Plans to build a Mosque at 911 'ground zero' site...

[SteamWake]

Who on earth thought this was a good idea? Regardless of your religious views or political standing.. this is just a bad bad idea.

Outraged family members and community groups are accusing a Muslim group of trying to rewrite history with its plans to build a 13-story mosque and cultural center just two blocks from Ground Zero, where Islamic extremists flew two planes into the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/14/plan-build-mosque-near-ground-zero-riles-families-victims/

[Platapus]

It is two blocks away, in a building that currently has a mosque. So what exactly is the problem?

[razark]

So what exactly is the problem?

I think people's problem with it is that it is a mosque.

[SteamWake]

While ground zero is still a hole in the ground to erect a gleeming 13 story Mosque is just going to open old wounds.

[Platapus]

ahh them mooslums again. Verrry scary

Now I understand. :doh:

[Skybird]

As we have been told from 11th September on, Islam had nothing to do with it. Will you guys please finally dig it. Islam means peace, and according to Turkish prime minister Erdogan, Islam is simply unable to do any wrong and evil at all.

So why not building a mosque in the neighbourhood - and maybe an Islamic friendship centre right on top of Ground Zero? :88) Be good sheep - believe the real truth, and obey. :up:

"Nur die dümmsten Kälber wählen sich ihre Metzger selber."

[Safe-Keeper]

As we have been told from 11th September on, Islam had nothing to do with it. Will you guys please finally dig it. Islam means peace, and according to Turkish prime minister Erdogan, Islam is simply unable to do any wrong and evil at all. [/silly trawman]

So why not building a mosque in the neighbourhood - and maybe an Islamic friendship centre right on top of Ground Zero? :88) Be good sheep - believe the real truth, and obey. :up::nope:

That's it, you've gone into full-on conspiracy theorist mode.

[Rilder]

Of course if the christians wanted to build a church there, there would be no resistance at all.

I say we meet half way and build a Pagan Temple. :arrgh!:

[SteamWake]

Of course if the christians wanted to build a church there, there would be no resistance at all.

I say we meet half way and build a Pagan Temple. :arrgh!:

I kind of like this idea ! :yeah:

[Safe-Keeper]

Of course if the christians wanted to build a church there, there would be no resistance at all.I don't see the problem with a church two blocks away from where a terrorist attack happened to occur, no.

[Oberon]

I say build a ICBM silo there. :yep:

[TLAM Strike]

I say build a ICBM silo there. :yep:
Shhhh... don't give them any ideas...
http://img121.imageshack.us/img121/8532/switzerlandminaret66933.jpg

[Aramike]

As we have been told from 11th September on, Islam had nothing to do with it. Will you guys please finally dig it. Islam means peace, and according to Turkish prime minister Erdogan, Islam is simply unable to do any wrong and evil at all. How could it do any wrong? It's a beautiful religion, we've been told.

Look, I don't see any good intellectual reason why this shouldn't happen, but let me ask you this: why is it that Muslims ALWAYS get a pass on sensitivity issues (especially from liberals), while Christians do not?

Think about it - if a bunch of Muslims objected to erecting a large Christian church for (insert reason here), what side do you think the left would fall on?

If this is offending so many people, why are the Muslims given that pass, when clearly Christians would not be?

Frankly, I personally don't think Islam should be recognized as a religion in any free nation, period, until the time in which it stops so blatantly attempting to supress the freedoms of their host nations. And before anyone attempts to cry about how it's only the extremists who behave like that, please read Islamic texts: the religion itself is extreme.

[Blood_splat]

Which is why they need to stay and practice their farked up religion where it is more suitable...like in the Middle East.

[Safe-Keeper]

Look, I don't see any good intellectual reason why this shouldn't happen, but let me ask you this: why is it that Muslims ALWAYS get a pass on sensitivity issues (especially from liberals), while Christians do not?Whether or not Islam was behind 9/11 is not relevant to this discussion. Now, before you say anything, yes, I did hit "View post" for the OP and read his quote (mental note to self: spare yourself the bother in the future, he's just as bigoted towards Muslims as atheists) and no, unless someone is going to explicitly state that Islamists were not behind the 9/11 attacks, no one is "rewriting history" by building a mosque and cultural centre.

If I was to build a church and Christian cultural centre some distance away from the site of KKK lynchings, would that be wrong (not to mention "rewriting history":nope:), too? How about a Japanese cultural centre within earshot of Pearl Harbour?

Frankly, I personally don't think Islam [and Christianity] should be recognized as [religions] in any free nation, period, until the time in which [they stop] so blatantly attempting to supress the freedoms of their host nations. And before anyone attempts to cry about how it's only the extremists who behave like that, please read [Islamic and Christian] texts: the religion itself is extreme. Fixed that for you.

Oh, and no, I don't agree, that sounds a tad bit too extreme to me.

Which is why they need to stay and practice their farked up religion where it is more suitable...like in the Middle East. I assume you're also of the opinion that the Roman Catholic Church and all the world's Catholics should take their religion back to Italy.

Oh, wait, your rhetoric applies only to people you don't like.

[Aramike]

Fixed that for you.

Oh, and no, I don't agree, that sounds a tad bit too extreme to me. First off, when you quote someone, it's bad form to edit their words. Please refrain from that in the future.

Secondly, while Biblical texts are certainly extreme in cases, Christianity's beliefs are centered on the New Testament which are quite benign when compared to Islamic texts, especially when considering the way they are instructed to live their lives out.

And bear in mind, I don't ascribe to either works, as I am an atheist. I'm just calling it like it is.

[Safe-Keeper]

First off, when you quote someone, it's bad form to edit their words. Please refrain from that in the future.Just taking it to its logical end point.

Secondly, while Biblical texts are certainly extreme in cases, Christianity's beliefs are centered on the New Testament which are quite benign when compared to Islamic texts, especially when considering the way they are instructed to live their lives out.Nope. It is the New Testament that declares women are created in man's image to be the glory of man. It is the NT that commands women to cover their heads in church. It is the NT that forbids women from speaking in church (if there's something they want to know, let them ask their husbands at home), and from teaching, or having authority over men in general. The NT also commands slaves to remain faithful and loyal to their masters even if they have a chance of escape. Then there is the loving stuff about homosexuality, the oh-so-cozy Revelations, and other assorted lunacy that would make even the Pope's head spin.

[GoldenRivet]

Plans to build a Mosque anywhere is a pretty disgusting thought IMHO :shifty:

like the man says - Opinions are like ass holes - everybody has one.

[Diopos]

...
are like ass holes - everybody has one.

an extension to the above:
Problem is that many have two. One where it is supposed to be and the second one where their mouth ought to be......:hmmm:

[not specific for any poster here ... :)]



.

[krashkart]

Of course if the christians wanted to build a church there, there would be no resistance at all.

I say we meet half way and build a Pagan Temple. :arrgh!:

:hmmm:

How about a hybrid: a Pagan Temple and a Mayan pyramid like we saw in Apocalypto. America needs less reasoning, and more public sacrifices. Wake up, people! :woot:

[Aramike]

Nope. It is the New Testament that declares women are created in man's image to be the glory of man. It is the NT that commands women to cover their heads in church. It is the NT that forbids women from speaking in church (if there's something they want to know, let them ask their husbands at home), and from teaching, or having authority over men in general. You must have your head in the sand if you don't see the difference between such largely ignored (citation lacking) requirements in a PRIVATE BUILDING and similar requirements being imposed on an entire society, you clearly don't know the definition of the term "extreme".

[Rilder]

:hmmm:

How about a hybrid: a Pagan Temple and a Mayan pyramid like we saw in Apocalypto. America needs less reasoning, and more public sacrifices. Wake up, people! :woot:

Or we could scrap that and just go and build a church to Optimus prime.

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/4903/vschart.jpg

[Safe-Keeper]

You must have your head in the sand if you don't see the difference between such largely ignored (citation lacking) requirements in a PRIVATE BUILDING and similar requirements being imposed on an entire society, you clearly don't know the definition of the term "extreme". :-?

It was written:
Frankly, I personally don't think Islam should be recognized as a religion in any free nation, period, until the time in which it stops so blatantly attempting to supress the freedoms of their host nations. And before anyone attempts to cry about how it's only the extremists who behave like that, please read Islamic texts: the religion itself is extreme.I replied that the Bible has lots of horrific rules, too, which someone objected to, pointing out the relative harmlessness of the NT. I corrected him (or her) by listing several laws of the NT that I found offensive. Shifting the goalposts to "oh, but it's not extreme because it's not adhered to" misses the "judge the religion by its Scriptures" context.

