Originally posted by Robtard
Edit: I once saw (online) a painting of Jesus in a sexual 3-way with a lion and a lumberjack (not XXX), do you really think some Pastor or Bishop would call for the head of the artist?
In North America or Europe? no
In central America, sourh America or Africa? I'd still be surprised, but I wouldn't bet against it
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Well, if you don't want to appease the radical muslims, then what do you think would be the right thing to do, so far as preventing them from killing us?No, I can't.
It's happened many times before in history. Maybe not nowadays, no.
IMO, there's little to do to appease radical people like these, they'll simply find something to fight about, no matter what. That or convert the US into an Islamic republic; that might(it won't) work.
Ha, you can't.
Well sure, the Inquisition, the Crusades, but as you implied, that was long ago.
There are radicals in all branches of religions, IMO. Like the Catholic Church: "The Catechism of the Catholic Church specifies that all sex acts must be both unitive and procreative. In addition to condemning use of artificial birth control as intrinsically evil, non-procreative sex acts such as mutual masturbation and anal sex are ruled out as ways to avoid pregnancy."
That is simply the dumbest, most intransigent, irresponsible position for a world leader to take - but then, as I've stated elsewhere, I don't have a lot of patience for blithering idiots... Of ANY religion.
HEY! MORON! IF SEX ISN"T FUN YOU"RE DOING IT WRONG! 🙄
(And before you come and burn crosses outside my yard, I didn't say I have a problem with people who have faith - you are welcome to believe whatever you want!)
But for crying out loud, why are we still willing to attack and kill people to "prove" one religion is better than another in this day and age?
Which is why I am a follower of the "Bill Hicks School of Faith". 😄
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I agree. But the blame doesn't lie totally with them - they're sucked into an ideology.
And you should know better than many Westerners that Qu'ran does not have the same standing in Muslim world as does Bible in Christian world. Qu'ran is undisputed and direct word of God (word for word), not a bunch of people jotting things down such as Pete, Steve, Mark and Paul.
This is what makes it mega, super sacred.With that in mind, this whole book burning is seriously not a good idea.
It just goes to prove that those who think burning this book is somehow a good idea, are not yet familiar with Islamic doctrine and religion.This is why I think this will offend a lot more Muslims than would Bible burning, Christians.
I disagree. The Bible is supposed to be the indisputable word of Jesus-God too and is just as sacred. Comes down to the individual follower. Same can be said for most religious text.
Agree it's stupid and the Pastor is an imbecile, but I don't agree it should be stopped on the "some Muslims won't like and who knows what they'll do" grounds.
Islam practitioners seem far more fanatical to their religion than most other religious followers on the whole; this is why it will be far more personal than burning Bibles, in using your example. That's the fault of those Muslims though, their religion isn't law in all parts of the world; they should respect that.
Originally posted by Robtard
[B]IMO, there's little to do to appease radical people like these, they'll simply find something to fight about, no matter what. That or convert the US into an Islamic republic; that might(it won't) work.
Ha, you can't.
Nah, I just don't wanna. ahah
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
That didn't answer my question, though. What should we do, then?Nah, I just don't wanna. ahah
It did, I don't think there's much "we" can do to appease radical people, at least feasibly do. IMO, "we" either do everything they demand and spend forever in an "walking of eggshells" approach, towards them or we ignore their retard demands/rants. The later being feasible.
Originally posted by RobtardMy question was, if you don't think that appeasing radical muslims will keep them from trying to kill us, then what should we do, instead? To quote what I said earlier,
It did, I don't think there's much "we" can do to appease radical people, at least feasibly do. IMO, "we" either do everything they demand and spend forever in an "walking of eggshells" approach, towards them or we ignore their retard demands/rants. The later being feasible.
But, that aside, I'm not really interested in discussing that, to be honest. I'm more interested in ideas for what we should do period. What's obvious is that we are, essentially, at odds with Islam. What's less obvious, or rather what's obvious but no one wants to talk about it, is, how are we going to settle this? It's the general consensus that outright merc'ing islam mother****ers isn't the route to take. But, no one wants to stop people from outright bashing them either. So no one wants to get rid of them, and no one wants to appease them. What's the alternative, then?
