Originally posted by Lestov16
In the United States, out of the almost 6,000 hate crimes committed in 2013, 20 percent (approximately 1,200) were based on victims’ sexual orientation, according to the FBI.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/02/lgbt-homicides_n_6993484.html
"Record Number of Reported LGBT Homicides So Far In 2015"
Not what I said, prove our government is killing homosexuals.
Originally posted by Surtur
It's secular in theory, but the church holds way way way too much power in this country. If Islam had that much power here it would be outright f*cking scary. [/B]
Wouldn't call it power. The Church after all, cannot make enforceable laws.
I think a better term in "influence" using it's masses to push their values or protects its interests by lobbying or pressuring (via their voter base) politicians.
But then again, isn't this just democracy in action? SJW's do it. Feminists do it. Environmentalists do it. Every special interest group does it. So why is the Church specifically the scary one? And AFAIK, I mean I'm sure ppl might disagree with the Church's views on gay marriage or abortion, but then again, how scary are those really?
Originally posted by Lestov16
In the United States, out of the almost 6,000 hate crimes committed in 2013, 20 percent (approximately 1,200) were based on victims’ sexual orientation, according to the FBI.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/02/lgbt-homicides_n_6993484.html
"Record Number of Reported LGBT Homicides So Far In 2015"
Dude but if you read..it kind of sounds like they assume ANY time a person is murdered and they are trans or gay..that the motive was a hate crime.
You know sort of how whenever a non-black person kills a black man it's usually assumed it must be racially motivated?
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Wouldn't call it power. The Church after all, cannot make enforceable laws.I think a better term in "influence" using it's masses to push their values or protects its interests by lobbying or pressuring (via their voter base) politicians.
But then again, isn't this just democracy in action? SJW's do it. Feminists do it. Environmentalists do it. Every special interest group does it. So why is the Church specifically the scary one? And AFAIK, I mean I'm sure ppl might disagree with the Church's views on gay marriage or abortion, but then again, how scary are those really?
Doesn't it utterly f*cking terrify you that it more or less sounds like you could be describing the mob?
Lest you are doing everything but avoiding the truth, Islamic countries kill gays, stone them, hang them or toss them off roof, treat women like slaves, stone women who committ adultry
Quran (4:11) - (Inheritance) "The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females" (see also verse 4:176). In Islam, sexism is mathematically established.
Quran (2:282) - (Court testimony) "And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not found then a man and two women." Muslim apologists offer creative explanations to explain why Allah felt that a man's testimony in court should be valued twice as highly as a woman's, but studies consistently show that women are actually less likely to tell lies than men, meaning that they make more reliable witnesses.
Quran (2:228) - "and the men are a degree above them [women]"
Quran (5:6) - "And if ye are unclean, purify yourselves. And if ye are sick or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the closet, or ye have had contact with women, and ye find not water, then go to clean, high ground and rub your faces and your hands with some of it" Men are to rub dirt on their hands, if there is no water to purify them, following casual contact with a woman (such as shaking hands).
Quran (24:31) - Women are to lower their gaze around men, so they do not look them in the eye. (To be fair, men are told to do the same thing in the prior verse).
Quran (2:223) - "Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will..." A man has dominion over his wives' bodies as he does his land. This verse is overtly sexual. There is some dispute as to whether it is referring to the practice of anal intercourse. If this is what Muhammad meant, then it would appear to contradict what he said in Muslim (8:3365).
Quran (4:3) - (Wife-to-husband ratio) "Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four" Inequality by numbers.
Quran (53:27) - "Those who believe not in the Hereafter, name the angels with female names." Angels are sublime beings, and would therefore be male.
Quran (4:24) and Quran (33:50) - A man is permitted to take women as sex slaves outside of marriage. Note that the verse distinguishes wives from captives (those whom they right hand possesses).
Hadith and Sira
Bukhari (6:301) - "[Muhammad] said, 'Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?' They replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in her intelligence.'"
Bukhari (6:301) - continued - "[Muhammad said] 'Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?' The women replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in her religion.'" Allah has made women deficient in the practice of their religion as well, by giving them menstrual cycles.