The "citation lacking" note is pretty bold, though. References to hatred in the Q'uran are taken as gospel, but criticize the Bible and all of a sudden you need sources. No worries, though, there are plenty of good sources available. The Bible Gateway (http://www.biblegateway.com/) is the best one I have found, short of buying the Bible itself. If that proves too dry for you, there's always the satirical LEGO adaptation (http://thebricktestament.com/), which I love and highly recommend:up:. Do a search for "women" and you're off.

[Skybird]

Some people seem to think that that friendly Muslim they know necessarily represents the only one and true face of Islam. This often is assumed because many people have not spend any time at all to study islamic ideology as it is based in its tradition and on it's own sources/scriptures, so they cannot recognise when they are being told BS, and when not - becasue they do not know islam and always mistake ideology with personal impression of some single individuals they have. That is as if I would ignore american history and the constitution and the Bill of Rights etc and would form an opinion on political America exclusively by some random conversations i have had with three or four american members here in this forum.

Let me draw a parallel example to this naive assumption of "I know that Muslim now I know what Islam is".

during the Third Reich/Nazi-Germany, there still lived many Germans who did not believe in the Nazi ideology, and did not support it. then there were those Germans who were misled for sure and believed it to be something different than what it was, some of these recognised their mistake before the end, or during and after the end.

But you see, the existence of such "kind" and "reasonable" Germans did not change the undeniable fact that Nazi-Germany remained to be a reality, and that the content of fascist ideology was what it was, and was absolutely nothing else than that. That there were many germans - maybe even a majority - who were still humanistic and democratic in their thinking and orientation, did not change the fact that German fascism had brought a catastophe over it's neighbours and Germany itself, and that German fascim derived from Austria and Germany, and that the holocaust and the war was wanted, formulated, planned, intended part of it's program. German nazism was/is what it is - despite those friendly of all Germans who were no Nazis at all.

This should put it into relation, I think. Islam, before anything else is not so much a religion, but a political ideology instrumentalising religious claims for the purpose of martial and political self-justification. And as a political ideology, it is xenophobic-monocultural, obsessively intolerant, aggressive, totalitarian on every level of the social structure of communities, discriminatory; it propagates sexual slavery, and in general is an ideology justifying and aiming at all-out conquest and supremacist world-leadership.

Just this. Nothing else, nothing more, nothing less. If you think you can define an Isolam without the basic elements of it'S own teaching and tradiiton, it's own scriptures and it's own sources, then you are fooling yourself - and at your own cost, and the cost of your childkren and children's children. If you claim to loove your children, then you owe it to them to try to leave them a world where they can live their lifes free from Islamic slavery.

Mistaking a person with an ideology, is a major categorical error. The question one should better ask is: does the person's deeds, acts and intentions represent a given ideology'S content, or not? Is he/she in conformity with this ideology, or not? This nincludes both intentional individual behavior, as well as group behaviour. The answer to this question is what decide for me wether or not I see somebody as a Muslim, or not. I knew Muslims whom I refuse to accept as muslims, because they did not represent key content of Muslim ideology, and that claim of being Musli by birth is something I do not buy - Islam is no race.

But one thing is clear: in my book, seeing somebody as a true Muslim indeed is anything but a compliment. Like seeing somebody as a Nazi. I do not diffeer between Nazis that I like and Nazis I do not like. I NEVER like Nazis - because of the ideology they stand for. That Nazi ideology is inhumane, supremacist and evil. And Islamic ideology is inhumane, supremacist and evil as well.

[Aramike]

I replied that the Bible has lots of horrific rules, too, which someone objected to, pointing out the relative harmlessness of the NT. I corrected him (or her) by listing several laws of the NT that I found offensive. Shifting the goalposts to "oh, but it's not extreme because it's not adhered to" misses the "judge the religion by its Scriptures" context.Obviously you're intent upon avoiding the point. Here's the obvious difference (which I suspect you know but are attempting to twist out of): Christianity's texts indeed have extremism - but do not promote a Christian to CURRENTLY LIVE AS EXTREME. (Note: I disagree with many of Christianity's tenets, but I surely wouldn't put them in the category of violent extremism, which is the discussion.)

Muslim texts are the opposite.

Skybird's point is quite relevent to the discussion, I think.

PS: We're talking about violent extremism, here: not things that you "find offensive".

[Morts]

Plans to build a Mosque anywhere is a pretty disgusting thought IMHO :shifty:

like the man says - Opinions are like ass holes - everybody has one.
and putting up a church isnt ?

[Lord_magerius]

For the love of god, sorry if I offend any americans on here, but I'm sure those who know about the world outside their borders won't be. They want a mosque, two blocks away as I understand it, oh no! Islam, the terrible faith that preaches more love towards neighbours, friends or anybody you find on the street, than christianity. I know a lot of decent muslims, they're just as disgusted at the so called "rules" in the Qu'ran that the extremist clerics say are in there. If you ask a proper muslim, not one of those mentalist nutters, which I might add is a very rare thing in Islam actually. Nothing is mentioned about, supressing women's rights, sharia law and all the other bollocks that Fox news will have you God fearing yanks believing. I have studied many different faiths and in my opinion they are basically one and the same. One says thee, the other says thou. That's where the difference comes in. I'm what some would call a "filthy pagan" as I believe in the old gods. When I tell people this, I usually get told "you need to find Jesus, because if you don't you're going to burn in hell." The only people I have ever had that off, are christians. I have many friends of different creeds and religions and all that bollocks, but it's always been the christians who've told me to "repent" and "worship the lord". Never have i had my jewish friend or any of my many muslim friends tell me that their way was best. They accept me for who I am and don't let faith get in the way. I'm going to stop here as I'm just going to rant all night, and yes I was raised a christian but left the church as I couldn't stand the "I'm better than you, because my imaginary friend is better than your's" attitude...
Religion... sh*t it!

[Rilder]

That's where the difference comes in. I'm what some would call a "filthy pagan" as I believe in the old gods. When I tell people this, I usually get told "you need to find Jesus, because if you don't you're going to burn in hell."


You know, despite believing in the Hellenic Gods I actually haven't ever had this so far in America, though I'm young so I dunno, maybe I just haven't been telling enough people what Gods I believe in.

[Aramike]

and putting up a church isnt ?What, you don't know (or comprehend) the literal difference between a church and a mosque?

Provide reasoning, please ... or step out of the discussion, as it seems clear you're overmatched.

Here's a primer:
Church: Christian place of worship.
Mosque: Muslim place of worship.

Christian: religious texts don't advocate violent extremism to win converts.
Muslim: religious texts do.

Want to try to get in on this again, without the typical leftist talking points?

[Zachstar]

Have a reread of the old testament before you use that junk argument.

As for the planned mosque all this sounds like people who lost family members almost a decade ago desperate for more attention. Sorry but I have very little respect for people who keep using this loss to book more interviews book sales and of course political talking points left and right. We all lost family members though one cause or another. 9-11 is another just like a car crash or disease at this point.

[Skybird]

For the love of god, sorry if I offend any americans on here, but I'm sure those who know about the world outside their borders won't be. They want a mosque, two blocks away as I understand it, oh no! Islam, the terrible faith that preaches more love towards neighbours, friends or anybody you find on the street, than christianity. I know a lot of decent muslims, they're just as disgusted at the so called "rules" in the Qu'ran that the extremist clerics say are in there. If you ask a proper muslim, not one of those mentalist nutters, which I might add is a very rare thing in Islam actually. Nothing is mentioned about, supressing women's rights, sharia law and all the other bollocks that Fox news will have you God fearing yanks believing. I have studied many different faiths and in my opinion they are basically one and the same. One says thee, the other says thou. That's where the difference comes in. I'm what some would call a "filthy pagan" as I believe in the old gods. When I tell people this, I usually get told "you need to find Jesus, because if you don't you're going to burn in hell." The only people I have ever had that off, are christians. I have many friends of different creeds and religions and all that bollocks, but it's always been the christians who've told me to "repent" and "worship the lord". Never have i had my jewish friend or any of my many muslim friends tell me that their way was best. They accept me for who I am and don't let faith get in the way. I'm going to stop here as I'm just going to rant all night, and yes I was raised a christian but left the church as I couldn't stand the "I'm better than you, because my imaginary friend is better than your's" attitude...
Religion... sh*t it!

You must ask yourself what meaning the term "Muslim" has anymore when it is not defined on the basis of Quranic rules and laws. Because the submission to the Quran is what makes Muslim "Muslim". The people you described, the way you describe them they would be putting their lives in danger when being the way you say they are inside a real Muslim community/country, Quranic law demands their extinction, simply that.

not me defines what Islam is and what. The Quran does. And as long as you ignore the teaching of the Quran you are neither Muslim yourself, nor can you claim to legitimitaley define what Islam is.

