Michael Weiner Should Stick With His Real Last Name On The Radio...

[ttogreh]

You spent all this time looking for some way to counter the fact that 71 million people who subscribe to this so-called "virus" are also secular, and all you came up with is the fact that Turkey is less than perfect on the Kurds, who are Muslims themselves.

I am not casting a blind eye. The Armenian genocide happened. Oppression of the Kurds continues.

The world is a spectrum ranging from horribleness to virtue, and you have to recognize this. This isn't equivocation or pandering, or ignorance.

It's pragmatism. A secular republic is better than a country dominated by Sharia law. It's not perfect.

It doesn't have to be for me to expose you for what you are.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

No, I spent it sleeping, eating breakfast and otherwise having a life.

Get over yourself, I am not sitting here waiting to see what you post next.

and you can keep your veiled insults. You are not exposing me in anyway. I do not hide the fact that I hold the Muslim faith in contempt.

BTW You are wrong. the majority of Muslims live under Sharia law.

[ttogreh]

You are so wrapped up in yourself, you can't even conceptualize what I am really exposing, can you? Moreover...

I CAN COUNT. Turkey is proof that Islam and modernity can live with one another. Live with one another, maybe not love each other, but can we really say that the first one thousand five hundred years of Christendom were all peach petals and rose buds when it came to secular thought?

Whatever, people can read this exchange and make up their minds for themselves. I am going to enjoy some commercials and chip dip.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Apparently not. Why don't you just, in plain words, tell me what I really am. You know me so much better than I know myself.

[Marco Mchugh]

The IRA, the Ulster Defense Association, the Tsar Lazar Guard, God's Army, the Lambs of Christ, the Army of God. All terrorist organizations with at least a partially Christian agenda. So, by the logic related here, Christianity should be eradicated from the Earth, right? Right? Does anyone see how fallacious, how specious this line of reasoning really is? I'm sure we could come with a few Buddhist groups, too, so we can justify doing away with all of them. How about the Aum Shinrikyo for starters?

I'm sorry but this is a really really stupid post. No offense but you obviously didn't think this thru at all before posting. The IRA did not have a Christian agenda and were opposed by all the nations surrounding them - Chrisitan nations. The Lambs of Christ and the Army of God were very small minority groups. Not at all comparable to Hammas or other terrorist groupds.

Also, no one - not one person here - said Islam should be eradicated.

Do you actually have anything of value to add here or do you typically just put words in people's mouth and make false comparisons?

[Marco Mchugh]

Marco, terrorism is a tactic. One can use terrorism, renounce it, and begin the process of using politics to resolve areas of contention. Hamas' failure is not that they entered the political arena, it was that they failed to leave the violent arena.

Radical extremism, be it Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Animist, Atheist, or what have you, that is an entirely different kettle of fish. Once you sign on to a radical extremist agenda, chances are you are not going to make it to old age.

The point is this: Basque Separtist are not popular, the lambs of christ are not popular. They would not win general elections. In the middle east they can and do win elections with a violent agenda as their platform. And massive amounts of people vote for them. So how can you possibly deny that there is a problem with large amounts of populations supporting terrorism in the middle east? The numbers don't lie.

I'm not trying to be a jerk but you people have really poor arguments are defending sharia law so you can feel good about yourselves. I mean, women have almost no rights in much of the middle east, but we should just stick our heads in the sand about that too, right? Good Lord.

[Shade Everdark]

Let me re-phrase that....

Palestinians teach their children to kill Jews and Christians.

Non-Muslims in Dafur are getting slaughtered by Muslims or at best being forced to live in camps.

Iran hangs people for being gay.

Women are repressed and treated like property in most of the middle east.

All in the name of Islam.

I could keep writing all night about the horror that I find Islam to be. I still could not cover all the deplorable acts that are carried out in the name of Islam. The millions of people being repressed, tortured and killed. It sickens me.

It's not just the extremists. Every large population of Muslims in the world has it's own judges and laws. Sharia law. They are petitioning governments to be exempt from the laws of the given country and only be held liable to Sharia law. They also force said Sharia law on non-Muslims living in Muslim areas.

I have no problem with getting rid of the virus that it is.

