Muslims Properly Dealt With

[CoeburnCane]

Hell, lets all just curl up by the campfire and smoke a joint, everything will be ok. Those muslims dont hate us, they want to hug us and just be friends. You go ahead, and I'll stick to my redneck, backwoods, ignorant beliefs,,,in which im entitled to because...American blood was and still is be shed by young men and women, even for the damn liberals that refuse to see the light. Stock up on the firearms and ammo boys, your going to need it.

Make sure to feed that sheep when you're done having your way with it, Earl Gene JimmyJo E Lee.

Scary part about people like you is that they just don't know how dumb they sound.

[Gotch]

"I was trying to show that there are fanatics in every religion. I wasn't necessarily putting down any religion."

I understand that.

"It is wrong to think that one religion is better than another religion."

If you really look at the point I have tried to make on this subject over and again, it's not about one religion being better than another. In fact it is about degrees of evil perpetrated by followers of those religions.

My point is and always has been that people professing to be followers of Christ, followers of Buddha, follower of Zoroaster, etc have at times throughout history committed horrible acts. Usually they have not done this in the name of their chosen faith, at times they have.

The history of Islam however starts with violence, is spread through no means other than violence and force, has never veered from violence, has never taken a hiatus from violence, and has always carried out these acts in the name of Islam. I am not saying "one" religion is better than another. I am saying it is a historical fact that "all" major religions have a far better track record than Islam when it comes to past histories of violence.

"You missed my whole point Gotch."

No, I understood it perfectly.

"I was trying to point out that every belief/religion has its zealots."

Yes they do. The difference is in numbers and degrees of crazy. Islam wins in both categories by a landslide.

"That is what the Crusades were about. Christians were trying to drive the "savage" non christians out of Jerusalem."

And I pointed out that these "savage" non Christian's you speak of had by this time conducted a massive Imperialistic land grab that was, until recently, often overlooked as a driving force behind Christendoms reaction. Muslims had taken (by force) all of southern Europe, including Spain and part of France, as well as all of North Africa. This fact is not in dispute.

I ask you. Under these circumstances do you organize and fight or simply wait to be next?

"How many times have you heard christians say that if you don't believe in Jesus and that He died on the cross for our sins, then you are going to hell?"

Not really that many, but then I usually don't discuss such matters.

How many Christians can you think of who have strapped 15 pounds of explosives on themselves and blown up a Synagogue or a Mosaic?

"There are radical christians too."

Yes there are. The numbers are far fewer. They tend to be condemned by more moderate christians (something that seldom happens in Islam). And they seldom perpetrate violence (especially large scale violence). My point is in degrees not in existence.

[Gotch]

Tell that to the native people of North America...after all the finger pointing, read Bartolome de las Casas's "A Brief Account of the Destruction of the Indies" and slowly begin to realize that Christians have a history of spreading their faith through the same means that Muslim extremists do. As I said earlier, when it comes to which faith is correct all are equally wrong. I'll save you the effort...here's a link to the ebook: A Brief Account of the Destruction of the Indies by Bartolom? de las Casas - Project Gutenberg

What occurred right here in North America is probably the best example of Christian genocide there is. I never denied it existed. I have denied, and still deny that is has been epidemic and unceasing as has Islamic violence.

I would also suggest that greed and imperialism had at least as large a hand in these events as did religious zest. Again, this is not the case in the never ceasing example of Islamic violence.

[Gotch]

"It is wrong to think that one religion is better than another religion."

Although it has never been my point (see above post) I strongly disagree with this.

To suggest that a religion founded by a known pedophile, rapist, slave trader, murderer, and torturer is on an even plane with a religion founded upon the tenants of Christ, or for that matter the teachings of Gautama Buddha simply defies common sense.

[CoeburnCane]

If you really look at the point I have tried to make on this subject over and again, it's not about one religion being better than another. In fact it is about degrees of evil perpetrated by followers of those religions.

Which begs the first question that came to my mind--why should we tolerate any kind of evil, no matter what the degree, when it comes to an organized religion? Saying one religion is better than another on that basis is like saying getting hit in the left ball is better than getting hit in the right one. Not much difference, still hurts like hell.

I really respect you Gotch, and you've done a lot more research than I have on the historical side of things--but let me share a thought...the reason why you can't trust organized religion of any type is because it is "organized" by human beings. Even if it's based off a faith in a deity, it still is organized by human beings, and we're all evil at the core in one way or another. Which is why I feel one should strive for salvation & a relationship with God w/o the organized religion part--it only helps to corrupt, distort, and royally eff things up when it comes to a relationship with God and the destination of your eternal soul. And, specifically in the cases of Christianity/Islam that we're talking about, tends to corrupt one's actions towards someone of a different religion/non-religion JUST because they're different.

I'm not disagreeing with ya, just reframing the overall argument.

[Gotch]

"the reason why you can't trust organized religion of any type is because it is "organized" by human beings. Even if it's based off a faith in a deity, it still is organized by human beings, and we're all evil at the core in one way or another. Which is why I feel one should strive for salvation & a relationship with God w/o the organized religion part--it only helps to corrupt, distort, and royally eff things up when it comes to a relationship with God and the destination of your eternal soul."

I completely agree.

"why should we tolerate any kind of evil, no matter what the degree, when it comes to an organized religion?"

We shouldn't, and I've said that several times.

"Saying one religion is better than another on that basis is like saying getting hit in the left ball is better than getting hit in the right one. Not much difference, still hurts like hell."

This is the point we don't agree on. Not the testicle part....I'm sure you are right about that But I don't agree with the premise.

A better analogy would be a comparison between Jack Kevorkian and John Wayne Gacy. Which would you prefer to have living next door.

Then there is the greater core issue, the founders. Jesus taught non-violence, Gautama Buddha taught non-violence, so we can reasonably assume what about a person who adheres to the true teaching of these leaders? That they also will show some degree of influence from these teachings.

Muhammad on the other hand was a warlord who committed all sorts of vile acts personally and instructed his followers to do likewise in many cases. So what can we assume about a person who adheres to his teachings?

[sup-rbeast]

Hell, lets all just curl up by the campfire and smoke a joint, everything will be ok. Those muslims dont hate us, they want to hug us and just be friends. You go ahead, and I'll stick to my redneck, backwoods, ignorant beliefs,,,in which im entitled to because...American blood was and still is be shed by young men and women, even for the damn liberals that refuse to see the light. Stock up on the firearms and ammo boys, your going to need it.

And while you're at it, research how many US soldiers of Islamic faith have given their American blood for this country as well.

[sup-rbeast]

What occurred right here in North America is probably the best example of Christian genocide there is. I never denied it existed. I have denied, and still deny that is has been epidemic and unceasing as has Islamic violence.

I would also suggest that greed and imperialism had at least as large a hand in these events as did religious zest. Again, this is not the case in the never ceasing example of Islamic violence.

The author of that book was a monk himself...in the foreword of the book, or maybe in the 1st chapter (I can't remember which) he states that the Indians could spare themselves if they repented.... In addition, the papacy helped fund many of these expeditions. But, greed knows no religious bounds. BTW, the things Las Casas describes went on for about 40 years....and we thought the Jewish Holocaust from WWII was bad....

[Gotch]

The author of that book was a monk himself...in the foreword of the book, or maybe in the 1st chapter (I can't remember which) he states that the Indians could spare themselves if they repented.... In addition, the papacy helped fund many of these expeditions. But, greed knows no religious bounds. BTW, the things Las Casas describes went on for about 40 years....and we thought the Jewish Holocaust from WWII was bad....

Yeah, I'm aware of who he was. A Dominican I believe.

Although his work is of value, it has been pretty much universally criticised by mainstream historians for exaggeration and some self serving aspects.

He was also criticised for having an interest in bringing African slaves to North America.

I'm going by memory, didn't have time to look at references, but I think I'm pretty close to the mainstream view of his work there.

In fact nearly all respected historians point to the unintentional spread of disease for many of the deaths he laid at the feet of the Spaniards.

I hesitate to post that because those who don't agree with my points are basically just going to say..."there he goes again"....but it is true.


Again I'm going by memory so I could be mistaken, but I think he has been even more strongly criticised by mainstream historians concerning his work about and his exaggeration of the death totals of the inquisition.

Don't let any of this lead you to believe that I don't think the Native American were the victims of genocide at the hands of Europeans or even that I am suggesting that Las Casas was making things up from whole cloth. In fact I think the general consensus is that he just got caught up in his own fervor and he wanted his work to have as much impact as possible.

[R13]

"Haven't been around for the discussion about the crusades being easily shown to have been a defensive response to Islamic imperialism which within 100 years of the death of Muhammad had taken most of Europe up to and including Spain and part of France as well as Northern Africa?"

I guess I must have missed that discussion too, because it wasn't easily shown to be a dfensive response at all. You can take that position, but when countless other non-christians were slaughtered "just because"..it proves it wasn't just a defensive move, it was christians/catholics just taking out anyone that wasn't a christian.




"McCarthyism and the civil war are terrible analogies and are completely incompatible with the issue."

He said Mccarthyism didn't pertain to it. And those who defended slavery then, used the Bible to justify it..so that analogy wasn't that far off.


"It might make for a nice politically correct statement but simply isn't supported by centuries of evidence."

Just because you take that stanc, doesn't mean you are being "politically correct"...why would he be trying on here? Most muslims aren't the extreme ones and don't go by the violent parts of the Koran...just like most christians don't do the same with the Bible. Religions evolve, over time as society changes..most realize that certain parts of the original ways of the religion is outdated and wrong. Islam is no exception.