And read again what I said above about non-Nazi Germans and despite their existence the Third Reich and German fascism still having been existing reality and having been of that ideological content as we know it has been. In you logic you would say in this example that the Third Reich and German fascism has not been that bad at all becasue those Germans who were no Nazis and thus were not representative for Nazism did exist. Ask yourself: does that make any sense.

And please, do not try to compare the teaching of Jesus with that of Muhammad. the first taught pacifism and giving up violence, the other calls for violence against non-believers and declares such vioence a mandatory obligation. When people think they must compare Jesus and Muhammad by their teachings and then conclude that in principle both are telling the same things and talk about the same kind of god, then this is as if one would compare Stalin and Tamerlan with Ghandi or Mother Theresa.

But possible, absolutely, that the church has corrupted Jesus' teachings. Indeed one can ask what the church has to do with Jesus at all. Seen that way one can ask indeed why churches must be build at all, near or far from Ground Zero.

the point is: somebody living in the following of Jesus teaching, must corrupt his teaching in order to act violent, aggressive, intolerant. Somebody living by the teaching of Muhammad wanting to behave like that must not corrupt his teaching, but just live by the word of it. And that is what sets Jesus and Muhammad apart, fundamentally.

In case somebody does not know and now mistakes me with a Jesus-guy or Christian, I am both not. I am atheist, anti-religious, declared opponent of both Islam and the church, and I am - spiritual. I don't want rites and I don't need temples and priests. I do not believe in magic or superstition, and I do not believe in deities or the fairy queen. I am convinced when religion leaves the space of the intimate, the private, and displays in public, it stops to be truly spiritual, and turns into a powerpolitical claim of exclusively earthly nature.

[Safe-Keeper]

Obviously you're intent upon avoiding the point. Here's the obvious difference (which I suspect you know but are attempting to twist out of): Christianity's texts indeed have extremism - but do not promote a Christian to CURRENTLY LIVE AS EXTREME. (Note: I disagree with many of Christianity's tenets, but I surely wouldn't put them in the category of violent extremism, which is the discussion.)What does this even mean? Have you read a verse I haven't, that basically states "these laws expire well before May 2010"?

PS: We're talking about violent extremism, here: not things that you "find offensive".Who is this "we" you are talking about? I replied to someone who said the Qur'an contained extreme content by pointing out that, well, so does the Bible, with the implication that Scripture and the current practice of a religion are two completely different things.

Which, it appears, is exactly what you've been trying to tell me all along.

So we agree.

So I don't see the problem.

What, you don't know (or comprehend) the literal difference between a church and a mosque?

Provide reasoning, please ... or step out of the discussion, as it seems clear you're overmatched.

Here's a primer:
Church: Christian place of worship.
Mosque: Muslim place of worship.

Christian: religious texts don't advocate violent extremism to win converts.
Muslim: religious texts do.By the same reasoning, one shouldn't build synagogues because there's a verse in the Old Testament that says you should stone to death whoever tries to convert you from Judaism. Since actually reading or knowing the contents of their own Holy Books seems to be too much to ask from Christians and Jews these days, the text in question is at Deuteronomy 13:6-11.

Want to try to get in on this again, without the typical leftist talking points?I love how everything in US politics is turned into a "left vs. right" thing:-?.

Some people seem to think that that friendly Muslim they know necessarily represents the only one and true face of Islam. This often is assumed because many people have not spend any time at all to study islamic ideology as it is based in its tradition and on it's own sources/scriptures, so they cannot recognise when they are being told BS, and when not - becasue they do not know islam and always mistake ideology with personal impression of some single individuals they have. That is as if I would ignore american history and the constitution and the Bill of Rights etc and would form an opinion on political America exclusively by some random conversations i have had with three or four american members here in this forum.

Let me draw a parallel example to this naive assumption of "I know that Muslim now I know what Islam is".

during the Third Reich/Nazi-Germany, there still lived many Germans who did not believe in the Nazi ideology, and did not support it. then there were those Germans who were misled for sure and believed it to be something different than what it was, some of these recognised their mistake before the end, or during and after the end.Wow!

I never thought of it that way! See, I had this mistaken impression that there were one and a half billion Muslims, spread out over many denominations, countries, regions and communities like Christians are (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam#Demographics). I never realized that all of them belong to this single monolithic entity called "Islam" and all agree to the same violent tenets.

Next you'll probably say you hate all Christians because of the dreadful things the backwards Catholic Church are doing to everyone from ignorant women in Sub-Saharan Africa who get scared out of using condoms, to homosexual teens, to children who are fondled by their priests and then scared and shamed into silence.

Mistaking a person with an ideology, is a major categorical error.Firstly, there isn't "one ideology" any more than there is a single Christian, Buddhist or Jewish ideology. The views of a liberal church in Scandinavia and the Vatican are completely different.

Either way, if you're not going to judge a religion by its followers, how do you judge it? I have friends who are Christians and incredibly nice people. Several of them are active in their churches doing great things for their communities. If a new church was being built, should I try to get the construction stopped because the RCC over in Italy is a dreadful organization, because there are and have been Christian terrorist groups far away doing horrible things, and because the Bible says a lot of nutty things that the people who are building the Church are not even aware of?

Ridiculous.

Found an article (http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/05/07/new.york.ground.zero.mosque/index.html) on this, so let's get some details to see what you object to:


"Cordoba House project calls for a 15-story community center including a mosque, performance art center, gym, swimming pool and other public spaces."

"It will have a real community feel, to celebrate the pluralism in the United States, as well as in the Islamic religion," Khan said. "It will also serve as a major platform for amplifying the silent voice of the majority of Muslims who have nothing to do with extremist ideologies. It will counter the extremist momentum."

Muslims working to build a community centre with, among other things, an arts centre and swimming pool, in a building that reportedly already contains a mosque (which presumably SteamWake and Skybird want demolished), in an effort to promote a peaceful interpretation of Islam?

I especially liked this quote:
"Three hundred of the victims were Muslim, that's 10 percent of the victims," she said. "We are Americans too. The 9/11 tragedy hurt everybody including the Muslim community. We are all in this together and together we have to fight against extremism and terrorism."

[Skybird]

I never thought of it that way! See, I had this mistaken impression that there were one and a half billion Muslims, spread out over many denominations, countries, regions and communities like Christians are (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam#Demographics). I never realized that all of them belong to this single monolithic entity called "Islam" and all agree to the same violent tenets.

There is only one Quran, one Sharia and one Islam. You may not like it, but that's how it is. There are not different Qurans. And Muslims themselves - are not hesitent to claim that one monolithic Ummah, that one global community of Muslims to be what they belong to, even if you indicate you do not realsie the existence of such a Ummah. they refer to that Ummah whenever it is in their interest.

Stop trying to rewrite Islam.


Next you'll probably say you hate all Christians because of the dreadful things the backwards Catholic Church are doing to everyone from ignorant women in Sub-Saharan Africa who get scared out of using condoms, to homosexual teens, to children who are fondled by their priests and then scared and shamed into silence.

It seems you have not even taken the time to read what I have written before you wrote this pointless comment.

Firstly, there isn't "one ideology" any more than there is a single Christian, Buddhist or Jewish ideology. The views of a liberal church in Scandinavia and the Vatican are completely different.

You draw analogies between the western religion, and Islam. You are necessarily wrong, therefore. You cannot compare the history of the church with that of Islam. Both are two totally different things.

Either way, if you're not going to judge a religion by its followers, how do you judge it? I have friends who are Christians and incredibly nice people. Several of them are active in their churches doing great things for their communities. If a new church was being built, should I try to get the construction stopped because the RCC over in Italy is a dreadful organization, because there are and have been Christian terrorist groups far away doing horrible things, and because the Bible says a lot of nutty things that the people who are building the Church are not even aware of?

Another pintless comment. Read again what I wrote earlier, above. the points you try to raise I have already adressed.

Ridiculous.
Your lack of consistency and knowledge of the dominant position of the Quran in Islam? Yes.

Found an article (http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/05/07/new.york.ground.zero.mosque/index.html) on this, so let's get some details to see what you object to:


"Cordoba House project calls for a 15-story community center including a mosque, performance art center, gym, swimming pool and other public spaces."

"It will have a real community feel, to celebrate the pluralism in the United States, as well as in the Islamic religion," Khan said. "It will also serve as a major platform for amplifying the silent voice of the majority of Muslims who have nothing to do with extremist ideologies. It will counter the extremist momentum."