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
My question was, if you [b]don't think that appeasing radical muslims will keep them from trying to kill us, then what should we do, instead? [/B]
WTF, I said "ignore their idiocy", ie go about our lives. Taking away a man's right to do something (yes, even something stupid) because of threats from radicals isn't an option, imo.
If a group happens to do something as what happened on 9/11, then pursue that group/people specifically and crush them, their wives, their parents, their children, their cousins, their siblings, their 4th grade teacher and their pets.
Make the act of terrorism so unappealing that the religious heads that indoctrinate these idiots to blow themselves up in the name of god won't be able to recruit in the first place.
Originally posted by Robtard
I disagree. The Bible is supposed to be the indisputable word of Jesus-God too and is just as sacred. Comes down to the individual follower. Same can be said for most religious text.Agree it's stupid and the Pastor is an imbecile, but I don't agree it should be stopped on the "some Muslims won't like and who knows what they'll do" grounds.
Islam practitioners seem far more fanatical to their religion than most other religious followers on the whole; this is why it will be far more personal than burning Bibles, in using your example. That's the fault of those Muslims though, their religion isn't law in all parts of the world; they should respect that.
However, Bible is said to be written BY Paul and whoever else was writing it. We could sit here and have a healthy debate as to why much of what has been written could be faulty and/or misinterpreted as the words of God.
Qu'ran is a recitation by God. Hadith would be equivalent to Bible, because it is a lot of stories and narrations written by followers of Muhammed about what he did, said, ate and the likes.
Bible and the Qur'an haven't the same status.
Jesus NEVER wrote anything, so we can point that out when debating the Bible. From what we do know, Jesus also advocated that all churches, synagogues and temples pay tax to Romans, since that would (somehow) root out those who preach religion for profit and those who preach it for God.
We know Christian churches are tax exempt, so we can point out that they're not even following what their lord and saviour said to follow.
In Islam, we can't really say they're doing anything wrong according to Qur'an in fighting the infidels. They are following their religion, and because of the way Qur'an is, it may actually take longer to get over the fundamentalism than it did with Christians in the West.
If we compare their time-line, the age of their religion is still in 1400s.
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
That's generally what I was getting at(not really), but, you're so much more articulate. Marry me.
Vegas?
Originally posted by Robtard
WTF, I said "ignore their idiocy", ie go about our lives. Taking away a man's right to do something (yes, even something stupid) because of threats from radicals isn't an option, imo.
Which is fine, lol. My question was"Okay, so you think thats a bad idea. Give me an alternative then".
If a group happens to do something as what happened on 9/11, then pursue that group/people specifically and crush them, their wives, their parents, their children, their cousins, their siblings, their 4th grade teacher and their pets.Make the act of terrorism so unappealing that the religious heads that indoctrinate these idiots to blow themselves up in the name of god won't be able to recruit in the first place.
So, you would advocate something like... just killing everything that moves there? My point is that a lot of people think thats a bad idea, and that trying a non-violent route would also be a bad idea. That... annoys me, because if people don't a violent solution, and they don't want a non-violent solution, then what the hell do they want? If your minds set on just killing everybody over there, then more power to you. At least you've got an opinion.
I'm curious about what other people think, though.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
However, Bible is said to be written BY Paul and whoever else was writing it. We could sit here and have a healthy debate as to why much of what has been written could be faulty and/or misinterpreted as the words of God.
Qu'ran is a recitation by God. Hadith would be equivalent to Bible, because it is a lot of stories and narrations written by followers of Muhammed about what he did, said, ate and the likes.
Bible and the Qur'an haven't the same status.Jesus NEVER wrote anything, so we can point that out when debating the Bible. From what we do know, Jesus also advocated that all churches, synagogues and temples pay tax to Romans, since that would (somehow) root out those who preach religion for profit and those who preach it for God.