Bukhari (2:29) - Women comprise the majority of Hell's occupants. This is important because the only women in heaven mentioned explicitly by Muhammad are the virgins who serve the sexual desires of men. (A weak Hadith, Kanz al-`ummal, 22:10, even suggests that 99% of women go to Hell).
Bukhari (62:81) - "The Prophet said: "'The stipulations most entitled to be abided by are those with which you are given the right to enjoy the (women's) private parts (i.e. the stipulations of the marriage contract).'" In other words, the most important thing a woman brings to marriage is between her legs.
Bukhari (62:58) - A woman presents herself in marriage to Muhammad, but he does not find her attractive, so he "donates" her on the spot to another man.
Muslim (4:1039) - "A'isha said [to Muhammad]: 'You have made us equal to the dogs and the asses'" These are the words of Muhammad's favorite wife, complaining of the role assigned to women under Islam.
Abu Dawud (2:704) - "...the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) said: When one of you prays without a sutrah, a dog, an ass, a pig, a Jew, a Magian, and a woman cut off his prayer, but it will suffice if they pass in front of him at a distance of over a stone's throw."
Abu Dawud (2155) - Women are compared to slaves and camels with regard to the "evil" in them.
Ishaq 593 - "As for Ali, he said, 'Women are plentiful, and you can easily change one for another.'" Ali was raised as a son by Muhammad. He was also the 4th caliph. This comment was made in Muhammad's presence without a word of rebuke from him.
Ishaq 593 - "From the captives of Hunayn, Allah's Messenger gave [his son-in-law] Ali a slave girl called Baytab and he gave [future Caliph] Uthman a slave girl called Zaynab and [future Caliph] Umar another." - Even in this world, Muhammad treated women like party favors, handing out enslaved women to his cronies for sex.
Ibn Ishaq (693) - "Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu'l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons." Muhammad traded captured women for horses.
Al-Tirmidhi 3272 - "When Allah's Messenger was asked which woman was best he replied, 'The one who pleases (her husband) when he looks at her, obeys him when he gives a command, and does not go against his wishes regarding her person or property by doing anything of which he disapproves'."
Tabari VIII:117 - The fate of more captured farm wives, whom the Muslims distributed amongst themselves as sex slaves: "Dihyah had asked the Messenger for Safiyah when the Prophet chose her for himself... the Apostle traded for Safiyah by giving Dihyah her two cousins. The women of Khaybar were distributed among the Muslims."
Tabari IX:137 - "Allah granted Rayhana of the Qurayza to Muhammad as booty."
Ishaq 969 - "Lay injunctions on women kindly, for they are prisoners with you having no control of their persons." - This same text also says that wives may be beaten for "unseemliness".
Tabari Vol 9, Number 1754 - "Treat women well, for they are [like] domestic animals with you and do not possess anything for themselves." From Muhammad's 'Farewell Sermon'.
Notes
The move to paint Islam as a pioneering force in women's rights is a recent one, corresponding with the efforts of Muslim apologists (not otherwise known for their feminist concerns) and some Western academics prone to interpreting history according to personal preference. In truth, the Islamic religious community has never exhibited an interest in expanding opportunities for women beyond the family role.
The fourth Caliph, who was Muhammad's son-in-law and cousin, said just a few years after the prophet's death that "The entire woman is an evil. And what is worse is that it is a necessary evil."
A traditional Islamic saying is that, "A woman's heaven is beneath her husband's feet." One of the world's most respected Quran commentaries explains that, "Women are like cows, horses, and camels, for all are ridden." (Tafsir al-Qurtubi)
The revered Islamic scholar, al-Ghazali, who has been called 'the greatest Muslim after Muhammad,' writes that the role of a Muslim woman is to "stay at home and get on with her sewing. She should not go out often, she must not be well-informed, nor must she be communicative with her neighbors and only visit them when absolutely necessary; she should take care of her husband... and seek to satisfy him in everything... Her sole worry should be her virtue... She should be clean and ready to satisfy her husband's sexual needs at any moment." [Ibn Warraq]
A Yemeni cleric recently explained in a television broadcast what makes women inferior and unable, say, to serve as good witnesses: "Women are subject to menstruation, when their endurance and mental capacity for concentration are diminished. When a woman witnesses a killing or an accident, she becomes frightened, moves away, and sometimes even faints, and she cannot even watch the incident."