Muslims working to build a community centre with, among other things, an arts centre and swimming pool, in a building that reportedly already contains a mosque (which presumably SteamWake and Skybird want demolished), in an effort to promote a peaceful interpretation of Islam?

That peaceful interpretation of Islam is not possible by the conetnt of the ideology that Islam is. These people are either deceiving you, or they indeed believe in what they say, but then they are already apostates and just do not realsie it. By Quranic order and demand, they are free to be killed as apostates if they indeed believe what they tell in that article.

Also, it is part of the project of spreading Islam in the West to use all those terms and labels Wetserners like in order to make them ambrace Islam, and raise a wrong imopresison of it. This deception and denying of true Islamkic identity is allowed if it serves the interest of Islam, it's survival, and preventing opposition to it (taqquiya).


I especially liked this quote:
"Three hundred of the victims were Muslim, that's 10 percent of the victims," she said. "We are Americans too. The 9/11 tragedy hurt everybody including the Muslim community. We are all in this together and together we have to fight against extremism and terrorism."

Quran encourages and Muhammad demanded terroism as a tool to weaken and overcome opposition and hostile resitence to it's claim. You just understand what you want to hear. It also is claimed and true) that Islam does not allow suicide. that is correct, with one exception: the Quran says Muhammad explcitly ordered his folowers to not shy away from self-sacrifice if it is in the name of attacking the infidel enemy. Suicide attacks are perfectly legal by Quranic ruling. Also, apostacy is under penalty of death in Islam. This is why those the Wets calls "radicals" or "fundamentalists" excuse the killing of Muslims that we see as "moderate Muslims". Becasue what we call a "moderate" Muslim indeed is not Muslim in Quranic understanding. The killing of such muslims in the name of Islam therefore is perfectly legal.

It just is not poltically correct to remind of that, and it just does not serve the interest of Islam to lull the Westerners not knowing the scriptures of Islam, and who thus believe what they want to hear.

And this, nationality is of secondary improtance in Islam, that'S why the concept of national states is relatively new in the oriental world. If you think you can counter the meaning of being part of the Ummah by being Muslim with being American, then you simply believe wrong and again make the mistake to try pressing Islam into Western categories Western thinking could handle. But islam is not matching these categories, it means somethign very different when saying "peace", "tolerance", "freedom".

Ummah goes first. Nation and race comes second. That'S what makes islam so attractive to many converts and migrants as well, which explains why the third-generation migrants in europe of Islamic origin are even more conservative and "radical" than their grandfathers 50 years earlier: you immediately can boost your self-esteem and experrience of being valued by other by just saying you now confess to Allah and Muhammad as his prophet - et voilá - from one second to the next you are somebody, you are part of the ummah, the Islamic Herrenkultur - even if you are a social looser, a financial nobody, did not pass school, have no job, no future perspective, and are not accepted by the locals.

Say yourself - isn't that better and faster than taking drugs or happiness-pills...?

[CaptainHaplo]

First of all Safe-Keeper, your being disingenious by quoting old testament law when you know - since it has been mentioned - that Xtianity is not under the law anymore -but under grace. :nope:

As for "women" in the NT - they are told to submit to their husbands. Wow. How horrific. They are not told they can't vote, or teach, or much else. They are told that in matters of the direction of the family - they are to acquiese to the will of their husband. That isn't talking about what movie they are going to watch, or where the family is going on vacation - its about life-changing questions of "do we move to take that new job, uprooting the family for an opportunity" type questions. A man also has the duty to respect and submit to his wife as well - though I guess you don't want to address that. The only things Scripture is saying is that when it comes to the final say in major matters - the husband has that authority - which is echoed in the second thing it clearly says about women - they may teach, they may lead, however they are not to be the final head of the church - aka - they are not to be ordained as pastors/priests. Note there is no such prohibition on a woman running a business - so to claim the Bible is somehow sexist globally is incorrect. It simply lays down the plan of God for HIS family (the Church - and as its HIS he can dictate such) and the family structure he wants in those that follow him. Someone has to hold the "buck stops here" position - because you can't always get consensus - and the Bible simply makes it clear that a Xtian family will have that position held by the husband.

While you can point to "lego bible" all you want, if your foolish enough to take that as "gospel" knowing full well it is taken out of context intentionally to prove an anti-xtian point, then you make it clear you have no interest in a legitimate debate about the differences between Islam and Xtianity.

Regarding different variations of Islam existing just like they do in Xtianity. Sure they do. However, lets examine that for a second. Your claim is that the majority of Muslims are not "extremists" - yet tell me, how many countries that are predominantly Islamic require all women to wear a head covering, or execute homosexuals, or stone women who cheat on their husbands? I can name 3 COUNTRIES that do so..... But that population can't be considered "extremist"? Bull. Sure there are different flavors - but they all hold the same EXTREMISTS views... Lets compare for a second - Sunni vs Shia and Baptist vs Methodist... Sunni's and Shiites disagree on who the leader after mohammed should have been - but they still both hold to Sharia law and other EXTREMISTS views. Baptists vs Methodist - differ on how baptisms are performed (dunking vs sprinkling) and whether or not an invitation to partake of the lords supper should be issues or not. Neither things that women should be covered from head to foot, that you should stone a gay person, or cut off the head of someone who leaves the faith.... If you can't see the ludicrous stance your holding - then you are intentionally choosing not to see it.

You want to talk about all the non-extremist muslims..... just like the article you quoted did. I am glad you bring up this point - because sorry - 3 countries worth of muslims isn't exactly a tiny portion of the total, and its also worth noting that the "silent majority" your article quoted - has been relatively silent for HOW long? Sure an isolated group here and there has spoken out - but tell me - why has that silent majority been silent for so many years????? There is a reason for it....

There is evil in choosing to do nothing. Its called culpability - and implicit acceptance and support of such deeds. If the Muslims wants the rest of
the world to see them as revolting against the "extremism" - then they are going to have to stand en masse against these acts - before, during and after - as well as purge their extremist religion of its extremists elements. The only problem there - if you gut Islam of its violent dictates (including its Sharia tie-in) then you have no religion left. Xtianity doesn't have this problem - its violence was gutted about 2000 years ago....

I don't see any muslims doing that today.. . does anyone else? Didn't think so.

[caspofungin]

ah, the years go by, and still the same arguments play on...

[Schroeder]

Sure an isolated group here and there has spoken out - but tell me - why has that silent majority been silent for so many years????? There is a reason for it....

Because they might get killed doing so.;)

It's the very same as with Nazism 65 years ago. Speak against the Führer with the wrong people and you won't get old.

[Safe-Keeper]

:throws up hands:

But fine, believe that if you will, I can see this is going nowhere. While you're out there terrified of Muslims building swimming pools and advancing tolerance, I'll be out in the sun enjoying life.

Have a good day.

[CaptainHaplo]

Schroeder - the difference is there were groups that spoke against Hitler and Nazism. And THEY were the minority. Some did pay with their lives - but you know - they were heroes. To this day, the Germam people still hold a ... sensativity to the subject of Jews. A friend of mine once said that all a jewish man had to do was comment to a police officer about how germans treated jews and he was likely to be let go with no citation. Why? German society as a whole has accepted a level of culpability in the acts of history that Nazism led them to.

The difference is that this isn't a single country with an isolated power structure that is answerable to no one. If the "majority" of Muslims were against violence - they have the ability to get rid of the "tiny" element that holds extremism as its foundation. Yet it doesn't happen.

While there are some similarities, there are also vast differences. That portion of the silent majority thatwould shed extremism has directions to turn to help do so - but it chooses not do to so. Tacit approval.

@Safe-Keeper. Ok - have fun by the pool. Meanwhile, the score is now:

Head in the sand Islamic Defenders: 0
Realists: 1

[DarkFish]

That's where the difference comes in. I'm what some would call a "filthy pagan" as I believe in the old gods. When I tell people this, I usually get told "you need to find Jesus, because if you don't you're going to burn in hell." The only people I have ever had that off, are christians.What?! Don't tell me there are more Pagans than just me on here:D
Heilir Æsir, heilar Ásynjur, heil sjá in fjölnýta fold!
ok heil Vanir of course even though that's not in the original prayer;)

Anyway, I've never been told by anybody (besides jehova's witnesses of course:shifty:) that I'd need to find Jesus/Allah/Buddha or whatever.

