I tend to agree.

Watch out Aramike - I might get you voting for me after all! :up: :har:

Neal, your rignt - not all Muslims are extreme. However, the key here is that those that are - are not being stopped by the ones that are not. So either the ones that are not truly extreme are in a very substantial and silent minority - or they are actually giving tacit approval to such extremism.

When "moderate" muslims call out the Imams who preach hate, when they stand up and put a stop to the EXTREMIST teachings that are put forth in MOST of the islamic schools throughout the world, basically when they start policing their own to stop "extremism" that hurts the world view of their theology, then I will form a different opinion. Right now, all you ever see is the moderates "condemn" something AFTER THE FACT, instead of saying "this is wrong - lets put a stop to it". The "moderate" Muslims give great lip service to moderation - but do they actually do anything to put a stop to the extremists? It sure doesn't look like it, does it?

I know someone will throw up the VERY rare wacko that gets on the news for blowing up an abortion clinic or some such - but compare the frequency of those acts to the acts of terror that are almost innumerable and occur throughout the world every day in the name of "allah". There is a vast and distinct difference.

The point was that some people have claimed that its a Muslim thing and Christians don't do it and other have said they were unaware of such events . Another point was that such information is very easy to find if you bother to look .
Also as I mentioned earlier , the Druze , in their areas they seem to lead the field in "honour" killings even though their religious elders say their religious laws don't allow such things , so are these murders for family honour more of a tribal/clan thing or a religious one ?

Heh, like I said before, I don't disagree with you on most things - just that one teeny, weeny issue... :cool:

argh
 

Just saw this thread..

I am no muslim.. But I agree with the fellow..

Behead the b..h! She talks and talks.. nEVER STOPS.. Well now, she can't :rotfl: :rotfl:
Man, she p..d him off too much, since he did it even without thinking about that tv..

Funny stuff beside..

What do you think, which "civilisation" honours women more? Eastern, far eastern, middle eastern, african, western??

When you watch a tv and see bare naked stupid girl embarassing herself in front of a million crowd for few bucks, or when you decapitate the b..h?

Honestly, I feel everything is more or less alike..

And who can say a christian wouldn't do it!? Let's take a look at what christians do? "Stabbed his mother 56 times, then killed his father with an axe"
"In a killing spree, killed 6, wounder 20, then taken his own life"
"When robbing the store, shot pregnant woman in the belly, she bled to death"
"Killed his daughter, then packed his cloth and called the police"

ETC ETC..

The big difference is that those murders were not supported by the christian religion while plenty of muslims claim to have acted in the name of Allah when they killed someone.

Besides I really don't get the comparision of a girl who decides her self to strip naked for some money and a women who get behaeded. I think the latter did not chose so herself.:nope:

eh
 

That, my friend could be, because, christians suffer of a strong lack of fate these days.. So they don't say "we killed those savages in the name of God!".. :rotfl:

When you have maniacs killing around, do you really think there is a difference if "they kill because of Allah or because the b..h talks too much"?
But I agree, modern muslims are a disaster, but maybe it is that the traditional world is hampered with modern Coca Cola civilisation measures, so modern muslims who are raised in a traditional way cannot cope with that?
It is easy for us, who are raised in an "open state of mind" where we hate the world, hate our neighbour and tolerate everything.. But it is hard to them.. Should we hate them for that? Should they be allowed to act like they are in their own country, to live by their own laws?
Close the borders.. Let every country deal with herself without interferring.. Much better..

Why is it, whenever we speak of muslims, there are no muslims around, is there any muslim registered on subsim?? ANY?? :rotfl:

Second part..
No comparison value there.. I was kidding about decapitation... But let me think.. You have a muslim woman, raised in a certain way, obeying and praying.. But.. She wants more, she wants a vibrator? Who can say she doesn't have it allready? :rotfl: Because of some crazy muslims? Because you think all muslims are "brain dead"? :rotfl:
And if you like, jews are much the same like muslims in some matter, yet muslims are target..

Then you have that poor girl.. Decapitated for life in that show, without confidence, depressed and f..d by every idiot that tells her hello or buys a drink.

There are many things we christians could learn from the muslims, as well as some they could from us(for instance how to smoke 2 box of cigarrettes, drink 10 beers and still see the match on tv, although I think many of them know that allready, hehehe), and I think it is prejudice to judge on some maniacs about the whole pack..

What about those things I mentioned? Are all christians "preggo killers"?

nothing is black or white..