We know Christian churches are tax exempt, so we can point out that they're not even following what their lord and saviour said to follow.In Islam, we can't really say they're doing anything wrong according to Qur'an in fighting the infidels. They are following their religion, and because of the way Qur'an is, it may actually take longer to get over the fundamentalism than it did with Christians in the West.
If we compare their time-line, the age of their religion is still in 1400s.Vegas?
I still disagree, the Qur'an was written by Mohammad, he's just as fallible is writing something down wrong as was Peter. If you believe in this "God's word" business (I don't). Level of sacredness comes down to the eye of the beholder (the follower).
They're are Christians who are far more devote to Jesus-God than Muslims are to Allah (and vice-versa)
But even if we say as fact "The Qur-an is more sacred to Muslins than the Bible is to Christians", it still doesn't excuse the idiocy of the Muslims making death threats over a perceived religious slight.
Watch it, he's likely to drug, molest you, take your money and kidneys and leave you in a bathtub full of ice.
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Which is fine, lol. My question was"Okay, so you think thats a bad idea. Give me an alternative then".So, you would advocate something like... just killing everything that moves there? My point is that a [b]lot
of people think thats a bad idea, and that trying a non-violent route would also be a bad idea. That... annoys me, because if people don't a violent solution, and they don't want a non-violent solution, then what the hell do they want? If your minds set on just killing everybody over there, then more power to you. At least you've got an opinion.I'm curious about what other people think, though. [/B]
I was actually joking about the killing of parents, children, pets etc.
I am for chasing down and destroying those responsible though. Like what Israel did after their Olympic athletes were killed in Munich. Certainly be more effective and cost infinitely less than invading Iraq.
Originally posted by Robtard
I still disagree, the Qur'an was written by Mohammad, he's just as fallible is writing something down wrong as was Peter. If you believe in this "God's word" business (I don't). Level of sacredness comes down to the eye of the beholder (the follower).They're are Christians who are far more devote to Jesus-God than Muslims are to Allah (and vice-versa)
But even if we say as fact "The Qur-an is more sacred to Muslins than the Bible is to Christians", it still doesn't excuse the idiocy of the Muslims making death threats over a perceived religious slight.
Watch it, he's likely to drug, molest you, take your money and kidneys and leave you in a bathtub full of ice.
Muhammed IS the prophet not the follower of one, therefore assumed infallible.
To Muslims him being wrong goes the same as Moses having mixed up God's commandments and was wrong.
Although, it is good to point out that Muhammed didn't write anything, being illiterate. He was reciting and someone else wrote it down.
I'm not arguing at the ridiculousness of threats and numerous other Islamic practices. Neither Ramandan, no praying 5 times a day, nor the way of prayer were originally Islamic - those were Arab pagan practices, of which Muhammad was one...
I'm not defending them, but that is the reality of Islam and as long as people think it's just few random people soiling Islam as a religion, there will be problem. Reform must happen within the institution and not only within few people
Originally posted by Robtard
Special Forces, CIA, NSA, DOD foreign intelligence etc all working in unison. Find those responsible, assassinate them and take away their funding if possible.
That would work for revenge, but, do you think that that would seriously make these guys think twice? They think nothing of strapping bombs to their ballsacks and detonating them in public areas. I don't think putting out a message that says "If you kill Americans, we'll kill you back", means anything to people who think that dying in holy war is the absolute greatest honor they could ever achieve in their pathetic unworthy lives. If anything, it seems like that would just attract even more recruits.
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
That would work for revenge, but, do you think that that would seriously make these guys think twice? They think nothing of strapping bombs to their ballsacks and detonating them in public areas. I don't think putting out a message that says "If you kill Americans, we'll kill you back", means anything to people who think that dying in holy war is the absolute greatest honor they could ever achieve in their pathetic unworthy lives. If anything, it seems like that would just attract even more recruits.
This is why you go after the heads, they're the ones that convince young imbeciles that killing oneself is what God wants.
I do think it would make a difference eventually as the leaders want to live, they're generally not stupid enough to go on suicide runs. Kill enough of them, they'll be fewer of them to begin with and the would be leaders will be less inclined to lead.