christian Europe, particularly the Franks of France and the Holy Roman Empire. The specific crusades to restore Christian control of the Holy Land were fought over a period of nearly 200 years, between 1095 and 1291. Other campaigns in Spain and Eastern Europe continued into the 15th century. The Crusades were fought mainly by Roman Catholic forces (taking place after the East-West Schism and mostly before the Protestant Reformation) against Muslims who had occupied the near east since the time of the Rashidun Caliphate, although campaigns were also waged against pagan Slavs, pagan Balts, Jews, Russian and Greek Orthodox Christians, Mongols, Cathars, Hussites, Waldensians, Old Prussians, and political enemies of the various popes.[1][page needed] Orthodox Christians also took part in fighting against Islamic forces in some Crusades. Crusaders took vows and were granted penance for past sins, often called an indulgence.
So, like 200 to 400 years of killing?[/quote]
100 year war, the Jesuit experiments in South America, the Spanish Inquisition, witch burnings, progroms against Jews all across Europe…
[/quote]
Ummm, I’m talking in TODAY’S world?
Try to read a little better:
“Radical Islam is a problem, as is radical Christianity” was the statement I was questioning.
You know, present tense?
Anyone else?
Oh, and just BTW, the Crusades began as an effort to DEFEND Christian lands; not as an agression. [/quote]
What?
If everything the US does is ok because the Nazis were evil, everything Muslims do is ok too, because there were Christians that did the same and worse.
You really cant have it both ways.
[quote]Inner Hulk wrote:
The problem of course, is religion. Competing religions, religious differences, religious extremists, etc.
RELIGION is the problem.[/quote]
People are the problem. Atheists have plenty of blood on their hands, plenty…Millions upon millions.
If religion were the problem, then religious people would be the only people with blood on their hands. But their not.
[quote]milktruck wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Radical Islam is a problem, as is radical Christianity, but Islam surely is blown out of proportion. (In contrast problems with radical christians are collectively ignored for the most part)
[/quote]
I’d be genuinely interested to see the instances of radical Christianity that can be equated in 1)scale and 2)heinousness with what we see from radical Muslims.
I’ll be the first to condemn those Christians carryinng out suicide bombings & public beheadings, and flying commercial airliners loaded with civilians into huge buildings packed with innocents. All IN THE NAME OF CHRISTIANITY, of course. [/quote]
The Crusades?
Wikipedia - The Crusades were a series of religiously sanctioned military campaigns waged by much of Western Christian Europe, particularly the Franks of France and the Holy Roman Empire. The specific crusades to restore Christian control of the Holy Land were fought over a period of nearly 200 years, between 1095 and 1291. Other campaigns in Spain and Eastern Europe continued into the 15th century. The Crusades were fought mainly by Roman Catholic forces (taking place after the East-West Schism and mostly before the Protestant Reformation) against Muslims who had occupied the near east since the time of the Rashidun Caliphate, although campaigns were also waged against pagan Slavs, pagan Balts, Jews, Russian and Greek Orthodox Christians, Mongols, Cathars, Hussites, Waldensians, Old Prussians, and political enemies of the various popes.[1][page needed] Orthodox Christians also took part in fighting against Islamic forces in some Crusades. Crusaders took vows and were granted penance for past sins, often called an indulgence.
So, like 200 to 400 years of killing?[/quote]
These were actual wars, complete with armies from both sides. The Moores started invading, the Christian armies kicked them out. Had it not been for the crusades, Europe would speak arabic and beat their women.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]milktruck wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Radical Islam is a problem, as is radical Christianity, but Islam surely is blown out of proportion. (In contrast problems with radical christians are collectively ignored for the most part)
[/quote]
I’d be genuinely interested to see the instances of radical Christianity that can be equated in 1)scale and 2)heinousness with what we see from radical Muslims.
I’ll be the first to condemn those Christians carryinng out suicide bombings & public beheadings, and flying commercial airliners loaded with civilians into huge buildings packed with innocents. All IN THE NAME OF CHRISTIANITY, of course. [/quote]
The Crusades?
