Islam: Our Partners in Peace...

[nightflier]

This thread was about the brutality of sharia law. That you got it off-topic is to your credit, but off-topic it is. No matter what you said in your last post, you had nothing to argue with it's it's impentation. In fact, all your posts read like a tourist brocure for it.

And, I've never "taunted" your or anyome's religion, or lack thereof, although I do suspect you harbor a distinct desire for the stricter sharia law structure. It would give you more control over those around you, at least the women.

That you say my suggested google search "bored" you tells me that there was simply too much evidence to support my statements. So, why IS there so much muslim terrorism in the one western country that allowed a bit of sharia law into it's books? Coincidence, or simply a side-effect of the muslim influence in general? Hmmmmm...?

It's too bad you mix so few valid statements with your patented 99% bullshiite that it's impossible to tell one from the other. Argue if you want, but since you'll be doing with yourself, it will truly be mental masturbation.

I've stated my case, and so have you.

This is the voice of extremism: "Lotsa words, but totally worthless in content."

(And apparently I'm not the only one who's wondering what your point was).

[markw]

This is the voice of extremism: "Lotsa words, but totally worthless in content."

(And apparently I'm not the only one who's wondering what your point was).

I think I was pretty clear. That you can't understand it means you're lost in your own verbose, rambling bullshiite, as usual.

How do you walk with that big head of yours? Training wheels, or do you need a snorkel stuck out of your arse to breathe?

[02audionoob]

My intent was not single out the South. I have spent significant time in Dallas, Florida, georgia and Louisianna. There I have been received almost universally with warmth, hospitality and civility.

My intent was to point out that the Middle East doesn't have a stranglehold on religious fundamentalism and extremism. As Americans we can't afford to be hypocritical on this issue. I have indeed, on occasion, seen it in the South...as I have on the Eastern seaboard and in the Midwest.



Um...okay...but I'm not an athiest. I am, however, an individual that believes that people, all people, shouldn't be descrimated against (and definitely not exterminated) for spiritual beliefs that can neither be quantified nor qualified.



Much like everyone on these boards, I'm a busy guy. I tend to write quickly and off-the-cuff. It's not my responsibilty to take extra time to write down to the lowest common denominator.

None of my points were aimed at you.

Regarding the Texas, Alabama issue and referring to Feanor's post...often people perpetuate a stereotype and try to pass it off as an intelligent thought.

Regarding atheists...again referring to Feanor's post in this thread as an example, atheists often complain about the Christians trying to impose their beliefs on others, while the atheists do the same.

Regarding the way posts are written...I was referring to the opposite of your style. Your style is the one I was favoring, even if I didn't understand one of your comments. I am actually amazed sometimes at the composition of some of the longer posts, so really I guess they don't bother me. I still sometimes read them, but usually only scan.

[markw]

ok


what was that again?

sharia law is bad? - sure is

You basically got it, You really didn't realize that?

the muslims are coming the muslims are coming? - so

We'll both be dead and gone if they do succeed in what I mentioned in a previous post (read a little more carefully if you didn't understand it. It's there, in bold print, with a nice link, but that may take a little effort and thinking.)

But, I have five grand-kids so far and they might be the "beneficiaries" of their takeover, if this country allows it. I take it you either don't have kids or don't care about the world they live in.

same can be said for those who beat around the bush

I get a strong impression yer not really saying all you have to say on the subject of muslim immigration (you keep touching on it) - so lets hear it. Since it is clearly a problem in your eyes, what's the plan?

Why do you say that? Because I don't want this country run under islamic/sharia law? Do you have a problem with that? Get crackin' and make babies. It ain't easy, but if enough "non-islamic" people do it, it could work out. Again, another link I posted. Betcha you didn't bother to click it either.

Now, if you can still say you don't understand what I said, perhaps you shouldn't reproduce.

boy, talk about beating around the bush...

[ForeverAutumn]

None of my points were aimed at you. My point on the Texas, Alabama issue is that people like Feanor perpetuate a stereotype and try to pass it off as an intelligent thought. My point on atheists is that, again using Feanor as an example, they often complain about the Christians trying to impose their beliefs on others, while the atheists do the same. My point on the way posts are written was about exactly the opposite of your style. Your style is the one I was favoring, even if I didn't understand one of your comments.

Now who's stereotyping? I've known that I was an atheist for approximately 30 years. I've had people of many religions tell me I was going to hell, tell me that they'll pray for me, and try to convert me. I even had a co-worker completely stop talking to me when he found out I was atheist. I've never tried to convert anyone of religious belief to atheism. Believe what you want, frankly, its none of my business.

Don't complain about stereotypes and then impose yours on me.

