Originally posted by Darth Thor
Wow, yeah let's equate being a Maul fanboy to a Quran "sympathiser" because that's totally the same thing.
Can you explain why it isn't?
I never tend to waste people's time with false analogies, where it assumes that because two things are alike in some respects, they aren't alike in others. This thread is literally in existence because the individuals of various groups - or movements - tend to ebb on the same wavelength. In the realm of Star Wars fanon, the common denominator depends on the actions of their chosen character. So inevitably Maul's devotees are apologists for a continuous array of missteps which haven't subsided with age or experience. The justifications of said deficiencies tend to be mere deflection tactics, to address something else rather than the point in question. Much like when - as you've just omitted - sympathisers start comparing bad things in the Bible in attempt to apologize for Islam.
And actually the central theme of the Quran (without being a modern day sympathiser) is more like "God is great, and he's watching over everything you do"
I will devote only one, and no more than one reply regarding the Quran - I hope not to shift things too far off-topic. Equating a Maul fanboy with apologists of the Muslim brotherhood, was merely intended to be a simple comparison that shares a few general themes. It is true that I could have made the comparison with other movements, but I felt that this analogy was best. After all, for the failures of Maul, you only need to look at the source material. For the Quran, Anybody who thinks it is inherently peaceful needs to just read the damn thing. Read the book and then tell me it's calm and soothing and tolerant. It has one message it repeats loud and clear almost every page - God is Great, and the disbelievers will receive a most painful punishment.
The book itself isn't too long and can probably be read in a few days if you can stomach the repetition. It has one hundred and fourteen chapters, but the chapters at the end are very short and look more like poems. A minor role is taken up with stories - very scant, nothing like the Old or New Testament - and social rules such as gender relations. I would roughly guess that the - God is Great & Disbelievers will be Punished - themed parts make up seventy percent of the book. Other stories and social rules take the back seat. The manner in which God is great - merciful, gracious, all knowing, all seeing - is as varied as the manners in which the disbelievers will be punished - painful, disgraceful, terrible, severe - chopping off their fingertips and burning their skin to then replace it so it can be burned again.
The interesting part is what the nature of God and the disbeliever is. Islam is not about a different and separate god. It is about the same god referred to in the Old Testament / Torah and the New Testament / Gospel. It specifically refers back to both of these books, and characters and stories from them, and refers to itself as an elaboration. The real insight to be obtained in on a zoomed-out level. What is the nature of this thing? Even lauded figures like Hitchens or Dawkins can't seem to get past the "it's obviously nonsense", and their self-indulgent well-reasoned arguments. The land of Dawkins isn't overrunning the land of Muhammed, but the opposite.
But Even if it's what you said, I don't see how that's different to the Christian belief that you must accept Jesus to be saved. So why not say it's like "Religous symphathisers/justifications" instead of showing your clear prejudice to one particular religion?
Again, the nature of the Koran is important whenever you get some leftist comparing against bad things in the Bible in attempt to apologize for Islam. The point is mute: Islam inherits both existing holy books and supplements its own. The only question is whether or not that supplementary book makes monotheism more aggressive and zealous or less. Upon reading it you immediately know the answer is: more. It is basically an injection of steroids into monotheism.
Finally it's worth noting that this book is not the totality of Islam, it is just the core. Unlike Jesus, who never wrote down his revelations and only had second-hand recordings of his words, Muhammed both wrote down revelations and other people recorded his sayings. Islam takes the sayings of Muhammed (hadith) and his biography as secondary sources, considering Muhammed's life to be a perfect rendering of a Muslim life, and thus a full role-model by which to live.
Originally posted by MythLord
Anyone from TOR... legitimately anyone from TOR.I wouldn't be surprised if people argued Skotia is > Maul, or something. mmm
TOR era characters are terribly underrated at present.
---
PT era fanbase constitutes a large number of trolls and fanboys. They tend to suppress arguments in favor of characters of other eras (or alternate perspectives) with unmatched zeal. This trend is apparent in every discussion forum. I have lost much interest because of it (and this should tell you something).
Originally posted by Ziggystardust
Maul fanboys.There's only so many excuses one can make for a character's incompetence.
It's much like any moderate interpretation of - batten up the hatches - the Quran, that comes full with justifications for it's central theme. When I started reading the Quran, my first thought is "this is a rant". After several pages in, I realize that's not what it is. It is a chant. A highly repetitive sentiment that could be summed up with - [b]God is Great, the Disbelievers will be Punished
- That is the central and primary theme of the entire book. Just as monotheist sympathizers recant the true message of the Quran, insisting it's a practice of non-violence, Maul fans are guilty of delusions of grander for their horned champion. Unaccepting of that he is, at the very core of his character, a failure as a Sith assassin. [/B]
I would like to to somewhat-retract this statement here, as Maul fans seem to have taken flight and are all but non-existent after recent revelations. My thoughts on Islam - better known as Pisslam, Jizzlam, Shitlam, I-Slam my head on the ground - or quite simply - Terrorism - remain unchanged.
Originally posted by Darth ThorWhen did Vader beat Maul ? Oh right he didn't. Vader got his ass worked by Tano. When you do find the time to meet reality do get back to me.
The biggest crime the Maul and Galen fanboys do are putting them above Vader, even after the people working on Rebels and TFU have confirmed they are both below Vader.But that's just called being in denial.