Wikipedia - The Crusades were a series of religiously sanctioned military campaigns waged by much of Western Christian Europe, particularly the Franks of France and the Holy Roman Empire. The specific crusades to restore Christian control of the Holy Land were fought over a period of nearly 200 years, between 1095 and 1291. Other campaigns in Spain and Eastern Europe continued into the 15th century. The Crusades were fought mainly by Roman Catholic forces (taking place after the East-West Schism and mostly before the Protestant Reformation) against Muslims who had occupied the near east since the time of the Rashidun Caliphate, although campaigns were also waged against pagan Slavs, pagan Balts, Jews, Russian and Greek Orthodox Christians, Mongols, Cathars, Hussites, Waldensians, Old Prussians, and political enemies of the various popes.[1][page needed] Orthodox Christians also took part in fighting against Islamic forces in some Crusades. Crusaders took vows and were granted penance for past sins, often called an indulgence.
So, like 200 to 400 years of killing?[/quote]
100 year war, the Jesuit experiments in South America, the Spanish Inquisition, witch burnings, progroms against Jews all across Europe…
[/quote]
Ummm, I’m talking in TODAY’S world?
Try to read a little better:
“Radical Islam is a problem, as is radical Christianity” was the statement I was questioning.
You know, present tense?
Anyone else?
Oh, and just BTW, the Crusades began as an effort to DEFEND Christian lands; not as an agression. [/quote]
What?
If everything the US does is ok because the Nazis were evil, everything Muslims do is ok too, because there were Christians that did the same and worse.
You really cant have it both ways.
[/quote]
Lord knows what the hell you’re talking about…
But just for the record, I have never said that “everything the US does is ok” because of your grandfathers or for any other reason.
Jeez, try to ignore those voices in your head, and follow the question being asked.
He he.
If the Nazi’s are no excuse for America, then Christians are no excuse for the Muslims.
Goes both ways there, Franze, irrelevant as it may be… [/quote]
I never made the argument in earnest, you did repeatedly.
So please refrain from posting in these threads or else I will be forced to use the Chushin end all and be all of arguments:
But, but, your guys did the same so shut up.
Doesnt matter whether it is as stupid as a sponge, it only matters that it seems to convince you.
As long as it isnt used against you that is.
Plus, that the crusades were in defense of Christianity is a crude, oversimplified and in large parts false Fox talking point.
Maybe true for the reconquista, probably not for the sacking of Jerusalem and most definitely not for the sacking of Konstantinopel and the casual murder of Jewish communities along the way.
[quote]orion wrote:
Plus, that the crusades were in defense of Christianity is a crude, oversimplified and in large parts false Fox talking point.
Maybe true for the reconquista, probably not for the sacking of Jerusalem and most definitely not for the sacking of Konstantinopel and the casual murder of Jewish communities along the way.[/quote]
Well, I am not exactly a guy to defend the Chistian Crusades, but as an Austrian, surely you know the Turkish muslim invaders made it to Vienna?
That was 1683. Not that long ago.
I guess battling them back out of Vienna was evil subjugation of friendly Turkish immigrants who happen to be weilding scimitars as part of their culture is what they teach in PC European schools these days.
Of course, that good Austrian Hitler stated he “wished the muslims had won. Islam is a much better religion for a warrior race than Christianity.”
Bottom line is, all religions have been excuses for heinous shit, and nobody can point fingers. People are people and sociopaths come in all stripes, surprise surprise.
Why does present tense matter? You seemed to be comparing radical islam and radical christianity as fundamentally different in regard to their constituents propensity to do atrocious things. Any evidence that you dont like you dismiss by narrowing your definition, and you insult the intelligence of the person who gave the evidence.
You obviously are pushing an agenda here and trying to validate something you really want to believe.
[quote]milktruck wrote:
Bottom line is, all religions have been excuses for heinous shit, and nobody can point fingers. People are people and sociopaths come in all stripes, surprise surprise.
Why does present tense matter? You seemed to be comparing radical islam and radical christianity as fundamentally different in regard to their constituents propensity to do atrocious things. Any evidence that you dont like you dismiss by narrowing your definition, and you insult the intelligence of the person who gave the evidence.