Cheers!!

I have to go buy myself a beer..

Strange, Neal. In a pm you asked me to show more respect of other people's faith, but then you list plenty of reasons why this faith is not respectable.But this just on a side-note.

The real important thing is that you subscribe to the same mistake so many people did and do for so long time. Jesus, whom they enobled in reputation by giving him an honour title of "Christ", lived his life in a way and preached a teaching that does not justify excesses like the inquisition, "just wars", and others forms of collective hysterical violance. Nor did he live his life in a way that would serve as a precedent for these things to happen. So, what some narcissistic idiot named Paul has written in his letters, is not really important. Jesus' teachings did not and do not depend on Paul, nor is Paul equal to Jesus. the church calls itself to represent christianity, and bases on all the bible, that is true. But it'S claim to represent christianity in the meaning of jesus teachings and Jesus life - is a lie. A 2000 years old lie, but that doesn't make it any less a lie. And you - are still buying it.

Isn't that absurd? To commit all the crimes you have listed, the church had to abandon the examples set by Jesus. If you think that is wrong, show me where Jesus called for the torture of witches, or where he raised his hand against his next. In fact, he offended the relgious institutions of his time, the pharisees, by not following their example, but stay with the weak, the outcast, the ill, and rejected to live a life in golden wards and diamonds hanging around his neck. Why do you think they worked for getting rid of him?

Of course, the opposite also can happen: people become intolerant and fanatic in their claim to follow not the church, but the teaching of Jesus - but then, the do take him literally and by that miss the content of what he tried to say - and that then mades them the fanatic nutheads that they have become.

If you want to behave like a hate-driven, intolerant, violant powermonger on the basis of Christianity understood as the example set by Jesus, you have to abandon Jesus and have to violate his teachings. Like the church did, and still does.

If you want to behave like a hate-driven, intolerant, violant powermonger on the basis of Islam, you do not violate the Quran, but you explicitly follow it and the example set by Muhammad and the demands he raised.

I can'T understand what is wrong with so many people that they do not see this most dominant difference - it springs into the eye all by itself. Of course not every person is what he claims. Not every muslim is a muslim, and not every chrostian is a christian. However, on these two cases this statement has two very different consequences in quality. For the christian, it works to his loss and that of the people around him. For the Muslim it gains him a win, and a win for the others around him.

I realise that you are a peaceloving, polite man. It takes quite an effort to get a fight with you. However, I think you exaggerate it with that politeness and patience, because you are willing to bend some very substantial basic facts and distort a reality just to maintain a situation that allows you to claim that politeness (respect for other people'S faith) is the top priority. But it is not - not when it does damage. and religions have enjoyed this kind of forgiveness and undeserved respect already for far too long, creating a whole bloody mess by accepting it the opportunity to commence it in the name of "faith" - and needing the polite respect of undecided hesitant people like you. Without that attitude - religion would be powerless.

Compare this

with this:

Both men obviously were not too optimistic about the ammount of people understanding correctly.

one more thing
 

This skybird msg popped right out of the blue..

I have to answer..


What do you people suggest?

To kill muslims?

"F..g a.. Let's convert those bloody bastards.. They are filthy anyway!"
:rotfl:

I think talking how Islam is a threat, how there is a difference between Islam and Christianity, how they should be "sane"(!?!?!?) is rather ignorant and sad.

And it is not Islam that drives people into talks like that here, it is our fair
christians.. Jesus would be proud with you people..
IT IS not politeness(I don't know about others not I care!) that drives me to tell this, it is boredom and my sanity.. You cannot judge people because they behave differently from you.. Because they have different point of view.. That is not "polite", it is sane..

:up:

When reading s..t like this, I want to be a muslim, hate you all woodnecks, at least I would be shure I will not be on some aa meeting..

Cheers!

Sure, Asanovich, Islam's content has nothing to do with it, it never has these days, and Skybird is a christian believer... Suuuuuure... The sky is green and the grass is blue.

With some people it takes a long time before their penny is dropping, but once it does it makes a nice and long echoing sound inside their heads.

Thats funny since Paul allegedly wrote about Jesus superceding the torah in certain ways .
But OK if you think the letters are unimportant what is the provenance of the Gospels as the life words of Jesus and who were they written by and when ?
You keep on rejecting bits of scripture as unimportant because you don't like them and say the were written and influenced with different intents by the authors/authorities , yet you don't apply the same to the Gospels even though the same is true .
But what is even funnier is that when it comes to Islamic scripture you say that what was written was manipulated by the authors/authorities ovr a period of a couple of hundred years but that it is all true what was written especially the bits you don't like.
So in the one case you accept as truth the bits you like but reject the bits you don't like while in the other you accept the bits you don't like as true .
Not very consistant is it ?