During a 2012 talk show on an Egyptian television channel, a cleric slammed Christianity - in part for teaching gender equality: “the Christian religion does not differentiate between women and men, but it confirms their perfect equality: it gives them an equal share in inheritance, it bans divorce, and it bans polygamy.”
I checked the article, I can't find the 1200 number that he is saying about LGBT hate crimes?
Closest I found is:
"VP’s most recent annual report, released last October, documented 18 anti-LGBT homicides in 2013. Almost 90 percent of the victims were people of color, and more than two-thirds were transgender women. While firm numbers are not yet available for 2014, a spokesperson for AVP said that between 20 and 25 killings occurred last year, but only two of these occurred during the first three months of the year."
Can't seem to quote the post. I think the quote function is broken...
Originally posted by Surtur
Doesn't it utterly f*cking terrify you that it more or less sounds like you could be describing the mob?
Why would it terrify me?
Again, this is democracy in action. Every special interest group lobbies for their values/interests to be pushed. This is just how things are.
I mean the influence of the media FAR FAR outstrips that of the Church.
Should the Church just not advocate for its principles while everyone else is free to do it?
I just find the article hilarious now. Not for the deaths, but for the strange leaps it takes:
"Some victims were killed by domestic partners, others by complete strangers."
So hold on domestic partner means like a boyfriend or husband. But if they hate gays why would they be in a relationship with gays? Is domestic violence now a hate crime?
"But there is a thread of similarity running through the cases as well. According to AVP, around half of the slayings this year appear to be hate-motivated violence. In the case of the transgender victims, many are initially misidentified and mis-gendered by both police and media reports."
Lol wait what? So the cops couldn't even identify some of them as trans people, but random strangers used their trans-gender sensing powers to determine this and commit an act of violence specifically because of trans people?
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Why would it terrify me?Again, this is democracy in action. Every special interest group lobbies for their values/interests to be pushed. This is just how things are.
I mean the influence of the media FAR FAR outstrips that of the Church.
Should the Church just not advocate for its principles while everyone else is free to do it?
I'm just saying it sounds like you described the mob to a tee.
Originally posted by Surtur
I just find the article hilarious now. Not for the deaths, but for the strange leaps it takes:[b]"Some victims were killed by domestic partners, others by complete strangers."
So hold on domestic partner means like a boyfriend or husband. But if they hate gays why would they be in a relationship with gays? Is domestic violence now a hate crime?
"But there is a thread of similarity running through the cases as well. According to AVP, around half of the slayings this year appear to be hate-motivated violence. In the case of the transgender victims, many are initially misidentified and mis-gendered by both police and media reports."
Lol wait what? So the cops couldn't even identify some of them as trans people, but random strangers used their trans-gender sensing powers to determine this and commit an act of violence? [/B]
Can you point where the 6000 number Lestov is talking about is coming from?
I mean, I did a Ctrl-F and it didn't show me a number higher than 25.
Originally posted by Surtur
It's secular in theory, but the church holds way way way too much power in this country. If Islam had that much power here it would be outright f*cking scary.I also feel this quote from Teddy Roosevelt perfectly sums up my feelings about this shit with muslims:
[b]"The men who do not become Americans and nothing else are hyphenated Americans; and there ought to be no room for them in this country. The man who calls himself an American citizen and who yet shows by his actions that he is primarily the citizen of a foreign land, plays a thoroughly mischievous part in the life of our body politic. He has no place here; and the sooner he returns to the land to which he feels... his real heart-allegiance, the better it will be for every good American."
[/B]
I agree with you here.
Kind of also gets into one of the main flaws of Islam. While Israel and Jerusalem are very prominent in the Bible, they are not as important to Christianity as the Middle East is to Islam. Nowhere in the Bible is pilgrimage to Jerusalem a requirement. In Christianity, one simply needs to be devoted to the faith. In Judaism, one must be devoted to their bloodline, and in Islam, one must devoted to their holy place (the Middle East).
Islam really blurs the line between religion and nationality, just as Judaism blurs the line between religion and ethnicity.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
So you're saying every special interest group = mob?Tho the feminists being an actual mob may be the scariest thing in the world.
Would make for a good movie, tho.
"The Godmother".
No, but the mob couldn't make enforceable laws or policy either and yet they held a huge sway over their territories at some points. Just because someone can't make laws doesn't mean much when they have great influence over the people who do make the laws.
As for feminists, they are scary for different reasons. They are frightening for the lies they put forth. They lie and lie and lie and if you call them on it they call you a woman hater. They are causing a new generation of people to be raised in a country where they think there is a rape culture and a wage gap and a war on women. The feminists/SJW's represent a different kind of danger.
If I was some naive 18 yr. old female about to go to college I'd be thinking "well just how many times will I get raped this semester, should I take precautions with my professors so if I miss an assignment due to being raped it is okay?"
Yet you're less likely to be raped on a college campus lol. They won't ever tell you that. They want you to be scared. They want you to feel disempowered. It's f*cking weird when a disturbing amount of feminists actually exhibit misogynistic behavior.
Originally posted by Surtur
No, but the mob couldn't make enforceable laws or policy either and yet they held a huge sway over their territories at some points. Just because someone can't make laws doesn't mean much when they have great influence over the people who do make the laws.As for feminists, they are scary for different reasons. They are frightening for the lies they put forth. They lie and lie and lie and if you call them on it they call you a woman hater. They are causing a new generation of people to be raised in a country where they think there is a rape culture and a wage gap and a war on women. The feminists/SJW's represent a different kind of danger.
Dude. Like I said, that is just how democracy works. And the Church doesn't even have that much influence especially compared to the more vocal special interests groups (with smaller voter bases) for as long as the media backs them (ex. feminists/environmentalists/SJWs). You're throwing around the word "mob" like it has any relevance here. Seriously, that is literally how democracy works.
It is, in fact, just a part of the conservative voter base. Are you going to call conservatives/liberals "the mob" as well?
I really can't see how it's "scary". Scary is when the interests of a tiny minority can run in counter with the well being of the rest of the population and yet they carry tremendous influence (big business mostly) .
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Wouldn't call it power. The Church after all, cannot make enforceable laws.I think a better term in "influence" using it's masses to push their values or protects its interests by lobbying or pressuring (via their voter base) politicians.
But then again, isn't this just democracy in action? SJW's do it. Feminists do it. Environmentalists do it. Every special interest group does it. So why is the Church specifically the scary one? And AFAIK, I mean I'm sure ppl might disagree with the Church's views on gay marriage or abortion, but then again, how scary are those really?
Whatever influence christians have in government is waning at an alarming rate. Secularism and atheism are on a rise in the U.S. Many who identify as christian do not care to actively protest what they view as immoral laws i this country, other than complaining about it in social media. Also, many who identify as christian are beginning to accept controversial topics such as gay rights and abortion. Traditional christian values do not hold sway over legislation like it may have had in the past. This is reflected in the voting habits of the majority in this country. An ultra conservative with christian values will not be electable as President of the U.S.
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Whatever influence christians have in government is waning at an alarming rate. Secularism and atheism are on a rise in the U.S. Many who identify as christian do not care to actively protest what they view as immoral laws i this country, other than complaining about it in social media. Also, many who identify as christian are beginning to accept controversial topics such as gay rights and abortion. Traditional christian values do not hold sway over legislation like it may have had in the past. This is reflected in the voting habits of the majority in this country. An ultra conservative with christian values will not be electable as President of the U.S.
Agreed.
Originally posted by Lestov16
In the United States, out of the almost 6,000 hate crimes committed in 2013, 20 percent (approximately 1,200) were based on victims’ sexual orientation, according to the FBI.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/02/lgbt-homicides_n_6993484.html
"Record Number of Reported LGBT Homicides So Far In 2015"
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So lestov did you not read the article you posted, cause what it said does not back up your claims, it actually proves the opposite.