You obviously are pushing an agenda here and trying to validate something you really want to believe.[/quote]
Ah, the joy of simple moral equivalency.
I think the big difference is (and I am far from an expert on Christianity) that the horrid acts of Christians are ananthama to their sciptures, while the horrid acts of muslims fulfil their scriptures.
It’s a material difference.
I would note the historically non-aggressive religions (Druze, Judaism, just for example) only reluctantly accept converts, if at all, and do not prostilyze (sp? — push thier religion on others not of their faith).
Where an unjust war often occurs, aside from simple conquest masqurading as religion, it is an attempt to force conversion on another party.
Islam’s attacks on the west are merely a repeat of a 1000 year old pattern of aggression to force conversion.
[quote]milktruck wrote:
Bottom line is, all religions have been excuses for heinous shit, and nobody can point fingers. People are people and sociopaths come in all stripes, surprise surprise.
Why does present tense matter? You seemed to be comparing radical islam and radical christianity as fundamentally different in regard to their constituents propensity to do atrocious things. Any evidence that you dont like you dismiss by narrowing your definition, and you insult the intelligence of the person who gave the evidence.
You obviously are pushing an agenda here and trying to validate something you really want to believe.[/quote]
Again, do we need to go in to atrocities done by atheists.
People do realize that most wars and atrocities committed through out history, have not been religious in nature. But don’t let facts get in the way.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]milktruck wrote:
Bottom line is, all religions have been excuses for heinous shit, and nobody can point fingers. People are people and sociopaths come in all stripes, surprise surprise.
Why does present tense matter? You seemed to be comparing radical islam and radical christianity as fundamentally different in regard to their constituents propensity to do atrocious things. Any evidence that you dont like you dismiss by narrowing your definition, and you insult the intelligence of the person who gave the evidence.
You obviously are pushing an agenda here and trying to validate something you really want to believe.[/quote]
Ah, the joy of simple moral equivalency.
I think the big difference is (and I am far from an expert on Christianity) that the horrid acts of Christians are ananthama to their sciptures, while the horrid acts of muslims fulfil their scriptures.
It’s a material difference.
I would note the historically non-aggressive religions (Druze, Judaism, just for example) only reluctantly accept converts, if at all, and do not prostilyze (sp? — push thier religion on others not of their faith).
Where an unjust war often occurs, aside from simple conquest masqurading as religion, it is an attempt to force conversion on another party.
Islam’s attacks on the west are merely a repeat of a 1000 year old pattern of aggression to force conversion.[/quote]
Well, you can also frame it as different civilizations struggle for dominance, all conversion aside, and the west is using “legitimate” methods of war and the middle east is using “rogue” methods, which are easy for wester media to paint as evil.
The only thing I think there is is the jihad in the scripture, but the central tenets of most religions seem to be pretty non-evil across the board and the actions of the constituents never match up anyways.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]milktruck wrote:
Bottom line is, all religions have been excuses for heinous shit, and nobody can point fingers. People are people and sociopaths come in all stripes, surprise surprise.
Why does present tense matter? You seemed to be comparing radical islam and radical christianity as fundamentally different in regard to their constituents propensity to do atrocious things. Any evidence that you dont like you dismiss by narrowing your definition, and you insult the intelligence of the person who gave the evidence.
You obviously are pushing an agenda here and trying to validate something you really want to believe.[/quote]
Again, do we need to go in to atrocities done by atheists.
People do realize that most wars and atrocities committed through out history, have not been religious in nature. But don’t let facts get in the way.[/quote]
Um, you just agreed with me, why is your tone condecending?
I say the whole world converts to islam, problem solved. No more evil people to make war on. One world religion or none, that is the only way the world will ever establish lasting peace.
Oh there is that whole other problem of muslim nations warring on each other. Hmmm Simple, no nations, just one world order, all under the banner of islam. Yea that will do the trick. I can see the peace we would all have already, well except for the women. On the plus side, I’d have an abundance of sammiches.
V
Can’t we all just smoke a fatty and listen to some EWF?
Happy Friday, y’all.
.