IMO, a mosque 2 blocks away from ground zero is okay. I mean, if it were right on top of ground zero, of course it would not be good. But 2 blocks? Come on.
As long as muslims worship their god silently, without disturbing Western values, I have no problem with them. But once they make their women go cover their heads and stuff, which is against the western value of equality for both sexes, (and there are many more examples) let them please return to their own little muslim country. If they wish to come here, they must adapt to our norms and values.
That said, I know muslims that do adapt themselves to western society. I have no problem whatsoever with these muslims.

[CaptainHaplo]

Hey Darkfish - you need to find uhm.... whatever. :rotfl2:

Here is a question for you - what is your opinion going to be when this Muslim house of worship (along with whatever else it may contain) sues the city to be allowed to broadcast on speakers the Cal to Prayer? It has happened in other places, no reason it wouldn't here....

Meaning if you were standing on Ground Zero - you would hear such a broadcast - every few hours - every day...

Think that is a good idea?

[Foxtrot]

This thread can use some great singing from a evil dirty nazi women-hating freedom-despising Muslim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyAKBuU72p4

[DarkFish]

Here is a question for you - what is your opinion going to be when this Muslim house of worship (along with whatever else it may contain) sues the city to be allowed to broadcast on speakers the Cal to Prayer? It has happened in other places, no reason it wouldn't here....this is one of those 'many more examples" of different norms and values between the western and the muslim world. Here in the west, we don't want to be disrupted by someone shouting his calls to prayer (or anything for that matter) all over the place. The muslims should respect that, and pray in silence. Definitely if there are people around who could be offended by the broadcasts, like victims of 9/11.

If they want to live here, they gotta respect and obey the rules of our society.

But as you say, it has often happened that muslims simply don't respect our values, and instead demand us to accept their (seen in our western values) rude behaviour. And the very moment you speak up against that, you're called a racist:shifty:.




EDIT:
Anyway, I've never been told by anybody (besides jehova's witnesses of course:shifty:) that I'd need to find Jesus/Allah/Buddha or whatever.not entirely true, I forgot to mention about the local lunatic here in Eindhoven:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=my0l-IfVQbg
just a random youtube clip, it doesn't take much fantasy to get what he's yelling about:rotfl2:
He gets annoying sometimes, I don't really want to be told about how Jesus supposedly can save me:88)
I have to follow the legendary Frisian king Radboud here, I rather spend eternity in hell with my (also atheist/pagan) friends, than in heaven with my enemies and a god I don't like.

[Aramike]

Have a reread of the old testament before you use that junk argument.Understand the argument before you label it junk.

While Christians believe in the history of the OT, they follow the tenets of the NT.

In case you haven't heard (clearly), Christianity is the product of Christ, which only appears in the NT.

[Aramike]

What does this even mean? Have you read a verse I haven't, that basically states "these laws expire well before May 2010"?I doubt you've actually read any verses, as there ARE NT verses which clearly distinguish between the "old ways" and how Christ ushers in new ways.

[nikimcbee]

I say we build a giant apple store there:

http://kera.name/articles/wp-content/uploads/2006/10/apple_store.jpg

[razark]

While Christians believe in the history of the OT, they follow the tenets of the NT.

In case you haven't heard (clearly), Christianity is the product of Christ, which only appears in the NT.

:06:
Then why do the Christians constantly attempt to post the ten commandments everywhere they can? Or oppress homosexuals based on the Old Testament laws? Or the creationists, constantly trying to get the Genesis story taught in science classes?

What about the fact that Jesus said that the old laws still applied? The only New Testament writings that say the old laws are null and void come from Paul, not Jesus. Did I miss the part where Paul outranks Jesus?

Why don't we find people that support the stoning of unruly children? Or the execution of people who deconvert or follow another religion? How about the destruction of any non-christian/non-jewish temples? Or the execution of rape victims? Forcing rape victims to marry their rapist? The bible gives specific instructions on slavery, who you can hold as a slave, how long they can be your slave, how severely you can beat them, etc. Even the writings of Paul in the New Testament tell slaves that they need to submit to their masters. Can you show me a church that teaches those tenets of Christianity? Where are the Christians calling for the Old Testament laws against shellfish and blended fabrics? Why do I have to put up with the atrocity of my mother-in-law's Christmas ham?

How about the New Testament teachings of Christ that are constantly ignored? When is the last time you saw someone sell all they own, donate to the poor, and live as a traveling teacher, as Jesus called them to do? How about Jesus telling his disciples that prayer was something to be done in private, only for god to witness; not done in public, as a way to impress everyone? How about the verses in Acts, that shows the Apostles living in a collective group, each one contributing what they had to give, and taking what they required from the group treasury? (Or, as someone later put it, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need".) Why don't Christians follow that tenet of the New Testament, and support communism?

If the Old Testament is pointless now, why is it still the first half of the Bible?

It seems most Christians like to selectively pick from their favorite fantasy novel, and only spout off about the rules that reinforce their worldview, and ignore the ones they don't like or find inconvenient. Not that Christians are the only ones to do so. Certain branches of Islam do the same thing. They focus on certain rules, and we end up with the sort of people that hit the World Trade Center. But just as not every Christian follows every teaching of the Bible, not every Muslim follows ever teaching of the more fundamental branches of Islam. If you read the Bible, it's full of awful stuff. If some Christians can ignore the bad parts, and follow only the good, why is it that all Muslims are bad Muslims?

[gimpy117]

They're going to play it up a bit. Take it with a grain of salt...it's FOX.
I don't Buy Into fox news' sensationalism and fear mongering. Fox will just open up old wounds over 911 to get the ratings and that's sad. On top of this too...were supposed to believe that there's some EVIL Muslim plot to and I quote "re-write history". And how exactly can a building do that? last time I checked People write history...not structures. Building a Mosque there Might be Just what America needs. Another step towards finally healing the wounds from that September day.

sadly though...sound like Grudges run deep in this nation,and people will still distrust, and refuse to put that terrible time in Americas history to rest.

[Zachstar]

Other than the surprising amount of remaining hatred towards islam in this forum again this is a nonissue. Just "9-11 I lose" exploiters looking to play things up in time for their next book about someone lost a decade ago and how that is more important than a mother losing a daughter in a car crash. Or a father lost in an industrial accident.

They can take a hike!

[Tribesman]

There is only one Quran, one Sharia and one Islam. You may not like it, but that's how it is.
Yet there are many many interpretations of the Koran, thousands of versions of sharia and several dozens of very different flavours of Islam.
Skybird may not like it, but his only arguement is that he accepts the rather new nutty fundamentalist flavour as the real one and only.

Here in the west, we don't want to be disrupted by someone shouting his calls to prayer (or anything for that matter) all over the place.
Yeah and them noisy ******* with the bells at six in the morning had better go back to wherever it is they came from. And the horrible salvation army crowd with their damn band on a sunday morning of all days.
Them non westerners had better learn to fit in or else get back to making noise somewhere else.

Meaning if you were standing on Ground Zero - you would hear such a broadcast - every few hours - every day...

Perhaps you had better go to ground zero
If you were standing pretty much right next to or opposite something you might hear it if its a quiet day, but hearing some speakers two block up with a pile of high rise buildings between ya?????
For a measure why not try hearing the bells of Trinity from ground zero when there is a memorial "silence"

While Christians believe in the history of the OT, they follow the tenets of the NT.

In case you haven't heard (clearly), Christianity is the product of Christ, which only appears in the NT.
So that would be the Christ who in the NT apparently was very specific in relation to the OT in that until heaven and earth shall come to an end not even the slightest letter of the law in the OT will change and anyone who breaks even the smallest of those laws or teaches others to do so shall be called to judgement as the lowest of the low.
Ain't that amazing, following the tenets of the NT as a Christian means you have to follow the tenets of the OT because Jesus said so in the NT

[Aramike]

Then why do the Christians constantly attempt to post the ten commandments everywhere they can?Oh man, you're right. "Thou shalt not kill" is extremism and should be stopped! :doh:

[Platapus]

:06:
Then why do the Christians constantly attempt to post the ten commandments everywhere they can? Or oppress homosexuals based on the Old Testament laws? Or the creationists, constantly trying to get the Genesis story taught in science classes?

What about the fact that Jesus said that the old laws still applied? The only New Testament writings that say the old laws are null and void come from Paul, not Jesus. Did I miss the part where Paul outranks Jesus?

Why don't we find people that support the stoning of unruly children? Or the execution of people who deconvert or follow another religion? How about the destruction of any non-christian/non-jewish temples? Or the execution of rape victims? Forcing rape victims to marry their rapist? The bible gives specific instructions on slavery, who you can hold as a slave, how long they can be your slave, how severely you can beat them, etc. Even the writings of Paul in the New Testament tell slaves that they need to submit to their masters. Can you show me a church that teaches those tenets of Christianity? Where are the Christians calling for the Old Testament laws against shellfish and blended fabrics? Why do I have to put up with the atrocity of my mother-in-law's Christmas ham?

