Originally posted by Time-ImmemorialNon sequitur, them being "liberals" has no bearing on whether or not they were Christian terrorists.
KKK was started by liberals, swing and miss.The rest is hilarious. 😆
Also, you're cherry picking. Even if one assumes that the KKK being started by liberals refutes them as a source (it doesn't), you're ignoring the rest of his examples to focus on one.
Originally posted by Time-ImmemorialYour premise was "Christian terrorists don't exist in modern times", not "WHITE Christian terrorists don't exist in modern times", you're moving the goalposts.
You found some Chinese terrorists, good job, how do you feel now?Face it you can't find shit for relevance, brains.
Originally posted by Star428
LOL. Right. Yet you still have given zero proof of your ridiculous claims. You can't show any examples of Christian terrorism in todays world BECAUSE THERE ARE NONE. You and PR and others are the ones denying reality when you claim that Christianity is just as violent as Islam.Until you or PR or someone shows actual proof of Christians terrorizing and killing people in the name of Christ on the scale of what ISIS does every single day you've lost this argument. You can't say "Oh, but [b]IF
things were in North America like they were in the Middle East Christians would be doing the same kind of thing". THat's nothing but pure speculation on your part since you can't prove it.Recently, ISIS crucified a man for nothing more than shaving his beard. You ever hear of a Christian do anything like that? Not talking abouyt 800 years ago but in the modern era. [/B]
Don't misquote me, please.
I dont care what Christians were doing 1000 years in the past, they're not the ones who're currently radicalized to the point of causing a global crisis.
I mean for god's sake, Egypt is one of the more developed and educated muslim countries and during the Arab spring Pew Polling found that over 80% of the country's muslims felt you should be murdered for leaving the religion... Again, and this is coming from an atheist, I couldn't give half a **** about the Salem witch trials or crusades or any other enabling apologist nonesense beyond taking it into account from a historical perspective. I care about the people CURRENTLY trying to murder everyone.
Originally posted by long pig
I dont care what Christians were doing 1000 years in the past, they're not the ones who're currently radicalized to the point of causing a global crisis.I mean for god's sake, Egypt is one of the more developed and educated muslim countries and during the Arab spring Pew Polling found that over 80% of the country's muslims felt you should be murdered for leaving the religion... Again, and this is coming from an atheist, I couldn't give half a **** about the Salem witch trials or crusades or any other enabling apologist nonesense beyond taking it into account from a historical perspective. I care about the people CURRENTLY trying to murder everyone.
Exactly. People also either forget or perhaps they're ignorant of the fact that it's muslims' goal (whether the so-called "good ones" admit it or not) to take over the world thru force not peace or love as so many of the "good ones" claim. That's what they were trying to do nearly a millenium ago which caused Christians to start the Crusades in the first place. FFS, CHristians had to take the war to the muslims or else they probably would've been wiped-out themselves. If they had done nothing muslims would probably be ruling the world today and in that world Heaven help anyone who would be caught shaving. LOL. People who think Christians as a whole are more dangerous (or even as dangerous) than muslims should see a psychiatrist. All one has to do is compare the Koran to Jesus' teachings to see which group is clearly more dangerous.
Originally posted by Star428
Give it up, FA. That excuse you keep giving for Muslim violence is getting a little old.
If the Catholic Church and the European nations that followed it wanted to help the Byzantine Empire stabilize its borders against the Seljuks, which had already stabilized by the time mind you, they would have sent their forces to Constantinople and into Anatolia. Instead, they invaded and captured the Holy Land in the name of Christ, a much less strategically secure target.
And I excuse none of the Islamic terrorism that goes on in the world, or any terrorism anywhere for that matter. I object to your narrow-minded opinion that the Muslim population is the only one producing terrorists in the world. But then, you are a bigot, as your signature shows.
Originally posted by FinalAnswer
If the Catholic Church and the European nations that followed it wanted to help the Byzantine Empire stabilize its borders against the Seljuks, which had already stabilized by the time mind you, they would have sent their forces to Constantinople and into Anatolia. Instead, they invaded and captured the Holy Land in the name of Christ, a much less strategically secure target.And I excuse none of the Islamic terrorism that goes on in the world, or any terrorism anywhere for that matter. I object to your narrow-minded opinion that the Muslim population is the only one producing terrorists in the world. But then, you are a bigot, as your signature shows.
Sorry, little lady but liberal shaming doesn't work anymore.