I'm sorry but this is a really really stupid post. No offense but you obviously didn't think this thru at all before posting. The IRA did not have a Christian agenda and were opposed by all the nations surrounding them - Chrisitan nations. The Lambs of Christ and the Army of God were very small minority groups. Not at all comparable to Hammas or other terrorist groupds.

Also, no one - not one person here - said Islam should be eradicated.

Do you actually have anything of value to add here or do you typically just put words in people's mouth and make false comparisons?

The IRA had no Christian agenda, hm? How about their 'defense' of the Catholics in Northern Ireland against the Protestant Loyalists that began in the '60s? But that doesn't count, right? I might add that the point I was making was not one of degree. It was that every religion has nutjobs, and our time is better served by trying to figure out why these nutjobs crop up and eliminating the root causes, instead of condemning an entire religion. If I used a dash of sarcasm and hyperbole, it seems to have gone over your head.

On the other hand, if you read Gaf's post, quoted at the top here, it seems, at the very least, an insinuation that he'd not mind seeing Islam done away with, so your statement about no one saying Islam should be eradicated is invalidated post hoc anyway.

The point is this: Basque Separtist are not popular, the lambs of christ are not popular. They would not win general elections. In the middle east they can and do win elections with a violent agenda as their platform. And massive amounts of people vote for them. So how can you possibly deny that there is a problem with large amounts of populations supporting terrorism in the middle east? The numbers don't lie.

I'm not trying to be a jerk but you people have really poor arguments are defending sharia law so you can feel good about yourselves. I mean, women have almost no rights in much of the middle east, but we should just stick our heads in the sand about that too, right? Good Lord.

Now who is putting words in whose mouth? I haven't seen anyone here say that they would like to see Sharia law continue. Arguing against overreaction to a threat that is, let's be honest, a relatively small one, and arguing FOR a theocratic and dictatorial set of laws are two entirely different things.

[Steven]

Honestly? Don't give me the freedom of speech canard. He has a perfect right to say what he wants. He does NOT have the perfect right to say whatever he wants and get PAID for it. I might also mention the fact that I never even insinuated that he should be censored, only that I find it amazing that he can get away with saying some of the things he does.

no...he does indeed have that right to say what he wants and get paid for it, even if its terrible.

so you pressure his support system if you want a change....that too - is YOUR right.

I think thats pretty fair - about as fair as you can get.

maybe you can understand my perspective better Shade, if you consider that I strapped on a weapon and gave years of my life in defense of that simple ideology, so that you could post online and oppose it.

[Shade Everdark]

no...he does indeed have that right to say what he wants and get paid for it, even if its terrible.

so you pressure his support system if you want a change....that too - is YOUR right.

I think thats pretty fair - about as fair as you can get.

maybe you can understand my perspective better Shade, if you consider that I strapped on a weapon and gave years of my life in defense of that simple ideology, so that you could post online and oppose it.

Hm. Thank you for explaining exactly what I mean when I say he doesn't have the right to say whatever he wants on the public airwaves and get paid for it.

And I'll leave your second paragraph be; such condescension is beneath you, Steven.

[Kit Kat P]

True but you have to go back quite a long time to find groups of Christians banding together to spill blood. You see it weekly in the middle east. Muslims are not a monolith, but there are several hundred thousand that adhere to the stereotypes.

Um what about the "christians" that bombed the abortion clinic?

[ttogreh]

Marco and Gaf only see what they want to see, Kit.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

I don;t deny that some people who claim to be Christian are extremists. I deny they are Christians. Christianity does not teach it's followers to kill anyone that does not follow the tenants of Christianity. Islam on the hand does. It's spelled out in plain words repeatedly in the Qurran.

[ttogreh]

Equivocation, Gaf.

A Muslim can spend his entire life, say, in Dearborn Michigan, without killing anyone. Christianity... have you ever read Isaiah? What about the exploits of Joshua?

Stop it. You are digging an ever deeper hole for yourself.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Can you just stop your attacks on my charactor? Is it possible?