How about the New Testament teachings of Christ that are constantly ignored? When is the last time you saw someone sell all they own, donate to the poor, and live as a traveling teacher, as Jesus called them to do? How about Jesus telling his disciples that prayer was something to be done in private, only for god to witness; not done in public, as a way to impress everyone? How about the verses in Acts, that shows the Apostles living in a collective group, each one contributing what they had to give, and taking what they required from the group treasury? (Or, as someone later put it, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need".) Why don't Christians follow that tenet of the New Testament, and support communism?

If the Old Testament is pointless now, why is it still the first half of the Bible?

It seems most Christians like to selectively pick from their favorite fantasy novel, and only spout off about the rules that reinforce their worldview, and ignore the ones they don't like or find inconvenient. Not that Christians are the only ones to do so. Certain branches of Islam do the same thing. They focus on certain rules, and we end up with the sort of people that hit the World Trade Center. But just as not every Christian follows every teaching of the Bible, not every Muslim follows ever teaching of the more fundamental branches of Islam. If you read the Bible, it's full of awful stuff. If some Christians can ignore the bad parts, and follow only the good, why is it that all Muslims are bad Muslims?

I believe this is what is known as "Cherry Picking".

Parts that support your group's agenda are followed, parts that do not support your group's agenda are not followed.

And yes, some people who have an agenda against Islam, choose not to believe that, just like in Christianity, there is cherry picking in Islam.

There are fanatics in all religions who try to insist that THEIR cherry picking is the only appropriate way of interpreting their religion. That's one of the reasons they are fanatics.

[Platapus]

Oh man, you're right. "Thou shalt not kill" is extremism and should be stopped! :doh:

And Christian have such a good history of following THAT commandment. :doh:

[razark]

Oh man, you're right. "Thou shalt not kill" is extremism and should be stopped! :doh:

A few good rules in the midst of a bunch of bad ones does not make the whole thing worthwhile.

Most of the ten commandments are not part of our legal system, some of them completely contradict the Constitution. Besides, they are from the Old Testament, which you said we could ignore (even though Jesus says you can't).


And if you can't figure out that you shouldn't kill people without the help of a bronze age list of morality, I feel sorry for you.

[DarkFish]

Here in the west, we don't want to be disrupted by someone shouting his calls to prayer (or anything for that matter) all over the place.Yeah and them noisy ******* with the bells at six in the morning had better go back to wherever it is they came from. And the horrible salvation army crowd with their damn band on a sunday morning of all days.
Them non westerners had better learn to fit in or else get back to making noise somewhere else.huh? I suppose with "bells at six in the morning" you mean christians?:06:
The last time I heard any church bell here in the Netherlands must be years ago. I can remember from childhood those few times I heard church bells, it was like "Huh? what are those f*cking things I hea...oh, wait, it must be the church next door"
Not to mention salvation army bands, I didn't even know they had bands until I looked it up on wikipedia just yet.

[Sailor Steve]

@Safe-Keeper. Ok - have fun by the pool. Meanwhile, the score is now:

Head in the sand Islamic Defenders: 0
Realists: 1
Score?

"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should be not victory, but progress."
-Joseph Joubert

[Tribesman]

huh? I suppose with "bells at six in the morning" you mean christians?
With "bells at six in the morning" I mean those that do bells at six in the morning, the three main flavours that follow that obviously non western tradition happen to be Christian, but it doesn't mean it is "christians" per se.
The last time I heard any church bell here in the Netherlands must be years ago.
Does that mean you are abandoning your culture or does it mean you just don't notice?

Not to mention salvation army bands, I didn't even know they had bands until I looked it up on wikipedia just yet.
Thats one example, the first house I brought in the UK had the boys brigade church parade with full drum corps at 7am the first sunday of every month, look them up on wiki as I hadn't heard of them till they went blasting past the house....its traditional apparently:yeah:

So Darkfish, you made comments about possibly loud religious events not being part of western culture and not disturbing people, they are part of western culture and they do disturb people....and if you want to complain you apply for a noise abatement ruling.
BTW how did your dad get on with his protest problem?(or is it tthe end of this month?)

[Happy Times]

Just make a rule that when Muslim countries let Christians, Atheists etc. to build cultural centers they can build theirs here.:salute:

[DarkFish]

The last time I heard any church bell here in the Netherlands must be years ago.Does that mean you are abandoning your culture or does it mean you just don't notice?no, it means there simply are no bells at 6 in the morning. Or at 9 in the evening. Or at 3 in the afternoon. Jeez, is it so hard to get?:06:
Also, since when is christianism the definition of "western culture"? Because I'm pagan, am I no part of western society? Was Einstein not a westerner cause he was a Jew? Is a muslim raised with western norms and values an easterner?
Thats one example, the first house I brought in the UK had the boys brigade church parade with full drum corps at 7am the first sunday of every month, look them up on wiki as I hadn't heard of them till they went blasting past the house....its traditional apparentlywell great for you:shifty:
I know of no christian tradition (let alone Dutch traditions) that creates lots of annoying noise, like the muslim call for prayer. (there are some festivities, like carnival, but these are not just for christians, and they happen only a few times a year. I have no problem with the occasional festivity)
Also, a drumband playing only once a month can hardly be called as intrusive as a call for prayer happening every day.
BTW how did your dad get on with his protest problem?(or is it tthe end of this month?)Oh, you are trying to make this personal now, are you? Or are you just trying to pick a fight? Or did you run out of arguments and thus quickly tried to change the topic?
How very brave of you sir, to start playing on the man.

[Tribesman]

Just make a rule that when Muslim countries let Christians, Atheists etc. to build cultural centers they can build theirs here.
So they can build it then.
Unless of course you want to adopt the nutty fundy ways of the wahhibis in Saudi and set that as an example of good behaviour to follow. :yeah:
Of course them fundys can't help it, they have to follow the strict interpretation of scripture.
So when they read.....
I do not serve that which you serve
Nor do you serve Him Whom I serve
Nor am I going to serve that which you serve
Nor are you going to serve Him Whom I serve
You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion.
...it translates as "die you unbeliever as my religion is right so you are wrong and you can't build churches here"

[Tribesman]

no, it means there simply are no bells at 6 in the morning. Or at 9 in the evening. Or at 3 in the afternoon. Jeez, is it so hard to get?
So your christian churches in the netherlands of those denominations which do the bells thing don't do the bells?
Thats interesting. You had better tell all them dutch churches that do the bells :har:

I know of no christian tradition (let alone Dutch traditions) that creates lots of annoying noise,
When the Dutch wanted to send a traditional message of thanks to the US for their liberation was it a composition in the form of traditional church bell ringing in the dutch style or traditional church bell ringing in the dutch style?
Hey they didn't just compose the peals they cast a load of bells so the americans can do thier own dutch style ring for themselves.


Oh, you are trying to make this personal now, are you? Or are you just trying to pick a fight?
What on earth are you on about?
Or did you run out of arguments and thus quickly tried to change the topic?

Change the topic?
The topic is about objections to a mosque, your father was arrested while objecting to a mosque wasn't he.

How very brave of you sir, to start playing on the man.
Actually it was a simple question, there was no intention to offend, it was a simple inquriy as to if your father chose to pay the fine for clearly breaking the municipal law governing council meetings or if he tried to fight it in court.
Edit, just for reference the royaldutch foundry would be the most famous current(and long established) bell maker and their restorastion of the world famous 16 th century peal in Utrecht would be one of their more notable local things that don't happen in Holland.
But of course its only a minor thing as the royal duch foundry just happens to be the biggest in the world so its obviously a foriegn thing that doesn't really happen in Holland as darkfish hasn't heard.
Lets face it , it cannot be a local thing or they would have a local school dedicated to making noises with church bells...like the one in Amerfoort, or the other one just across the border in Belgium where they have this thing about their flemmish culture which is so unlike that foriegn dutch stuff.

[DarkFish]

So your christian churches in the netherlands of those denominations which do the bells thing don't do the bells?
Thats interesting. You had better tell all them dutch churches that do the bells :har:ehrrrm... very interesting phrase I suppose:huh: but I think I get what you want to say.
As I said, I barely hear any church bells around here. That might sound weird for you, but it just is that way. It might be different in the Dutch Bible Belt, but the churches I know barely ever ring their bells. Not even before masses and stuff.
(My parents home is just some 100m from a church, so when I still lived there, I could easily hear the bells those few times they rang. Not hearing them much made me often forget there was a church nearby, so usually when they finally rang my mind went like "whuh?! where does that come from?! ... Oh yeah, there's a church just around the corner:cool:")

When the Dutch wanted to send a traditional message of thanks to the US for their liberation was it a composition in the form of traditional church bell ringing in the dutch style or traditional church bell ringing in the dutch style?As I said, I don't have a problem with the occasional festivities.