The gospels have been put down several deacdes after Jesus' presumed death. whether or not Jesus ever was a historic figure, still cannot be argued beyond any doubt. And it is not important one bit.

Important is the content of that scripture that the term "Christianity" is directly, beyond doubt, basing upon: the description of the Christ, and his life, whether it be fictional story-telling, or true historic report - it does not matter. the content of the gospels focussing on Jesus's life and practicing and teaching, is what it is. You could as well call them a fictional or non fictional) biography. They display the life of a historic or fictional man who lived like he was preaching. His teachings are such an such, and if you want a challenge, try to justify war, progroms and religious powerpolitics with the sermon on the mountain. (Or has obama said it in his famous religious speech before the elections: if america would follow the sermon on the mountain and by that: a teaching that is at the very heart of true Christianity, the Pentagon probably would not survive that). The fictional or non-fictional man's life is consistent with his teaching. He preached and acted peacefully, he taught self-responsibility and acted with full responsibility and in knowledge for the consequences of his way of living. He helped the ill, defended the weak, acted peacefully towards even his enemies whoim he refused to flee from or to raise his hand against, and by his consistent example set a precedent as an illustration how to acchieve inner freedom by your own deeds. It could not be any more different to the demands raised by the psychopathic deities of the old Testament, the quran, or the torah, which all base on one and the same ancient paradigm that has nothing to do with what Jesus was about: "Obey our God who demands your obedience, and if you don't he will slaughter you through our hands".

Paul - just added another, completely new layer of his own interpretation to this biography of Jesus. It does not matter that we cannot say for sure whether or not the gosepls already are interpretation, or not, the important thing is that Paul added a completely new layer of such subjective interpretation - his own, and he put it ion top of the formner layer, no matter whether the gosples are prioginal, or subjetive interpretation by somebody else. And he did so to tailor the man's meaning in a way so that he, Paul, could play an important, powerful role by referring to it and taking benefit of deeds he did not do himself, but Jesus. Paul was the first of the christian church-priests - whom are nothing else than ursupators and pompous self-declared VIPs. Or in plain English: parasites. As Nietzsche so very aggressively and so very very correctly identified Paul like this, and I agree wholeheartly with him:

That is a dart hitting the bull's eye three times in a row.

we also do not know for sure whether or not Muhammad has been a real historic figure, or not, there remains some doubt. And like with Jesus, it does not really matter. What matters is that, fictional or real, his tale of a biography

- shows his warlord'S life and desert bandit'S behavior to be totally consistent with what he has preached,

- what has been laid down by his secretaries in writing and what has come to appearance in the later emerging one form of the Quran during the work of the first three caliphs, after severeral versions of the Quran existed that were tailored for local powerpolitic'S interest.

Muhammad even sometimes copied suggestions by his secretary in his next preaching, which brought that one secretary into danger of getting killed, for he knew that Muhammad's Allah-sent words were not that much coming from Allah at all - the man had to flee for his life as a result.

The important thing here is that the Quaran's unpleasant features, and muhammad'S violant life, are in consistency, that muhammad and Jesus lived two forms of life that could not be any more different in orientation, and that since both men'S lives were in consistency with their preachings, the recordings of their preachings, the gospels and the quran, could not be any more different as well.

Always be aware of the "but" in Quran's writings. So many things that at first listening sound nice and well, get put into relation just short time later. And only when considering the complete contexts of the Quran, you understand it in full, and correctly. and then it is no nice message you hear, but a message of intolerance, aggression, discrimination, humiliation, subjugation. and muhammad behaved in an intolerant, aggressive, discriminating, humiliating, subjugating way as well. If that is not consistent.

I have gotten a mail while writing this, asking why I say the same things time and again. the answer is somple, dude: it may have somethign to do with the fact that it is time and again the same questions and misled misconceptions being raised in a topic like this. When the questions do not change - why should the answers?

What I said to you in a private message is between you and me. I think that's why they call them "private" messages.

Privacy is overrated (xxx is overrated is registered trademark on SubSim of Raptor1).

Now that is something I thought we'd never hear from you! What next, you start feeling sick while just thinking of JD? :haha: