Oklahoma beheading - Islam is a disease (page 47)

FlyingHighNow

You mention other countries and its ok, I do it and it's not....

It is okay for you to mention other countries. Your original response to me was that you were miffed as if I had only mentioned Arabs and their violent history, which wasn't true. I mentioned Arabs and other peoples. Go ahead, make a list, because my post wasn't about just the Arab history. My response to you is that this is a thread about that region of the earth, so it is only understandable that I would mention the region and it's violent history. Somehow though, Confused (very appropriate moniker), it escaped your notice that I had mentioned more than just the Islamic/Arab region in my comment. I respectfully ask you, have you had your neurotransmitter levels checked lately?

cofty

References to historic crimes of western nations are a red herring. The developed world has gone through centuries of civilisation which is still ongoing. Our attitudes are - in some cases - very different from our parents. Broadly speaking Islam has opted out of the process.

The only intolerance that is acceptable is intolerance of intolerance.

LoveUniHateExams

@lisaBObeesa - I agree with your last point but it was hopelessly off-topic and therefore a fantastic example of whataboutery.

I am genuinely interested to hear a proposal that eliminates islamic extremism without shining a spotlight on the 'muslim community'.

Over to you.

FlyingHighNow

I was attending a very eye opening discussion at St. Andrew's Episcopal Church a couple of years ago. We were talking about the Bible and how it repeated/copied things taught and or practiced in religions that preceded the Bible. We discussed how most of the stories of violence in the Bible were copycat to the teachings in Babylon and places like the Assyrian Empire, which were quite violent and gruesome. Hell was one of the teachings. Virgin birth was another borrowed teaching.

LoveUniHateExams

'the only intolerance that is acceptable is the intolerance of intolerance' - excellent comment.

confusedandalone

cofty do you agree with the fact all MUSLIMS should be deported or put in jail as mentioned earlier, or do you think only radical Muslims should be.

Reference to historic western ATROCITIES. Can you please tell me what historic means in this sense. How far back is off limits? More importantly when FlyingHighNow uses historical events as the basis for why Muslims are STILL the way they are it is acceptable. However when European crimes are mentioned it is not valid. A red herring it is not.

The developed world has gone though centuries of civilisation because it was thier right to get to this point. You however want to take away another groups RIGHT to do so because it is not in your European timetable.

I love how Europe has forgotten about the ARAB Spring that they were so excited about not to long ago. You have people trying to alter thier own destiny in that area of the world. So its not as if these people are not capable. If Europeans who participated in Inquisition, the slave trade and wholesale killing of Native peoples could leave behind the filthy religious values that allowed them to participate in those things why do you think the arabs are not vcapable of doing the same with time? Is it an evolutionary thing that they just are not as intelligent or is it something else?

Also Chrisitianity had a 600 year headstart on Islam so there has been more time for Christian nations to make changes and be enlightened - the same can be said of Islam. Arabs are also very intelligent people. Look at countries like Turkey that are definitely making changes.

What is worse you look at America who just 50 some odd years ago let police dogs maul its own citizens in the street and be treated similar to how people are being treated in the middle east and most people were fine with it. Forcing people to do what YOU want will always lead to more problems and hatred of you later.

Have you ever really thought why many Extremists hate Western nations? When you feel that it is your right to carve up a region and force yourselves on them.. take their resources and ultimately destroy their way of life people will dislike you.

Extremists need to be rooted out and done away with, but again thinking that you have the right to imprison and jail and deport people for their religious affiliation is disgusting.

LoveUniHateExams

'Also Christianity had a 600 year headstart on Islam ...' - correct, but that doesn't mean that islamic reformation should be put off for 2 or 3 centuries.

I also agree with you that Western foreign policy deserves to be criticised and is a factor. However, Islamists hate not only the West but also the Chinese, Nigerian, Russian, Thai governements, etc. Why is this?

Gentledawn

"whataboutery" indeed. This whole thread is full of examples.

One such is bringing up people's opinions within this thread and jousting with these as if the opinions-- in and of themselves-- were hardcore ideaologies, enforced by violence and sharia-esque laws, like Islam.

Or dragging out examples of violence from decades or centuries past and saying, "Look there! Identical to the violence (or worse? is that what we're supposed to take away?) currently happening at the hand of Islamists."

Whenever anyone, regardless of race, religion or ideology, steps over the bounds from voice to violence, then that must be addressed. That was part of the point with my linking the "zombie muhammad" halloween parade video.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/social/current/284959/19/Oklahoma-beheading-Islam-is-a-disease#5103194

Confused: you claim that there is gross intolerence shown by people who voice their respective opinions in this thread. Yet the violence displayed by the man who attacked another man because the costume-wearing man in the parade was claiming to be the zombie incarnation of the prophet muhammad is pretty blatant. But let's put the situation in its true context: it was a f-ing HALLOWEEN parade, not a protest outside a mosque or city courthouse, stating that ALL muslims should this or that.

Back to some statements you made, I replied, and you never answered:

==================================

OK alpha man in a thread about a woman beheaded, someone posts a youtube video about a guy at a halloween parade dressed as a Zombie Mohammed who gets "choked" by someone trying to remove a sign... the two do not equate.

I post a video with a corrupt cop planting crack cocaine in a mans store which is far more deplorable then the Zombie video. Far more.

It illustrates something that goes far over your head and also helps to further open dialogue about things in this country.

It (the zombie muhammad video) illustrates that zealots and extremists are sometimes given a free pass in western (civilized) countries. Would the same be done to someone in a predominantly muslim country if the tables were turned? Would an athiest be free to even so much as walk the streets in broad daylight as he/she wants, without having to hide who they truly are/what they believe?

As a woman, all it would take in many muslim-dominated countries is to go out without accompaniment of a close male relative. They don't issue drivers licenses to females. Women must have a male relative's permission to travel, inside and outside the country itself.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/social/current/284959/20/Oklahoma-beheading-Islam-is-a-disease#5103231

Honestly, I find your debate style disingenuous deflection from current happenings. Islamists are CURRENTLY doing as bad or worse to people (how about a whole school full of girls kidnapped [300+]? whole towns slaughtered, including boys, girls and old people?) in many parts of the world. RECENTLY. Nothing Andrew Jackson (as an example) did all those decades ago (almost 2 centuries ago now) can be changed in the here and now. So why flop that dead fish out there whilst shouting "WHAT ABOUT THAT?" ?

Taking people to task for having the OPINION that they don't want that shit happening in the streets where they live isn't violence. It is merely words. Once those words start forming mobs, going to people's homes, churches, places of employment, schools, what-not and making life difficult and unbearable, then you have a comparison.

In my opinion.

Simon

I think there are no so stupid as those who go to great lengths to wilfully misunderstand an argument or point.

No one is saying that all people currently claiming to be Muslims should be locked up, deported, killed etc...

And repeatedly pointing to other misdeeds by other nations in centuries past is a rediculously weak argument and it's DONE confusedandalone - now it's simply off-topic.

It's like having a defense for murder as "well someone else killed someone once so you can't possibly convict me!"

confusedandalone

Cofty I have answered your question from last night multiple times but you refuse to answer the question of:

Do you think that all muslims as stated in the opening of this thread should be imprisoned or deported? Do you think it should be a crime for someone to be a Muslim?

LoveUniHateExams

Again it is not fair to decide when people have to make reformation. That decision has to come from the individual. If not and reformation is forced upon people bad things tend to happen.

They hate anyone that tries to undermine their religious beliefs or where they feel Islam is being persecuted. Islam is their life. So an attack on Islam they feel is an attack on them. That is thier thinking. This is why they have issues with the governments mentioned above. Its like trying to force democracy on Vietnam or Russia or North Korea or China. You can try, but ultimately you do not have the right to do that to another nation.

Oklahoma beheading - Islam is a disease

Share this