Actually it was a simple question, there was no intention to offendIf there was no intention to offend, my apologies. (though I must say I really doubt your good intentions)

Edit, just for reference the royaldutch foundry would be the most famous current(and long established) bell maker and their restorastion of the world famous 16 th century peal in Utrecht would be one of their more notable local things that don't happen in Holland.
But of course its only a minor thing as the royal duch foundry just happens to be the biggest in the world so its obviously a foriegn thing that doesn't really happen in Holland as darkfish hasn't heard.Well I'm pretty sure we've got world's biggest wooden shoe factory as well. But that doesn't mean we all walk on wooden shoes.
And that Dutch churches apparently not ring their bells quite as often as Irish (or UK or wherever you've lived) ones, doesn't mean our churches don't have bells.

[Tribesman]

Darkfish you kinda hit on something there.
That "oh yeah there's a church".
Its sorta like background noise. Rather like living near tracks or on a flight path, it blends away so you don't even notice it. How many locals in edinburgh notice hearing the time gun blasting away every day?
Which converselty is why that church parade with the full band I mentioned was so annoying, due to its relative rarity.

Well I'm pretty sure we've got world's biggest wooden shoe factory as well. But that doesn't mean we all walk on wooden shoes.

But does it mean that no one walks on wooden shoes?
After all your statement about the bells was very definative, if you had said the church by your parents only rarely uses the bells..... fine, if you had said the church near you doesn't use them ...fine, but when you say the churches in the netherlands simply doesn't do it at all...... you can see the problem there as Holland is renowned for it.


As I said, I don't have a problem with the occasional festivities.

Some people do, not long ago there was a news story about a fella that had moved near to a chinese restaurant and then complained about their new year celebrations which they had been doing for years.

[DarkFish]

Darkfish you kinda hit on something there.
That "oh yeah there's a church".
Its sorta like background noise. Rather like living near tracks or on a flight path, it blends away so you don't even notice it. How many locals in edinburgh notice hearing the time gun blasting away every day?
Which converselty is why that church parade with the full band I mentioned was so annoying, due to its relative rarity.And that exactly demonstrates my point, I notice it right away when they do finally ring, cause I'm not used to them ringing.
After all your statement about the bells was very definative, if you had said the church by your parents only rarely uses the bells..... fine, if you had said the church near you doesn't use them ...fine, but when you say the churches in the netherlands simply doesn't do it at all...... you can see the problem there as Holland is renowned for it.I have never said they don't do it at all. Read my comments. They do ring, just not very often.
(for clarity: all churches I know only ring their bells rarely)
Some people do, not long ago there was a news story about a fella that had moved near to a chinese restaurant and then complained about their new year celebrations which they had been doing for years.I'm not "some people".

[Aramike]

A few good rules in the midst of a bunch of bad ones does not make the whole thing worthwhile.

Most of the ten commandments are not part of our legal system, some of them completely contradict the Constitution. Besides, they are from the Old Testament, which you said we could ignore (even though Jesus says you can't).


And if you can't figure out that you shouldn't kill people without the help of a bronze age list of morality, I feel sorry for you. None of this relates to the point, which is about the difference between religions; specifically the extremism of Islam and the lack thereof of Christianity.

[Aramike]

And Christian have such a good history of following THAT commandment. :doh:Not saying they do. That's besides the point, in any case.

But I guess, as a typical wishy-washy liberal, you'll ignore the fact that the Christian faith directs Christians to not kill, whereas the Islamic faith is completely the opposite.

[MILLANDSON]

Here is a question for you - what is your opinion going to be when this Muslim house of worship (along with whatever else it may contain) sues the city to be allowed to broadcast on speakers the Cal to Prayer? It has happened in other places, no reason it wouldn't here....

Meaning if you were standing on Ground Zero - you would hear such a broadcast - every few hours - every day...

Think that is a good idea?

You think it's a good idea that America (under the guise of "WMDs" or "freedom and democracy") invades their countries, kills their women and children, and essentially set up people who agree with them in positions of authority?

I think broadcasting the Call to Prayer is a little fairer than directing a large portion of their military strength to blow them up. Or maybe that's just me...

If that's how things work, then maybe Christianity should be vilified and destroyed. I mean, the IRA bombed Northern Ireland and England for decades under the guise of Catholicism and Republicanism.

Or, perhaps, it was more to do with the political ideal (republicanism in this case) more than the religion, just like it is with Al-Qaeda. They use the religion as a tool, both to recruit people and to justify themselves. Islam isn't the cause of all this stuff, it's general anti-Western feeling in the Middle Eastern world. I mean, you can't say that "the West" doesn't try to push it's ideologies and cultures onto everyone they can at every opportunity. I've never seen Iraq or Iran try to push it's view of the world on me, but I've sure as hell seen the American TV broadcasted to those countries, making it out as though the West is the best thing since sex and chocolate were invented.

See, this is why I'm ashamed about being a "Christian" now, because people like you guys are so intolerant of everyone else. It's times like these that I remember why I decided to renounce any and all institutionalised faiths and just run with being a "deist". No one religion is right. In all likelihood, they are all entirely incorrect. The sooner people learn that, the sooner everyone will stop killing each other for slightly different versions of the same damn holy book.

[razark]

None of this relates to the point, which is about the difference between religions; specifically the extremism of Islam and the lack thereof of Christianity.

The point that Christians ignore the large sections of their religious scripture that they find inconvenient or morally distasteful, but expect that every Muslim must follow every tiny bit, no matter how perverse, of their scripture?

If you follow the Christian scripture to the same extent that you claim Muslims follow the Koran, then you will end up with the same extremism. Just with a slightly different flavor.

Not every Muslim follows the more distasteful bits of Islam, just as no Christian follows every single rule in Christianity.

[CaptainHaplo]

Razark - you continue to spout ad naseum the same thing - ignoring the difference between the NT and OT. Sure - if you want to ignore reality you can continue to claim one is as bad as the other when comparing Xtianity and Islam. Problem is - that requires - as I said - ignoring reality.

[razark]

Razark - you continue to spout ad naseum the same thing - ignoring the difference between the NT and OT. Sure - if you want to ignore reality you can continue to claim one is as bad as the other when comparing Xtianity and Islam. Problem is - that requires - as I said - ignoring reality.

The Old Testament is part of Christianity's scripture. It was added to, not replaced by, the New Testament. Jesus said that he did not come to throw away the old laws. (Matthew 5:17) So yes, in reality, the Bible and Christianity are still full of atrocities and immoral acts by the Jewish/Christian god and his followers, and a lot of crazy rules.

Besides, the New Testament also contains some rather bad things. Why is it that Christians get to ignore those parts? And why do many Christians cling to parts of the Old Testament, while completely disregarding other parts?

And if Christians can move away from their scriptures, why can't Muslims?


Yes, there is a difference between the way Christianity and Islam relate to their source material today. The source material for both is equally vile. If Christians can put the evil parts behind them and progress past the old laws, why are there so many people claiming that it is impossible for Muslims to do so? Why is it that for one to be a true Muslim, one must follow the bad rules, but to be a Christian, one doesn't need to follow them?

[antikristuseke]

Because hypocrisy is alive and well. But **** it, religion is nonsensical to begin with so why not go the whole 9 yards?

[Tribesman]

And that exactly demonstrates my point, I notice it right away when they do finally ring, cause I'm not used to them ringing.

Yet apparently you were used to them when you were young.

I have never said they don't do it at all. Read my comments. They do ring, just not very often.

Your claim was that the noises from a religious building are something that doesn't happen and are unwanted, its un western and the muslims had better learn to fit with the norms of western society.
I replied that regular church bells are a very western thing and have been for a very long time.
You then claimedno, it means there simply are no bells at 6 in the morning. Or at 9 in the evening. Or at 3 in the afternoon. Jeez, is it so hard to get?
That is saying they don't do it at all isn't it, which you just claimed you never said, remember Holland is famous for churches with bells.
So when you saidI know of no christian tradition (let alone Dutch traditions) that creates lots of annoying noise, like the muslim call for prayeryou was only saying it because you didn't know the christian and/or dutch traditions.

[DarkFish]

Yet apparently you were used to them when you were young.No, I wasn't. What in hell makes you think that?:doh:
Why do you constantly decide for me what I did and didn't hear and what I was used to and not? Wouldn't you think I know a lot better than you what I hear and notice and think?
If I say I have noticed something, you constantly go in against it. You can't reasonably do so as there is simply no way for you to deny I have noticed these things.
Your claim was that the noises from a religious building are something that doesn't happen and are unwanted, its un western and the muslims had better learn to fit with the norms of western society.
I replied that regular church bells are a very western thing and have been for a very long time.
You then claimedno, it means there simply are no bells at 6 in the morning. Or at 9 in the evening. Or at 3 in the afternoon. Jeez, is it so hard to get?That is saying they don't do it at all isn't it, which you just claimed you never saidWith "no bells at 6 in the morning" etc. I mean there are no bells that ring "every day" at 6 in the morning. Of course every now and then they do ring at 6 in the morning. I've been saying that all the time. This argument you make is really pointless.
remember Holland is famous for churches with bells.so what? Dutch churches have bells as well. That they don't ring often doesn't mean they aren't there.
So when you saidyou was only saying it because you didn't know the christian and/or dutch traditions.yeah of course, I am from the Netherlands, so I am the one here who doesn't know the Dutch traditions:doh:
Yet you, a foreigner, do know all about our traditions. May I ask, how long have you lived in the Netherlands?

[Tribesman]

With "no bells at 6 in the morning" etc. I mean there are no bells that ring "every day" at 6 in the morning.
Which is where you are wrong, you really should be less absolute in your claim.

so what? Dutch churches have bells as well. That they don't ring often doesn't mean they aren't there.

The whole thing is that they do ring often, many of them sound regularly throughout day and night every day of the year.

yeah of course, I am from the Netherlands, so I am the one here who doesn't know the Dutch traditions
It would appear so. If I recall correctly you had severe problems knowing your local municipal laws too so perhaps its a pattern emerging.

Yet you, a foreigner, do know all about our traditions. May I ask, how long have you lived in the Netherlands?
Its amazing what you pick up living in other countries ain't it, its one of the benefits of my generation in that the only real option was to go and live in other countries. Luckily lots of countries need masons, and lots of them dutch churches with bells that ring very regularly are made of this strange thing called stone:up:

[DarkFish]

With "no bells at 6 in the morning" etc. I mean there are no bells that ring "every day" at 6 in the morning.Which is where you are wrong, you really should be less absolute in your claim.
so what? Dutch churches have bells as well. That they don't ring often doesn't mean they aren't there. The whole thing is that they do ring often, many of them sound regularly throughout day and night every day of the year.they don't! how can I say it more clearly; none of all churches I know sound "regularly throughout day and night every day of the year"! It's what I know, I am there! You aren't so you have no possible way of knowing what is going on here!
It would appear so. If I recall correctly you had severe problems knowing your local municipal laws too so perhaps its a pattern emerging.excuse me? it was you having severe problems thinking you know the muncipal laws here.
Its amazing what you pick up living in other countries ain't it, its one of the benefits of my generation in that the only real option was to go and live in other countries. Luckily lots of countries need masons, and lots of them dutch churches with bells that ring very regularly are made of this strange thing called stone:up:once again, how long and when did you live here? Sure it wasn't for very long, and probably a long time ago if you heard much church bells. It may have been different in the past, but now they simply don't ring every day.

anyway, don't bother to answer cause it's off to the ignore list for you:shifty:

[CaptainHaplo]

Razark....

Ya know - so many that refuse to apply any level of scholarship to Scripture fall for the same crap over and over. A tiny bit of research would help clarify....

The verse you quoted says that Jesus did not intend to "abolish the Law AND the Prophet" but to fulfill them. If you actually read the verse in context you see that Jesus IS fulfilling the LAW. Thus the Law - and the guidelines established by the prophets, passes away.


"Everything is accomplished"
Jesus said that until heaven and earth ceased to exist, nothing would disappear from the law "until everything is accomplished" (5:18). But heaven and earth will pass away, and by contrast, Jesus’ own words will remain forever (Matthew 24:35). They have a greater validity than the Law because Jesus is greater than Moses.
The meaning of "until everything is accomplished" has several possibilities. It is suggested by the Tyndale New Testament Commentary that the translation: "Until what it [the Law] looks forward to arrives" gives the best sense of this phrase. This links the thought with the idea of "fulfillment" in verse 17. This also seems to be the thrust of Paul’s comments regarding the relationship of the Law and Jesus’ earthly ministry (Galatians 3:19, 23-25).
The Tyndale New Testament Commentary expresses the interpretation of "accomplished" in these words:
"The law remains valid until it reaches its intended culmination; this it is now doing in the ministry and teaching of Jesus. This verse does not state, therefore, as it is sometimes interpreted, that every regulation in the Old Testament law remains binding after the coming of Jesus. The law is unalterable, but that does not justify its application beyond the purpose for which it was intended" (page 115).
The Tyndale commentary also makes the same point in these words:
"This passage does not therefore state that every Old Testament regulation is eternally valid. This view is not found anywhere in the New Testament, which consistently sees Jesus as introducing a new situation, for which the law prepared (Galatians 3:24), but which now transcends it. The focus is now on Jesus and his teaching, and in this light the validity of Old Testament rules must now be examined. Some will be found to have fulfilled their role, and be no longer applicable...others will be reinterpreted" (page 117).
This explanation must be the correct one, or else the early Christian church and the apostles violated Matthew 5:17-19 by telling gentile Christians that circumcision and keeping the Law of Moses was not necessary. The book of Galatians would also have been in error on this point. And the book of Hebrews would have been in extraordinary violation of Jesus’ words, too, since it states that the entire sacrificial system, the temple worship and Levitical priesthood had been annulled.
However, these books are in agreement with the principle mentioned above. They explain that some old covenant religious regulations have fulfilled their role and others need reinterpretation. This is the situation that holds with the ceremonial weekly Sabbath "holy time" regulation. It fulfilled its role in old covenant times and can be interpreted spiritually for Christians as the spiritual Sabbath rest we now have in Christ.

http://www.wcg.org/lit/bible/gospels/matt517.htm

The OT thus is still useful as a guide - fail to learn your history and you will be doomed to repeat it - so it does show what behaviors are and are not acceptable to God - for example - homosexuality is one that is not. However, as seen above, the mandate to stone homosexuals is not no longer in effect, Jesus through grace has over-ridden the LAW. In fact, when asked he states that the greatest of the commandments are Love God and Love thy neighbor. If your going to keep these, then obviously you could not abide by the law as it is written.

If you choose not to believe in Xtianity - thats your choice and I respect it. But kindly have the decency to do a little research before you start talking about Scriptural "problems" as if they invalidate the whole thing, since in this case the answer is easily found, if you put forth the effort. Its ok to not believe in any religion - its another when you try and tear it down with "talking points" and no scholarship. I say that - knowing full well my record on Islam is easily seen - and that is because I have taken the time to research it myself.

[Tribesman]

they don't! how can I say it more clearly; none of all churches I know sound "regularly throughout day and night every day of the year"!
But as you don't know all of the churches in Holland you cannot make the claim that none of them do. Its funny that you make the claim after saying that maybe they do in the Dutch bible belt

It's what I know, I am there!
Yet clearly not.

You aren't so you have no possible way of knowing what is going on here!

That isn't a very clever claim to make.

excuse me? it was you having severe problems thinking you know the muncipal laws here.

Oh dear, it was you who didn't even know what law he had been charged under and then when it was explained to you claimed the law didn't apply even though your father had already been fined for breaking it.:doh:

anyway, don't bother to answer cause it's off to the ignore list for you
Thats OK, ignorance is bliss.
I suppose its too much to expect someone from a country to know that by simply looking at the tallest bell tower in their country it stands up and proves their strange claims about local culture totally wrong:yeah:
Though even without that, logic would dictate that since there are three main denominations in Holland that use bells in that manner it isn't very wise to claim that no church in the country does it.

[Tchocky]

Vintage thread, this one. Brings me right back.

[Aramike]

The sooner people learn that, the sooner everyone will stop killing each other for slightly different versions of the same damn holy book.I think its a tad naive to think that mankind wouldn't invent something else to justify its bad behaviors.

Frankly I've always found the position that scapegoats violence on religion to be silly, as the people who are its largest supporters tend to be atheists. As such, religion is a human invention - why wouldn't we then just invent some other excuse to attempt to dominate one another?

(oh wait, we are ... socialism)

To believe any part of that idea, I think, is to be somewhat ignorant of the overall human condition. This is probably puposefully so, as it makes a great excuse to rail against something one doesn't like.