I am in no way equivocating. I beleive and say that Islam is a religion of Hate and Murder. It's holy books and writings teach, in plain words, to kill non-beleivers and people who loose faith. Christian wrtitings do not teacht hat anywhere. Yes, violence happens, but it is not at the core of Christian beleive to murder. Anyone who has read the Quran can not say that about Islam. That is what I say. That is what I beleive. My view on that is not changing to fit the conversation. Perhaps you don't know what equivocate actually means.

[ttogreh]

"Let me rephrase that"...

Stop it. Just... stop it.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

No. As long as the Constitution is protecting my rights, I will believe and say anything I want. If you don't like it, don't read it.

[Steven]

Hm. Thank you for explaining exactly what I mean when I say he doesn't have the right to say whatever he wants on the public airwaves and get paid for it.

And I'll leave your second paragraph be; such condescension is beneath you, Steven.

Ive been out of this thread for awhile.

"rights" to public expression.....who then do you say should have the final say so Shade?

Some type of governmental authority, or the influence of the people as they do or do not express themselves thru the spending of dollars?

[Steven]

No. As long as the Constitution is protecting my rights, I will believe and say anything I want. If you don't like it, don't read it.

well done.

and I beleive you too strapped on a weapon in defense of that simple ideal didint you Mark?

[Steven]

Equivocation, Gaf.

A Muslim can spend his entire life, say, in Dearborn Michigan, without killing anyone. Christianity... have you ever read Isaiah? What about the exploits of Joshua?

Stop it. You are digging an ever deeper hole for yourself.

expand please.

do tell and apply from these two books, you have my curiosity raised.

(please expand within context please).

[Steven]

I was not endorsing Al Franken's politics, way of life, or asserting his virtue. However, Bill O'Reilly sold every last copy of Al Franken's book with his lawsuit against it.

Also, there are about 1,610,000,000 Muslims. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that "several hundred thousand" means seven hundred thousand, right on the nose.

700,000 / 1,610,000,000 = 0.000434782609. Not one percent. Not one tenth of one percent. Four one hundredths of one per cent.

Radical Islamic Extremism is BAD BAD MOJO. Be that as it may, portraying it as anything but the fringe of a fringe of a fringe group is extremely foolish.

wait a minute here.

I see anti christian sentiments based on "fringe" behaviour all the time in here.

[Steven]

Um what about the "christians" that bombed the abortion clinic?

well lets use that example then, Love.

It seems to me that Mark is suggesting that specific groups of people are acting out of accord to some form of adherance to their religious text - somethign very plain and easily recoignizable. And the truth is that we have all seen a great deal of that sort of allegience to that particular religion carried out violently in recent years. ANd we're watching that alleginece become very resourceful and creative.

now someone in here may call that fringe behaviour - but I call it a growing trend.

as for the abortion clinic bombings, thats a fair counter.

but I do have to ask where this sort of behaviour and mission is directed in the Christian text.

[ttogreh]

Gaf, you most certainly have the right to say whatever you want. I have the right to say, out of pity... yes, PITY, to tell you to stop. Do you understand me Gaf?

I don't hate you. I don't dislike you. I... PITY... you.

As for Steven, well, Steven and I can disagree without being disagreeable.

Steven, the old testament is literally pockmarked with violence in the name of and by God. God killed thousands of innocent Egyptian boys on behalf of the Hebrews. Indeed, not only did He kill them, since they were Egyptian and therefore worshiped idols, He condemned them to hell.

Forgive me if I find comparison of the Christian sacred text to that of Islam's sacred text to be a poor argument.

As for hateful speech against Christianity, I reject it out of hand. I may not be as vigorous in my defense against it, I freely admit that much.

However, Gaf BY HIS OWN ADMISSION and simple inference is advocating at the VERY LEAST the forced conversion of 1,610,000,000 human beings to either secularism or a less offensive religion.

I am being charitable here. I could say from the same inference that he is advocating the extermination of 1,610,000,000 human beings. However, I doubt even he would go so far as to advocate THAT.

I am willing to be gracious here. Gaf can reject my assertion, and say that he believes in some form of isolation of the Muslim world from that of the western world. He can say he advocates some kind of measure that I cannot think of.

However, I maintain that as I have read his words, he is advocating the complete and utter destruction of the culture of 1,610,000,000 human beings.

Go ahead, Gaf... explain how I am wrong.