[02audionoob]

Now who's stereotyping? I've known that I was an atheist for approximately 30 years. I've had people of many religions tell me I was going to hell, tell me that they'll pray for me, and try to convert me. I even had a co-worker completely stop talking to me when he found out I was atheist. I've never tried to convert anyone of religious belief to atheism. Believe what you want, frankly, its none of my business.

Don't complain about stereotypes and then impose yours on me.

My comment was not a stereotype. It was an obeservation on the battle that often goes on between atheists and Christians. I didn't impose a stereotype on anyone, including you. A stereotype would be when one assumes everyone living in the south is a religious extremist.

[bobsticks]

Secular towards conservative Islamic movements, yes, at least for most countries. But that hardly makes them model leaders because they still imprison, torture, and execute more dissidents than in any state in the world. I'm not blind to the fact that conservative Islam is the backbone for their opposition, but like so many issues we're covering here, this isn't as black & white as some here would like it to be.

Thank you for proving my point though "conservative" Islam is not their backbone...greed is . Moreover, "extremist' or "fundamentalist" Islam is the issue, but I appreciate how you tried to may a symbiotic connection between one thing, universally despised in the educated world, and a second thing, a modern political movement that you use as a basis for your anti-Americanism.

For the last few months of his life my grandfather's personal physician had the dubious distinction of having been responsible for maintaining Saadam whilst he was awaiting trail. From his accounts I can assure you that the man was a fixer, a dealer, and a powerbroker...and from the accounts of this accomplished man I can tell you that the same is true throughout the leadership of that blighted part of the world.

Simply put, yer boys need to stop tellin' their boys to kill oyr boys...

Isn't that a making a mountain out of a grassy knoll? You're talking about mild fluctuations in directions, but the kind turn Oswald's single bullet had to have made could not have occurred by barrel modifications or hot-rodding grain loads. And why would Oswald do any of that? Sticks, let's not start fabricating plausibilities Limbaugh-style, now. How did you put that so elegantly again? Oh yes, and I quote: "it's just that the words you typed do nothing to elevate your argument."

Um, no...it isn't...I can make a .338 Lapua round skip across water or a .223/5.56 military round ricochet off concrete at will. Moreover, what you meant was the "angle at which the shot was placed" was inconceivable...at least by Oswald...

...and you seem to have overlooked the fact that I agreed with you that it seemed implausible given the circumstances.

By the way, you never answered my question: what is so blatantly false about Chomsky's research?

Cuz I don't have to. The original point of this thread was the specifics of a case involving Sharia Law and it's results within the modern context. The fact that you've managed to pull it so far off-topic and involve Islam as a whole and your references of an archaic worldview aren't compelling.

Btw, since you've mentioned to reference, and imply, a connection between Limbaugh and I...lemme say this: the fact that you could mistake me for a far right-winger is lamentable but, further, the fact that you would imply that the Far-Right of this country and their admittedly morose invective could be in any way commensurate with the evil of the Moulahs in the Madrassahs is pathetic.

I've yet to see Limbaugh, Coulter, et al. criticized for having arranged a bombing of a Mosque, a discotheque, or a pizzeria...no matter how much I may disavow their stances.

[ForeverAutumn]

My comment was not a stereotype. It was an obeservation on the battle that often goes on between atheists and Christians. I didn't impose a stereotype on anyone, including you. A stereotype would be when one assumes everyone living in the south is a religious extremist.

...or that all atheists try to impost their beliefs on others. Perhaps your point was poorly worded, but it sounded like a stereotype to me. Thanks for the clarification.

[02audionoob]

...or that all atheists try to impost their beliefs on others. Perhaps your point was poorly worded, but it sounded like a stereotype to me. Thanks for the clarification.

My comment was not poorly worded, nor was it a stereotype. To say that members of one group often are guilty of the same transgressions as those of an opposing group is not a stereotype.

[nightflier]

...that when someone starts to slip in a discussion here, they see no other out but to resort to insults and incongruities that further debases their own position.

But, I have five grand-kids so far and they might be the "beneficiaries" of their takeover, if this country allows it. I take it you either don't have kids or don't care about the world they live in.

Takeover? Islam is going to take over here in the states? How much of a paranoid xenophobe are you, really?

Because I don't want this country run under islamic/sharia law? Do you have a problem with that? Get crackin' and make babies. It ain't easy, but if enough "non-islamic" people do it, it could work out.

Fornicate ourselves out of the Islamic takeover? H.F. Verwoerd, one of the more colorful architects of South African Apartheid, made a speech just like that once...

Now, if you can still say you don't understand what I said, perhaps you shouldn't reproduce.

I have a better idea: maybe people like you should not reproduce. We've had enough internment camps, pointless wars, and mass murdering to last a few more generations, thank you.

How exactly is your point of view different from National Socialism?

[3LB]

perhaps you shouldn't reproduce...boy, talk about beating around the bush...

heh heh heh

It's there, in bold print, with a nice link, but that may take a little effort and thinking.

man, yer posts reek of effort

[ForeverAutumn]

My comment was not poorly worded, nor was it a stereotype.

Well, I read it as a stereotype. And I've reread it and it still sounds like a stereotype. So either it was one or the other.

To say that members of one group often are guilty of the same transgressions as those of an opposing group is not a stereotype.

Let's review what you said.

My point on atheists is that...they often complain about the Christians trying to impose their beliefs on others, while the atheists do the same.

You never actually say that Christians try to impose their beliefs on others. What you say is that Atheists complain of it. There is no comparison between opposing beliefs here, only inference of what you think Atheists complain about.

[bobsticks]

We could review all we want...my bottom line....and Fall Girl, you and I should know each otha well enuff by now...I truthfully do not believe that the "Noob" is doing anything other than standing up for hid beliefs and his view...

Frankly...whether you and I agree with it or not... i believe his comments were directed toward Feanor...in any case, this may not be a battle (in the war) that's worth fighting

[ForeverAutumn]

We could review all we want...my bottom line....and Fall Girl, you and I should know each otha well enuff by now...I truthfully do not believe that the "Noob" is doing anything other than standing up for hid beliefs and his view...

Frankly...whether you and I agree with it or not... i believe his comments were directed toward Feanor...in any case, this may not be a battle (in the war) that's worth fighting

I agree. I didn't mean to sound argumentative, but the way that things have been going around here for the last couple of days I can understand how easily that assumption can be made. I was just trying to point out that audionoob was not being as clear as he thought he was.

I wasn't taking offense at his words, which is why I thanked him for clarifying. But he continued to insist that his comment was not poorly worded and I wanted to show him the flaw in his statement.

Believe me, I'm not about to take this thread into yet another irrelevant direction.

It has made for fun reading the last couple of days though.

Audionoob, I apologize if my last post sounded like I was trying to start a fight. That was not my intent.

[02audionoob]

Audionoob, I apologize if my last post sounded like I was trying to start a fight. That was not my intent.

Just as an objective observation…not an intent of my own to start something…I believe your comments definitely warranted a reply.

You never actually say that Christians try to impose their beliefs on others. What you say is that Atheists complain of it. There is no comparison between opposing beliefs here, only inference of what you think Atheists complain about.

I would say you’re disregarding critical context. I was speaking in response to the implication that the Christians have a history of imposing their beliefs on others…and conceding that point. My point was to say neither side is innocent.

Well, I read it as a stereotype. And I've reread it and it still sounds like a stereotype. So either it was one or the other.

Based on the personal experiences you’ve described maybe your reaction was affected by what you expected my comments to mean, rather than what they really mean.
　
As bobsticks notes, I’m entitled to stand up for what I believe…which might be quite different than you’d expect. And you, of course, are entitled to object to it.

[Mr Peabody]

If I may, in defense of Christianity, "imposing" it, is wrong according to doctrine. One is to submit to the will of God, if that person is persecuted and then submits, they really aren't submitting to God they are submitting to the persecutor. Jesus instructed the apostles to spread the Word but if they go into a town where no one will listen to dust off their feet and leave. No where in the New Testament which is binding on people in these times do you see "imposing". If any one was persecuted it was Jews and Christians. This is only referring to the writing in the New Testament. God gave us free will who is any man to try and take it away? Well, that is if one believes in God.

One can call themselves what they will but it don't make it so. History is full of much evil that was done in the name of Christianity. The thing about the Bible is the same with any book if you cherry pick lines here and there you can make it say pretty much what you want. To understand a book it has to be taken complete and in context, it does help to grasp the intended meaning.

[ForeverAutumn]

As bobsticks notes, I’m entitled to stand up for what I believe…which might be quite different than you’d expect. And you, of course, are entitled to object to it.

Absolutely! The freedom to say and think as we like. Freedom. That's what this entire thread comes down to.

[Rich-n-Texas]

...that when someone starts to slip in a discussion here, they see no other out but to resort to insults and incongruities that further debases their own position.

Are you... paying attention here pixelthis???

(Hoping I just pissed off pixie's friends... oh, wait...)

Irregardless, I'm taking this one with me!

[3LB]

Oh...playing the irregardless card now are we...

[bobsticks]

Oh...playing the irregardless card now are we...

LMAO...between that and the "beating around the bush" I'd give you a greenie if I could.

[markw]

[QUOTE=nightflier]...that when someone starts to slip in a discussion here, they see no other out but to resort to insults and incongruities that further debases their own position.[[/when you veer so far off the topic that's all you deserve.

Takeover? Islam is going to take over here in the states? How much of a paranoid xenophobe are you, really?

I take it my references to England and the links provided didn't sink in. Oh, yeah, doing some reading "bored you".

So, don't expect any sympathy.

But, with your feelings it's a no-brainer that you'll let it slip in without a whimper of protest. After all, you're not a woman, technically.

Fornicate ourselves out of the Islamic takeover? H.F. Verwoerd, one of the more colorful architects of South African Apartheid, made a speech just like that once.

Right, I'll bet you didn't even click on that lank either.. Too lazy, or just bored again?

I have a better idea: maybe people like you should not reproduce. We've had enough internment camps, pointless wars, and mass murdering to last a few more generations, thank you.

I love how you drag in interment camps out of nowhere. Are you really that desperate and disingenuous that you have to stoop to that?

anyhow, I've got five grown boys and, so far, five grand kids and counting. We're doing our share to preserve our way of life. ...and all the boys are good with guns.

You better start humpin' and make some more whiny liberal moron babies if you want to turn that around. but that takes some effort, lack of selfishness, and commitment, doesn't it.

How exactly is your point of view different from National Socialism?

How exactly do you see it as similar? (don't expect a serious answer. I just want to send YOU on a wild goose chase for a change)

[nightflier]

Wild goose chase? Hardly, it's pretty plain in your posts: your fear-mongering about the spread of Islam smacks of the same extreme views that were used to justify the most heinous crimes of the last century. The whites against the blacks in South Africa, the Turks against the Armenians, the Khmer Rouge against the Buddhists, the Chinese government against Tibetans, The Japanese against the Koreans, and yes, the Nazis against Jews and "Slavic peoples". It's scapegoating of the worst kind and you're slipping down a very slippery slope with those statements. The part about fornicating our way out of it, is certainly not original, either. It's been said before and with horrid consequences.

More importantly, your opinions create hysteria about something that is truly very remote. The idea that we will one day have Sharia law here in the States is ludicrous. Likewise, the idea that Sharia law will be the law of the land in Britain is also extremely distant. I've been to England, talked to people there, read the papers, and while there are certainly concerns about the growing Muslim population, they are still only a small percentage:

Total population = just under 50M
Muslim population = 2.4M

By the way, 85% of the people there are also white (Indo-European), in case that was bothering you, too. But this is a broad brush, we're painting with, because of those 2.4M Muslims, only a small portion practice or agree with Sharia law, and an even smaller number believe in violent terrorism as a means of advancing their beliefs. And by small number, I'm talking about an extremely small fraction of the Muslim population. As a matter of fact, the British security forces have been relying heavily on cooperation from secular Muslims and they have done a remarkable job of policing their own extremists. There are still terrorist attacks, yes, but they hardly represent the views or methods of the vast majority of Muslims there.

Let's also remember that the event described in the original post did not occur in England at all. It occurred in the Sudan, which is not only a country at war, but a good portion of that war is being waged between Christians and Muslims. This fact must also be on the minds of the people involved, from the victims all the way up to the judges and the government and therefore affects their decisions. I'm sure if we went to any other war-torn place around the world (there are lots to choose from, these days), we would find some pretty objectionable cruelty there as well.

Therefore, I consider your point of view, not only extreme, but also incendiary. Now I'm not saying you don't have a right to your opinion about it, but by the same token your post also should be responded to with actual facts rather than hysteria. When it comes to Religion, history has shown us over & over again that the most effective and lasting solution is a peaceful one. A call to arms isn't going to do anything but light the proverbial powederkeg. This is not a liberal point of view, BTW, it is a factual one.

[markw]

Geez, you sure do love to dig up irrelevant bullshiite and try to throw it at people, don't ya?

It's amazing at how you ignore what doesn't suit you and you just go on digging up more random crap, sorta like the energizer bunny of bullshiite,

Look how well you're doing with mexicans in southern california. Who runs that again?

[nightflier]

Well you're the one who brought up England and the growth of Islam there, no?

[markw]

Well you're the one who brought up England and the growth of Islam there, no?

And, by your own words, you "got bored" looking through the results of the google search I suggested.

Ignorance is bliss, eh? Or is that your attempt at "plausible deniability"?

Oh, I get it! You didn't even bother to do the search!

You don't bother to read what others post. You just keep spewing forth your verbal diarrhea in the hopes you'll elicit a response and further derail the subject!

Do you really crave attention that badly?