[Steven]

Gaf, you most certainly have the right to say whatever you want. I have the right to say, out of pity... yes, PITY, to tell you to stop. Do you understand me Gaf?

I don't hate you. I don't dislike you. I... PITY... you.

As for Steven, well, Steven and I can disagree without being disagreeable.

Steven, the old testament is literally pockmarked with violence in the name of and by God. God killed thousands of innocent Egyptian boys on behalf of the Hebrews. Indeed, not only did He kill them, since they were Egyptian and therefore worshiped idols, He condemned them to hell.

Forgive me if I find comparison of the Christian sacred text to that of Islam's sacred text to be a poor argument.

As for hateful speech against Christianity, I reject it out of hand. I may not be as vigorous in my defense against it, I freely admit that much.

However, Gaf BY HIS OWN ADMISSION and simple inference is advocating at the VERY LEAST the forced conversion of 1,610,000,000 human beings to either secularism or a less offensive religion.

I am being charitable here. I could say from the same inference that he is advocating the extermination of 1,610,000,000 human beings. However, I doubt even he would go so far as to advocate THAT.

I am willing to be gracious here. Gaf can reject my assertion, and say that he believes in some form of isolation of the Muslim world from that of the western world. He can say he advocates some kind of measure that I cannot think of.

However, I maintain that as I have read his words, he is advocating the complete and utter destruction of the culture of 1,610,000,000 human beings.

Go ahead, Gaf... explain how I am wrong.

ok you were "sorta" there....you had mentioned Joshua and another text specifically. I'd like to hear your thoughts as they support your original idea in comparing the slaying of infidels to these christian parralels. I will share my thoughts on it but I wanted some detail from you first.

PS - I wouldent bother with pitying Mark - I admire him in many ways and respect him for living out his ideals....he'd be pretty oblivious to pity from anybody.

[ttogreh]

Ok, once again, I do not wish to hijack this thread towards a discussion of mentioned violence in the Koran, or in the books of Exodus, Joshua, and Isaiah.

Simply put, Steven, Judaism and subsequently Christianity were spread by the sword, just like Islam. This is a historical fact.

As such, mentioning that there is violence and the call to violence in the Koran is, in my opinion, easily refuted by mentioning that there is violence, and yes, the call to violence in the Bible.

I reject the assertion that adherents of Islam are doomed to reject modernity and secular thought. I have consistently mentioned verifiable examples to support my belief.

As for Joshua, Isaiah, and Moses, as well as Mohammed, they are better left to a thread all their own, in which I will likely not participate in.

[Steven]

Ok, once again, I do not wish to hijack this thread towards a discussion of mentioned violence in the Koran, or in the books of Exodus, Joshua, and Isaiah.

Simply put, Steven, Judaism and subsequently Christianity were spread by the sword, just like Islam. This is a historical fact.

As such, mentioning that there is violence and the call to violence in the Koran is, in my opinion, easily refuted by mentioning that there is violence, and yes, the call to violence in the Bible.

I reject the assertion that adherents of Islam are doomed to reject modernity and secular thought. I have consistently mentioned verifiable examples to support my belief.

As for Joshua, Isaiah, and Moses, as well as Mohammed, they are better left to a thread all their own, in which I will likely not participate in.

well, then maybe you can copy and paste this and start a new thread.

I think its worth exploring - seems to be a passionate subject for many people besides myself.

When you make statements of "Fact" to build your argument its often worth exploring in greater detail, especially when you make such statements with such an an air of learned authority, which you often do.

For example I cant tell you about Mohammed with any true authenticity because I have never lived the life of Islam nor have I been raised in it. yes I can cite some topical studies but thats about it - and that often lacks any true depth because without some degree of immersion into the working culture and mindset I am at best simply spouting "data". And Data is not truth. And the problem with "facts" is that they can be presented any number of ways to slant an idea.

"easily refuted" to me is a statement of superiority....its smacks of "I've done my homework and I understand that which you do not and that is the end of the subject - I have made my thoughts known and therefore there is nothing worth discussing"

I dont know that you recognize that you do that - but it often comes across that way.

and Im not even going after you here. Im simply saying hey - well lets dig into this a bit then since you used it as a point of referance, lets include some other opinions and voices.